Monday, January 6, 2025

US Biden government's parting weapons "gift" to Israel and Australian government's silence.

 Written by: Ned K. on 7 January 2025

 

In the dying days of the Biden Democrats government, a $12.9 billion (Australia currency) weapons package has been agreed to be sent to the Israeli Government. The weapons being sent include thousands of bombs, missiles and precision munitions. This is one of the largest weapons packages sent from the USA to Israel since 7 October 2023. The $12.9 billion has to be rubber stamped by Congress.

A Biden administration official announced the latest "gift" to Israeli Government saying, "We will continue to provide the capabilities necessary for Israel's defense."

"Defense" in real terms means the continued bombing of hospitals and all kinds of buildings in Gaza resulting in daily reports in the 24-hour news cycle of deaths of hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza but now extending to Yemen and Syria.

The Australian Government is complicit in this continued weapons supply from the US Government to the Israeli Government through its continued support of the Zionist Israeli state, its silence on US weapons "gifts" to Israel and by allowing Australian-based weapons and weapons-related component companies to supply the US and Israeli war machines.

The Democrats government in the US and the ALP government in Australia parade as the mass parties for the worker in their respective countries! Their actions pave the way for greater attacks on the Palestinians and attacks on workers in the US and Australia when there is a change in government to Republican or Liberal parties in the US and Australia respectively. 

In the US, the Democrats have been strong backers of the Israeli state since at least 1948 when the Democrat leader Truman was elected to government on a platform committed to Israel. 

In Australia, the ALP has consistently supported the US position on Israel through the US-Australia Alliance. The ALP leadership at the moment is more concerned about being re-elected in the coming federal parliamentary election. The Palestinian people's situation will only be viewed by the ALP leadership as important if it perceives it will win it a few election votes. That is the reality of parliamentary politics of capitalism in Australia.

2025 has just begun and is sure to see continued resilience of the Palestinian people against the Israeli Zionist regime and continued solidarity with Palestinians from the peoples of both the US and Australia and indeed the whole world.

 

Saturday, January 4, 2025

Chinese aid to Cuba: Aid as imperialism is as old as imperialism itself.

Written by: (Contributed) on 5 January 2025

 

The UK-based and revisionist-backed Friends of Socialist China website headlined an article, "China donates 70 tons of equipment to help Cuba restore its electric system."

FOSC, run by Danny Haiphong and businessman Keith Bennett , would be better named Publicity Agents for Capitalist China. Nonetheless, their post could not hide that the gift was an example of a typical PRC ploy: negotiate a big commercial deal with a country, tack on a dollop of pure aid, and publicize the latter.

This tactic was used, for example, when Chinese companies exported COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic. The donated first batch would arrive, and the Chinese side would arrange a publicity photo. The bulk of the deliveries on commercial terms would follow.

The FOSC post conceded, "The (Cuban) deputy minister also stated that the island government estimates that this donation will benefit about 53,200 homes in the country." The rest of the iceberg is hinted at: "The donations are part of agreements signed between Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, seeking to expand cooperation in strategic initiatives such as energy, transportation, food security and trade."

Two months ago a news report had more about these "strategic initiatives."

Chinese company bullish on Cuban solar drive, executive says (excerpts)

Reuters, November 4, 2024

Havana - Hangzhou Duojia Technology, which distributes solar technology to Cuba, called a Cuban plan to dramatically boost solar generation a win for both countries, touting China's manufacturing heft and the island's sunny climate.

Qiaoming Huang, president of Hangzhou Duojia Technology, told Reuters in an interview that
his company, which sources solar technology from China for small-scale commercial projects of up to 20 kilowatts in Cuba, had 10 containers of solar panels and lithium batteries on their way from China.

Cuba agreed in April for China to help it boost solar power's role in its grid, though neither government elaborated on financing details. After the October nationwide blackout, Cuba's top leadership appeared to double down on the plan, at least partially financed with Chinese development credits, according to state-run media.

Note that HJT "sources solar technology for small commercial projects." The company is a trader, not manufacturer of solar panels nor lithium batteries. HJT's principal business is as a global distributor between "more than 3000 auto parts manufacturers" in China and retailers in 50 countries. It has a large warehouse in Hangzhou for spark plugs, steering wheel covers, etc.The company obviously wants to get into green energy distribution, hence the Cuba deal.

Any donation to Cuba to break the U.S. embargo is a good thing. But let's not fool ourselves that the PRC is ambiguous between socialist solidarity and capitalist commerce. It's 98% the latter – as, for example, 53,000 homes in ratio to perhaps three million Cuban households.

South Korean instability a problem for US imperialism

 Written by: (Contributed) on 5 January 2025

 

Above; December 2024 and South Koreans take to the streets to demand  Yoon Suk-yeol's resignation

While government investigators sift through piles of evidence for use by the South Korean Constitutional Court following the impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol, one outstanding matter will be his agenda for attempting to implement martial law in early December.

From available evidence it would appear Yoon Suk-yeon was likely to have been pursuing a longer-term agenda in order to buttress his highly unpopular conservative and business political position, against an increasingly assertive and popular and well organised opposition which have proved problematic for decades.

During his election campaign in 2022, Yoon Suk-yeol stated if elected president his administration would abandon the traditional Blue House for suitable premises elsewhere. The Blue House, however, has a highly symbolic place in the political culture of most South Koreans: having experienced political turmoil and upheaval, the presidential palace is the institution through which they have been governed since the establishment of the Republic of Korea in 1948. While other ROK political leaders have expressed concerns about the Blue House, none had ever managed to muster enough support to abandon the vast, sprawling estate.

After winning the presidency with a very small margin, Yoon Suk-yeol announced he was making the former Defence Ministry headquarters his new presidential residence. It was to prove highly unpopular with many South Koreans; during the earliest days of presidential administration a massive public petition of 3,600,000 signatures opposed the move. (1)

The choice by the Yoon Suk-yeol administration to use the Defence Ministry premises, likewise, were to prove unpopular with many South Koreans for reasons the presidential administration appear to not have even considered as relevant.
 
Most South Koreans, while expected to serve National Service in the country's vast military apparatus, have unhappy memories of military involvement in political and civilian affairs which are regarded as darker days in the country's history. It has been noted, for example, that 'military officers … are by now fully educated about the deep unpopularity of earlier decades of martial law … and that … South Koreans have a deep embrace of democratic values'. (2) The choice of Defence Ministry for the official presidential premises can, therefore perhaps, best be viewed as strangely incongruous; that is, if the choice is to be regarded as straightforward and above board.

What, however, proved a particular matter of concern for many South Koreans were the expensive upgrading of various facilities in the Defence Ministry premises. Security concerns had been raised although it has remained curious how such an important defence facility could be regarded as so vulnerable by those making the assessments. While upgrades were taking place Yoon Suk-yeol used his own home as the presidential premises.

With plummeting popularity ratings Yoon Suk-yeol appeared to have developed a bunker-like mentality even before moving into his Defence Ministry compound, seemingly oblivious to what was taking place in the country as a whole. Government investigators will, no doubt, have a field-day assessing the role of the country's intelligence services and their working relations with the presidential administration; the reliability and nature of the intelligence assessments and those providing the sensitive information, and whether the presidential administration took any notice of what they were being told, has yet to be established but will inevitably be called into question.  

Popularity ratings of President Yoon Suk-yeol continued to plummet to under twenty per cent of the population as his administration pursued policies of closer diplomatic involvement with the US and Japan. The US Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) rests upon its diplomatic relationship with Japan as part of a global alliance; co-ordinated involvement with all US regional allies, including the ROK, remain a US political and military obsession. (3)

The April elections saw the political opposition, centred around the Democratic Party, win 192 seats in the 300-seat parliament. While regarded as a landslide victory, it fell just short of a super majority although rendered the presidential administration as little other than a 'lame duck'. (4) Despite attempting to label his political opponents as being North Korean agents, Yoon Suk-yeol provided no credible evidence of any northern involvement in the growing dysfunctional nature of ROK political developments. They remain mere allegations.

The ROK, however, still has legislation from the previous Cold War concerning any relations and contact with the northern DPRK. It remains highly controversial and part of the US-Japan alliance of which the ROK is a component part, for rapid deployment elsewhere in time of crisis. (5) While unpopular, attempts by then President Roo Moo-hyun over twenty years ago to repeal the National Security Law proved highly controversial. (6)

The 1948 law has been seen 'as a legacy of the military dictatorships that dominated South Korea for most of the Cold War'. (7) Fears that President Yoon Suk-yeol would resort to using the draconian legislation against political opposition figures was to become a common concern following their April electoral success, until his demise with impeachment in December.

President Yoon Suk-yeol later announced his move into the new Defence Ministry premises in early November in a manner of being under siege, less than a month before attempting to implement martial law under cover of darkness on the night of 3 December. (8) Why it took those providing the required upgrade over two years to complete the construction and security work has yet to be established. The whole matter, however, looks suspicious and requires clarification, although attempting to implement martial law from inside facilities so closely associated with the ROK's darker history is revealing, in itself.

Nearly 300 ROK uniformed military personnel were subsequently directed by President Yoon Suk-yeol to seize control of the country's parliament, paving the way for full control of the political system; some arrived by helicopter on the roof of the parliamentary buildings.  

Opposition political figures barricaded themselves into the parliamentary building and sprayed fire extinguishers at the soldiers, while huge numbers of protesters lined the streets.

Government investigators later established Yoon Suk-yeol had actually authorised the military to 'fire their weapons' at those resisting the attempted coup, in a ten-page report. (9) The personnel concerned, however, refused to accept the order and the Defence Minister subsequently attempted to commit suicide, presumably from disgrace.

And the farce was all over in a mere six hours: the presidential administration appears to have completely misread both the mood of the people and those residing in the state and military apparatus over which they were supposed to have direct and total control.

As ROK government investigators collect legal evidence for forthcoming Constitutional Court proceedings, they will obviously have to consider the longer-term agenda of President Yoon Suk-yeol and his decision to use military force to deal with political opposition on 3 December. It is difficult to accept the decision was taken on the spur of the moment or a planned quick solution to a long-time problem affecting class and state relations in the ROK stretching back decades.

The subsequent impeachment of Yoon Suk-yeol's replacement, Acting President Han Duck-soo, for 'actively participating in the insurrection', likewise, has already revealed the deeper and close-knit nature of their conspiracy. (10)

The tentacles of the attempted coup conspiracy may reach very deep indeed.

1.     Explained: Why South Korea's president-elect wants to relocate the presidential palace, The Indian Express, 23 March 2022.
2.     Real-life political Squid Game offers compelling viewing, The Weekend Australian, 28-29 December 2024.
3.     The reasons behind Washington's push for GSOMIA., Hankyoreh, 12 November 2019.
4.     Weekend Australian, op.ci.t, 28-29 December 2024.  
5.     North Korea's behaviour could threaten Australian security, Australian, 27 December 2002.
6.     See: Uneasy Korea braced for America's big squeeze, The Guardian Weekly (U.K.), 10-16 December 2004.
7.     Ibid.
8.     See: Yoon moves into new presidential residence, The Korean Times, 8 November 2024.
9.     South Korea's Yoon authorised 'shooting' during martial law bid, prosecutors say,   ABC News, (and AFP), 28 December 2024.
10.   S. Korean acting leader impeached, The Weekend Australian, 28-29 December 2024.

2024 in Australian Agriculture

 Written by: Duncan B. on 4 January 2025

 

2024 saw billions of dollars worth of Australian farmland and agricultural businesses change hands in a market dominated by institutional buyers, overseas buyers and wealthy individuals.

Canadian and US pension funds were again among the biggest buyers of Australian farm assets. Even a Utah-based subsidiary of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints paid over $300 million for a 26,885 ha cattle and cotton growing property in Queensland.

US investors were behind the three biggest agricultural property transactions for 2024, which saw more than 265,000 ha change hands for more than $1.2 billion. Canadian pension fund PSP was involved in some major purchases, as was US pension fund TIAA-CREF.
 
Canadian and US pension funds are control Australia’s largest summer and winter cropping operations. Canada’s PSP, the largest investor in Australian agriculture by value, control over 230,000 ha of cropping operations, producing winter cereals, oilseeds and cotton.
 
Although overseas purchase of Australian farmland continue at a high rate, Foreign Investment Review Board approved investment proposals for the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sector was $5.3 billion for 2023-24. This was a 34% drop on the previous year. FIRB approvals for agricultural investments have been valued at between $7 billion and $8.5 billion since 2016-17, except for the COVID year of 2020-21. One reason given for the fall in investment is the lack of suitable properties ($100 million or more) of the type that foreign investors seek.
 
Experts are predicting that foreign investors, especially from the US will be back in the market in a big way this year as the US corporate sector is posting record profits. The corporates will be looking to invest in international markets.
 
One factor making Australian farming attractive to foreign investors is the difference in the average value of agricultural land in Australia ($9184 per ha), compared to the US ($16,200) and Europe ($17,500). This difference allows foreign investors to make a healthy return on their investments.
This means that more of Australian land will pass into foreign hands!