Israel's Approval of the Law Banning UNRWA: A Declaration of Total War on the United Nations and Palestinian Refugees

 

Israel's Approval of the Law Banning UNRWA: A Declaration of Total War on the United Nations and Palestinian Refugees

Written by: Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine on 30 October 2024

 

Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine's Foreign Affairs Department: Either respect the charter or get expelled from the United Nations.

Ladies and gentlemen in political parties and parliaments worldwide,

Dear friends in international community, media, human rights, and trade union frameworks,

To all free individuals and those with a living conscience in our world,

In a dangerous precedent, the Israeli parliament (on November 28) passed a law banning the activities of one of the United Nations agencies in Israel, namely the "United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees" (UNRWA), which employs around 30,000 staff members. The parliament had previously voted in July 2024 to classify UNRWA as a "terrorist organization."
Days before the new law's vote, the UN Security Council, the United Nations, and dozens of countries and international institutions—including some allied with Israel—called for the project to be withdrawn and not approved due to its legal violations and humanitarian consequences that would affect millions of Palestinian refugees in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, who depend on UNRWA for health, education, and social relief services. Despite this, Israel insisted on its position and proceeded with the law, disregarding global opinions and the humanitarian fallout.

What does banning UNRWA's activities in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza mean?
Since its establishment in 1949 by the UN General Assembly under resolution 302, UNRWA has operated freely in the West Bank and Gaza to provide education, health, and relief services to refugees. After Israel's occupation of all Palestinian territories in 1967, an agreement was signed with UNRWA to regulate its work and grant it freedom of movement and necessary exemptions. However, this agreement has effectively been annulled by the law's approval, depriving UNRWA of many rights and privileges that would prevent it from operating, including:

The cancellation of all privileges and immunities granted to international diplomatic missions, including the cessation of tax and customs exemptions, lifting protections for UNRWA staff, facilities, and vehicles, severing communications with it, and barring it from any activity in areas Israel considers "sovereign."

The classification of the Shuafat refugee camp in Jerusalem as illegal, housing over 100,000 Palestinian refugees, which will adversely affect the camp's legal status and gradually facilitate collaboration with armed settler gangs to displace its residents in preparation for dismantling it.

UNRWA facilities in the West Bank will be targeted by the occupation army based on Israeli laws purportedly for combating terrorism, allowing settlers, who have previously besieged UNRWA offices and called for their burning, to invade them.

Beyond the legal descriptions of Israel's step, which not only violates the conditions for Israel's admission to the United Nations but also contradicts the UN Charter, which mandates respect as a fundamental principle and a condition for membership—particularly in Articles 2 and 105 that state: "All members shall provide every assistance to the United Nations in any action it takes in accordance with this Charter" (Article 2), and "The organization shall enjoy in the territory of each member such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfillment of its purposes..." (Article 105). This means facilitating UNRWA's work and granting it the privileges and exemptions is a fundamental requirement outlined in the Charter, not a decision of the occupying state to revoke at will.

The Israeli law is akin to a declaration of true war against the United Nations and its various institutions, following the Israeli foreign minister's declaration of the UN Secretary-General as "persona non grata," among other UN officials. It presents the international community with a genuine challenge regarding its reputation and credibility, as UNRWA is one of the organizations under the UN, both in terms of its foundation and its regular program renewals. Thus, defending Palestinian refugees in this case is also a defense of the international organization’s reputation.

Despite the considerable risks posed to refugees and the services provided to them by UNRWA, the law's impact on the right of return will remain limited, especially if the UN and Arab countries show the will to confront it and nullify it. The right of return derives its strength not only from the existence of UNRWA—important though that is—but primarily from the natural and historical right of refugees to their land. This right, as affirmed by numerous international resolutions, and I say by courts and international legal scholars, does not expire with the passage of time, no matter how many years go by, especially as millions of refugees still carry its banner. Secondly, it is a right supported by UN resolution 194 and dozens of other international resolutions that do not grant a right to refugees but rather affirm an existing, established right that predates resolution 194.

Since UNRWA constitutes one of the foundations upon which the right of return is established—including resolution 194, the existence of camps, and the legal definition of a refugee—these elements will remain even after the law is enacted. What the law proposes is the opening of a new battle added to the series of struggles waged by the Palestinian people and freedom-loving individuals worldwide. Because while Israel may impose the law's implementation through its military and occupying force in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, it cannot do so in areas where refugees reside outside Palestine, numbering over six million.

The world's silence over Israel's crimes and the pressure on international courts and judicial frameworks have led Israel to feel protected under the American veto and support from Western and allied countries, facilitating its persistent violations of the UN Charter and human rights. This has encouraged it to continually challenge the international community and reject its resolutions, including tearing the Charter apart at the United Nations platform by the Israeli representative last May.

The approval of the law reflects a disregard for what remains of the international system, and it would not have occurred with such arrogance were it not for the unlimited support Israel receives from the United States in particular, and the silence or even complicity of Western countries in allowing Israel to evade accountability for decades for its breaches of international resolutions and its continued criminal acts and genocide against the Palestinian people.

Moreover, Israel's insistence on continuing its comprehensive war against the United Nations, represented by UNRWA and other international organizations and institutions, necessitates more than condemnation and denunciation. The time has come for the United Nations to take swift responsibility in enacting measures to expel Israel and isolate it from the UN.

On behalf of the "foreign Affairs Department of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine," as we present this overview of the Israeli law declaring war on the UN and UNRWA, we are confident that this serious development will be on your agenda in your future movements opposing the genocidal war perpetrated by Israel against the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples, and in favor of supportive stances from your governments, aimed at isolating Israel and forcing it to respect the international community and its supportive positions for the Palestinian people and their national rights, rejecting the fascism represented by Israel with direct support from the United States and some Western countries that continue to practice political hypocrisy in their public rejection of Israel’s actions while providing it with unlimited support for its policies of killing, terrorism, and rebellion against the international system and its political, legal, human rights, and humanitarian foundations.

Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine's foreign Affairs Department

-30 October 2024-

 

Port Adelaide Community Opposes AUKUS

Written by: Nick G. on 27 October 2024

 

More than 120 residents of the Port Adelaide area attended a meeting yesterday, called by the Port Adelaide Community Opposes AUKUS (PACOA).

The meeting began with MC and local resident Eileen Darley introducing former WA Senator Jo Valentine by video link. Jo expressed solidarity from WA opponents of AUKUS and gave a detailed account of developments over there.

The meeting closed with messages of solidarity from the Wollongong Against War and Nukes (WAWAN) group which has held very large protests against a suggested nuclear submarine base at Pt. Kembla harbour.

Residents then brainstormed ideas for further developing their campaign against AUKUS and the radioactive waste it brings.

Speakers at the meeting included former SA Senator Rex Patrick (who will be standing as a Senate candidate with the Jacqui Lambie Network – Lambie herself was seated in the audience), economist Prof. Al Rainnie, Michael Williss (speaking as a member of the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network, IPAN), Amanda Ruler from the Medical Association for the Prevention of War), and co-leader of the Greens in the SA Parliament, Tammie Franks.

We are reprinting here the talk by Michael Williss. 

Talk at the Take Action Against AUKUS meeting October 26, 2024
Port Adelaide Community Opposes AUKUS

Thank you for inviting me to speak on the unceded lands of the Kaurna people. What a pity Australia is not an unceded independent nation state instead of a grovelling puppet of the United States.

But let’s start in the traditional way…with a pub quiz. 

I’m going to list ten wars, and I want to know the odd one out: Sudan Campaign, Boxer Rebellion. Boer War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Malayan Emergency, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq.

Yes, the odd one out was WW2 – the only one of the ten in which our national independence and sovereignty were threatened. Japan bombed northern Australia at least 111 times between February 1942 and November 1943. The first time Darwin was hit, 262 aircraft killed at least 235 people and caused immense damage.  Other places hit over a nearly two-year stretch included Broome, Katherine, Townsville, Wyndham, Port Headland, Mossman, Milingimbi, Exmouth, Horn Island, Bathurst Island.

Every other war, in my opinion, has seen us surrender our capacity for independent decision-making in matters of foreign policy, and blindly follow either the British or the US imperialists into wars not required for Australia’s defence.

That is why AUKUS and talk of war preparations by the US against China don’t unduly worry some people.  Apart from WW2, our wars have been fought “up there” or “over there”.  A war with China, some think, will follow that pattern. If we follow the US into war with China, it is unlikely that these people have considered Australian cities looking like parts of Ukraine or Gaza or Beirut. Osborne and surrounds are just such a potential target.

Bur Gillard, Rudd, Abbott, Morrison and Albanese have almost guaranteed that as a continental-sized air craft carrier for the US military, we have cities and suburbs that will almost certainly be hit in a Chinese retaliation against our participation in a US war against China.

Post WW2 we have had US bases here: Pine Gap and North West Cape spring to mind. But a qualitative change occurred when Obama’s pivot to Asia was married to Gillard’s cheerleading for the US Empire.

Obama’s pivot occurred in the first year of Gillard as PM. Starting in 2012 with 200 Marines, their Darwin rotation has grown to around 2,500 Marines.
U.S. aircraft, including bombers and surveillance planes, use Australian airbases, such as RAAF Base Tindal and RAAF Base Amberley.   US B-52s can be nuclear armed, and Wong accepts this as the US’s right not to disclose. US B-2 bombers just recently bombed Yemen having used Australia as a stop-over.

The Force Posture Agreement (FPA) between the United States and Australia, signed in 2014, significantly enhances the U.S. military presence in Australia by formalising and expanding military cooperation between the two countries. It provides US forces with access to critical Australian military bases and infrastructure, including ports and airfields and allows them to station fuel dumps, equipment, and munitions wherever they like.

We are upgrading submarine docking facilities in WA at a cost of $20 billion, chicken feed perhaps alongside the $368 billion submarine arrangements.

Our country has been handed to the US on a plate.  You have no doubt seen statements by Paul Keating, Gareth Evans and Bob Carr deploring the surrender of our independence through the AUKUS arrangements.

As much as Morrison likes to boast of his role in creating AUKUS, it was really a rerun of an idea first put to Australia by the US in October2013 after Tony Abbott had defeated Kevin Rudd. Morrison was in Abbott’s Cabinet and would have known of the US proposal that Australia operate 10 or 12 Virginia class submarines. Under AUKUS he simply tweaked the proposal for leasing the submarines into purchasing them. 

Former PM Malcom Fraser saw the dangers to Australia of such a submarine deal, saying that “The reliance by Australia on the United States for military communications in reality means that we cannot conduct operations unless the United States approves of them. That is a derogation of sovereignty” (Fraser, Dangerous Allies p. 256).

He would no doubt laugh at the idea that flying an Australian flag on an AUKUS sub would allow us to make our own decisions.

We must stand up for the independence of Australia and break the US stranglehold on the decision-makers in the Liberal and Labor parties.

Thank you.

Fight Against Inequality Forum – 16 October 2024

 Written by: Shirley Winton on 26 October 2024

 

We reprint a talk given by Shirley Winton at a public forum in Melbourne on 16 October, Fighting Inequality.  Shirley's talk addressed military spending in Australia and the US Alliance.   

Shirley spoke as a member of No AUKUS Coalition Vic and Independent and Peaceful Australia (Vic).

Thank you for inviting me to speak at this forum.  I hope my talk on military spending in Australia will be of some use in building the fight for justice and equality.

I’m on the land of Wurundjeri people of Kulan Nation.  I pay my respects to traditional owners of this unceded county.  I stand in solidarity with the First Nations people in their long fight for justice, sovereignty and Just treaties.  Always was always will be Aboriginal land.

 

I want to start my talk by briefly putting this period of rapid global militarisation in a broader context.  World wide, capitalism is in crisis of overproduction.  Goods are flooding markets, remain unsold as people’s incomes shrink, jobs disappear, social services are cut back resulting in many not able to buy even necessities of life.  Government funds for social services are drying up as corporations demand more government funding for their profit making. 

 

For example, in Germany today some of the world’s biggest car manufacturers are closing down, or dramatically cutting back their production lines.  Tens of thousands of workers are being laid off, mainly as a result of competition from China’s cheaper vehicles flooding the European markets.

 

Finance capital, that is the multinational global assets management corporations, control trillions of dollars of world’s assets and make decisions that ensure the trillions are invested in industries where profit returns are maximised, biggest and fastest.  Not for a secure and dignified life of all people and protection of the environment. 

 

At the same time more wars are breaking out.  The main drive for most of these wars is competition between big powers for control of shrinking markets and resources.  The military industrial complex makes huge profits from wars and destruction. 

 

In today’s world, weapons manufacturing industries are the most rapidly expanding profitable sectors of the economy.  It is in these industries that many of the world’s finance corporations, or assets managers, are investing billions and trillions of the world’s wealth.

 

For example, Lockheed Martin, the world’s biggest weapons manufacturer, is owned and controlled by the world’s 3 biggest assets managers.  BlackRock, State and Vanguard.  Governments are the biggest customers of weapons corporations, ploughing billions of people’s taxes into the war machines.  

 

Lockheed Martin’s biggest customer is the US government.  

 

The Australian government has contracted Lockheed Martin $500,000 million for weapons manufacturing, that’s half $billion of people’s taxes taken away from the urgent needs of the people, public housing, public education, healthcare, community services, to build the global US war machine.  And this is only one of top global weapons corporations to whom the Australian government is gifting people’s taxes.  Elbit, Israeli weapons company involved in the Gaza genocide has been awarded $917 million contract by the Victorian government.

 

BlackRock, the world’s largest assets management, worth $10 trillion, is one of the main investors in Lockheed Martin. It has enormous power in decision making.  BlackRock controls pension funds, private health and medical companies, construction companies – wherever profit can be made BlackRock will be found.  I’m only stating this to illustrate how the wealth created by the labour of ordinary people of this country is being parcelled out to a handful of financial and weapons corporations.  This enormous wealth, created by millions of Australia’s working people, must be taken out of the hands of these parasitic corporations, and used for the urgent needs of the people.

 

The world’s top 5 weapons corporations are embedding themselves in Australia’s economy, industries, education.  Australia’s economy and industries are being militarised, workers’ jobs and livelihood are becoming more dependent on weapons corporations.  Weapons manufacturing for multinational corporations is now a rapidly growing industry in this country, integrating Australia’s economy and industries into the US military industrial complex.  

 

Under US direction Australia has removed all barriers to the export of arms.  Now integral to US weapons supply chain Australia will have no control over where and how these weapons are used.  Sovereignty over our self-defence industry and policies has been surrendered.

 

The Australian government’s military expenditure has nothing to do with defence of Australia.  Only turning Australia into a weapons production expanding line, a US military base, and a launching pad for US war with China.

 

As well as enormous costs of embedded multinational weapons corporations in Australia’s economy, the demands of AUKUS and the US-Australia alliance on public expenditure are eyewatering.  

 

Just to name a few:

 

AUKUS and Force Posture Agreement

 

AUKUS and Force Posture Agreement are locking Australian into US imperialist wars and its military industrial complex.   

 

Australia’s defence policies and military infrastructure are indistinguishable from the US military machine, under the US command.  Our taxes feed the US war economy.  AUKUS and Force Posture Agreement is complete integration and subservience of Australia’s defence, military and foreign policies into the US war machine.   

 

In 2014 the Australian government and the US signed the Force Posture Agreement which gives the US unimpeded access to most of Australia’s military and defence facilities and infrastructure, from where the US is allowed to conduct wars of aggression.

 

The US is demanding Australia increases our military defence budget to fund the hugely expanding US militarisation of Australia and in Asia-Pacific.  

AUKUS –has nothing to do with defence of Australia.  It is a US war machine to instigate war with China.

 

The US-led AUKUS is militarising Australia’s economy, industries and education.  Syphoning off billions from public health, education, aged care, social services, environment. The world’s top 10 multinational weapons corporations -Lockheed Martin, Boeing, BAE, Raytheon, Northrop, GE, Thales - are embedding themselves in our schools, universities, defence and military establishments, infiltrating and advising governments, political parties and government bureaucracies.  They have strong influence over government policies that benefit only their profit making. 

 

AUKUS PILLAR 1

 

This extensive US militarisation of Australia is a burden on the people of Australia.  Australian government has committed to purchasing 8 US and UK nuclear powered submarines at a cost of more than $368 billion.  That’s $33 million a day of peoples’ taxes at a time of cost of living crisis, more people living in poverty, housing crisis, underfunded struggling public health, education and social services, unaffordable child care and aged care, and devastating climate change.  In addition, under pressure from US and UK the Australian government has committed $10 billion more to US and UK shipyards to build nuclear submarines but without any guarantee from US and UK that they will be delivered on time or delivered at all. The $10 billion of our taxes will be used to prop up ailing US and UK shipbuilding yards, and the US and UK economies. This is the extent of the Australian government’s subservience to major imperialist powers.

 

The cost of militarisation of Australia as a US base and its proxy in imperialist wars is a major burden on Australian people.

 

AUKUS Pillar 2 expenditure       

 

The Australian government has committed to spend $765 billion in military spending between 2024-2034.  The $368 billion on nuclear powered submarines is not included in this $765 billion.

 

The $765 billion is for upgrading and building new ports and military air bases to host giant US war ships and submarines, F35 and B52 bombers, some carrying nuclear weapons, missiles.  Expanding and building new military facilities, installations and spy bases; hosting thousands of continuously rotating US marines stationed in northern territory.  Northern territory is being turned into a major US military base under US command.

 

It is predicted that the lifetime cost of AUKUS 1 and 2 is likely to be $2 trillion to $3 trillion.

 

Australian people are paying a huge price. The cost of militarisation of Australia as a US base and its proxy in an imperialist war with China is a major burden on Australian people.   The only beneficiaries are the US imperial power and the military industrial complex – weapons corporations

 

The entire system is geared to make profits, not for needs of the people and the environment.

 

Workers not only face the day to day hardships of rising cost of living, housing crisis, but the threat of a major war.   We carry the main heavy burdens of these imperialist wars. The cost of AUKUS, nuclear submarines and the Australia-US military alliance will deepen the economic hardships for the people, worsen climate crisis and accelerate the march to war.  It will be a war of aggression led by the US, with Australia, its deputy sheriff, and an expandable nuclear target.

 

This is the price we are paying for being in the US-Australia military alliance.

 

The government is telling the Australian people a big lie that AUKUS, military spending and wars will ensure security for us.  But nothing could be further from truth.  AUKUS, US-Australia military alliance and climate crisis are the real threat to our security and people’s well being.

 

The only security for the people is decent and dignified housing for all, properly funded public health and education, high quality aged care and child care, secure and dignified jobs for all, decent social and community services, an independent foreign policy and living in peace with the people of Asia Pacific.

And while we meet here the  people of Gaza are being wiped out by these same masters of wars.

 

Same corporations and their governments inflicting the horrendous genocide on the people of Gaza and Lebanon.

 

Shirley Winton

Member of No AUKUS Vic and IPAN - Victoria

16 October 2024. 

Support Rojava – condemn Erdogan’s attacks on the liberated region

Written by: Nick G. on 25 October 2024

 

(Above: destruction caused by Turkish bombs, Rojava, 24 October 2024)

With the world focussed on the continuing atrocity of Zionist Israel’s genocide in Gaza and the West Bank, and its aggression against Lebanon, the Turkish authorities have resumed intensive bombing of the mainly Kurdish stronghold of Rojava in neighbouring north-eastern Syria (NES).

For the last couple of days, the Turkish fascist regime has carried out airstrikes on 42 sites in NES, including Qamishlo, Kobane, Amude, and Derik. To date, 12 civilians have been killed and 25 wounded. The strikes are still ongoing, and included several power stations, 2 bakeries, a health centre, and grain silos. In past months, the Turkish forces had burnt large areas of food crops in an effort to starve the Rojava people.

These attacks indicate Turkey’s intention to control these areas and displace their residents, in order to crush the democratic and progressive Rojava revolution. Itis contrary to what was being promoted about the peace talks between the Kurds and Turkey that were expected to start this month. The attacks show that Turkey is not seeking peace with the Kurds, but rather seeking to exterminate them under the pretext of fighting terrorism. 

This repeated targeting of service facilities is leading to a humanitarian disaster in an area that is home to millions of people, who are already suffering from severe fuel and gas shortages as a result of Turkey’s repeated targeting of infrastructure facilities in previous years.

The same Erdogan who correctly condemns Zionist genocide against the Palestinians is head of a fascist government whose values are threatened by the example of the Rojava revolution. 

“The only reason Turkey attacks is because we are a threat to their fascism. The society here is the antidote to the state's poison!” said one resident of Rojava.

(Above: the people of Kobane protest the bombing, October 24,2024)

The US, UK and the sufferings of the Chagos Islands

Written by: (Contributed) on 25 October 2024

 

Above: September 2018  Chagos Islanders protest at the Hague

An intelligence-type assessment and report about the Indian Ocean region has revealed just how close Australia has been drawn into US-led regional military provision.

In early October the Starmer government in Westminster announced that Britain was ceding sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius; a new 99-year lease for Diego Garcia, however, was also part of the package thereby allowing the US to continue to use the island for its sensitive intelligence facilities well into the next century. (1) The agreement was officially greeted by US President Biden, with the announcement, 'I applaud the historic agreement and conclusion of negotiations between the Republic of Mauritius and the UK on the status of the Chagos Archipelago'. (2)

Moves will soon take place to enable Chagos Islanders the right to return to islands from which they were displaced decades ago. Those former residents of Diego Garcia, however, will not be allowed the right of return.

The decision follows decades of legal proceedings and court cases. It would appear that the continued British colonial-type control of the remote islands was eventually regarded as increasingly untenable.

Situated about halfway between Africa and Indonesia, the Chagos Islands remain highly geo-strategic and central to the Indian Ocean. No reference was made in the report about recent Pentagon proposals to enlarge their present three-stage Asia-Pacific Island Chain Theory to include fourth and fifth chains across the wider Indo-Pacific; the Chagos Islands are, potentially, an important part of the proposals and more useful to the Pentagon when inhabited by local people who possess first-hand knowledge of the terrain, rather than being uninhabited and vulnerable to incursions from elsewhere. (3)

The Chagos Islanders were forcibly removed from the homelands in the late 1960s, when the British government began high-level diplomacy with the US to eventually use Diego Garcia for intelligence facilities. Opened in early 1973, the facilities were linked to similar facilities at Silvermine, South Africa, Argentina and Pine Gap, Australia, as the Southern Ocean Defence Plan (SODP). (4)

On a Peters Projection World Map, Actual Size, the four nodes of the SODP are all equidistant, revealing the range and capacity of the satellite and radar system. (5) The SODP was primarily concerned with the military control of the South Atlantic and Indian Ocean, and came to include numerous further formal and informal military agreements. (6)

There has remained little controversy about who controlled the intelligence network; fixed direct radio communications with Whitehall were routed through Mauritius, and the US through Puerto Rica. (7)  

The US-led intelligence facilities have been subject to almost continual upgrades for hegemonic purposes. (8) The basic function of the facilities, however, has remained the same, from the previous Cold War to the present one. More recent upgrades have included both Diego Garcia and its counterpart in Guam becoming hubs for US-led military operations, with Darwin in the Northern Territory of Australia being the support centre; both hubs rest on an arc from Pine Gap, Central Australia. (9)

The US, however, has had problems, historically, with the whole SODP; the role of South Africa raised serious questions about US support for Apartheid, the inclusion of Argentina, likewise, was difficult due to the Dirty War and later invasion of the Malvinas. Those in control, therefore, hid behind diplomatic silence as a matter of course. It continues.

The matters, however, came to a head during the 1975 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Kingston, Jamaica, where Gough Whitlam, representing Australia, played a significant part in supporting the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace, normalising diplomatic relations with Cuba, and supporting national liberation movements in South Africa, Angola and Mozambique. (10) They proved controversial.

The moves were also reinforced by the British Labour Government of the time, led by Harold Wilson, not renewing the Simonstown Agreement, and thereby isolating Apartheid South Africa.

The fact that Whitlam was dismissed later the same year and Harold Wilson, also suddenly announcing his retirement early in 1976, has left little to the imagination about hidden hands at work inside the corridors of Commonwealth power and the displeasure they had caused the faceless wonders who maintain the huge bureaucracies through which their patrons wield class and state power.

The intelligence-type assessment and report from Canberra did not take any of the above into account; it began, nevertheless, in classic Cold War-style with an opening sentence 'that Australia and the US are livid with the Starmer Labour government in London over its giveaway of a major military base in the middle of the Indian Ocean that is vital to Western interests'. (11) So much for the well-publicised Biden statement, quoted above!

In an indignant, terse writing style the statement then continued, noting, 'for Australia, Diego Garcia is a strategic asset available for military operations in the Indian Ocean and beyond. It anchors Australia's presence in the Indian Ocean and provides a friendly port in the vastness of the region'. (12)

Throughout the whole statement concern was raised that the present government in Mauritius 'is under increasing Chinese influence … with fears arising that … Chinese surveillance ships, no doubt disguised as fishing fleets, will be able to monitor the US long-range bombers stationed at the base'. (13) No recognition was given to the fact China has, more likely than not, used satellite surveillance of the US intelligence facilities based on Diego Garcia for decades.

Fears apparently exist that Mauritius will follow the lead of the Maldives which has a government supportive of China, alongside Beijing's moves across the Indo-Pacific to establish the String of Pearls of useful outposts in Ski Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan. (14)

In order to reinforce the Cold War nature of the assessment and report attention was drawn to noted left wing influences; references to Trotskyist groups inside the British Labour Party  were used together with criticism of Foreign Secretary David Lammy who was quoted as labelling Donald Trump as a 'woman-hating, neo-Nazi sociopath'. (15) The Australian, furthermore, takes every opportunity to applaud Trump, despite his continued appalling behaviour and attitudes. Elsewhere, a massive five column highly critical feature spread about the Starmer government and its declining popularity in another edition of their newspaper, did not contain a single reference to the Chagos Islands controversy. (16)

In conclusion, the intelligence services have used a classic ploy to 'leak' an assessment and report into mainstream Australian media in order to polarise opinion against Labour governments, both in the UK and Australia. They then sit back from their hidden vantage points in government bureaucracies and use the eyes and ears of their agents in secret networks to assess the political fallout before moving onto their next project. The real life Slow Horses have been at work with a covert operation. It has also shown vividly how those lurking within the corridors of power recruit from right-wing groups and compliant media outlets to serve the interests of those wielding class and state power:

                                            We need an independent foreign policy!

 

1.     UK cedes key islands to China ally, The Weekend Australian, 5-6 October 2024.
2.     Ibid.
3.     See: Wikipedia -Island Chain Theory, Fourth and Fifth Chains, Indian Ocean.
4.     Wikipedia: Diego Garcia; and, 'Maritime Operational and Communications HQ', The Star (South Africa), 10 March 1973; and, Security in the Mountain, The Star (South Africa), 17 March 1973; and, Not in Europe Alone, John Biggs-Davidson M.P., Brassey's Annual: Defence and the Armed Forces, (1972), pp. 78-89; and, Essential Instruments of US strategy – Two New Gendarmes: Iran and South Africa, Le Monde Diplomatique, December 1976; and, The UKUSA SIGINT Network, The Ties that Bind, J.T. Richelson and Des Ball, (Sydney, 1985), page 323.
5.     See: Map of the World, Peters Projection, Actual Size, New Internationalist.
6.     See: The politics of South Atlantic Security: a survey of proposals for a South Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Andrew Hurrell, Journal of International Affairs, February 1983, pp. 179-93.
7.     Star, op.cit., 17 March 1973.
8.     See: Diego Garcia and Africa's Security, Oye Ogunbadejo, Third World Quarterly Journal, Volume 4, Number 1, December 1982, pp. 105-20.
9.     US intensifies military presence in the Indo-Pacific, The Global Times (Beijing), 24 July 2018; and, Map of the World, Peters Projection, op.cit., Actual Size.
10.   CHOGM, Kingston, Jamaica, 29 April-6 May 1975, Final Communique, Sections: 13-26.
11.   China's boost in the Indian Ocean, Editorial, Australian, 18 October 2024.
12.   Ibid.
13.   Ibid.
14.   Ibid.
15.   Ibid.
16.   See: Trust in flames as Kier Starmer hurtles to earth, The Weekend Australian, 19-20 October 2024.

Urgent Appeal from the DFLP

 Written by: Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine on 24 October 2024

 

The CPA (M-L) has received an urgent request for assistance from the Foreign Office of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP).  No doubt ways will be found to support this request. Smash Zionist aggression! – eds. 

Urgent Appeal from the "Department of Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Front" to all free people in the world to provide humanitarian support to displaced 
people from the Palestinian and Lebanese populations.

Dear comrades and brothers,

Political parties, activists, and free people across the world,

The "Department of Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine" sends you its greetings and expresses its appreciation for your constant  support for the Palestinian people, their national and human rights, and your rejection of the genocidal war being carried out by the fascist government in Israel. We address you while the scent of death spreads across Lebanon and the Gaza Strip due to the ongoing barbaric Israeli bombardment of civilian residential areas and the popular environment that supports the resistance. Despite the immense human suffering, the resistance continues to raise its banner, understanding the objectives of the aggression and recognizing the involvement of Western countries, particularly the United States of 
America.

Given the ongoing Israeli aggression on Lebanon, which has lasted for more than three weeks, resulting in the displacement of more than 1.2 million people from southern Lebanon, the southern suburbs of Beirut, and the Bekaa region in eastern Lebanon, it represents one of the largest displacement movements Lebanon has witnessed.

The humanitarian suffering has dramatically worsened as the relevant authorities are unable to face the challenges imposed by this aggression, especially the Lebanese government, which developed a national plan to confront the humanitarian repercussions. However, due to the scale and brutality of the aggression, the state is unable to fully respond to the massive humanitarian needs, especially as Lebanon was already suffering from a severe economic crisis prior to the war, owing to the collapse of the Lebanese currency against the US dollar.

As for the Palestinian refugees, a large number of them, particularly from Palestinian camps in southern Lebanon—such as the Rashidieh Camp, the Buss Camp, and the Bourj al-Shamali Camp—and Palestinian communities in southern Lebanon, like Shabriha, Qasmiyeh, Aitaniya, Wasta, Abu al-Aswad, Jamjim, and Kfarbadda, have also been displaced. In addition, many have fled from Palestinian camps in the southern suburbs of Beirut, such as Shatila and Bourj al-Barajneh, and some Palestinian residential clusters in the Bekaa region.

Most of these Palestinian refugees have left their homes and camps after some of them were bombed, leading to casualties. The number of displaced Palestinian refugees is estimated to be more than 60,000. Most have taken refuge in areas like Sidon, where Ain al-Hilweh Camp has received more than 1,500 families, while Mar Elias Camp in Beirut has received 360 families, and Nahr al-Bared Camp has welcomed over 3,000 families in northern Lebanon, along with the al-Bada Camp.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) has established shelters for displaced people in several areas, including Siblin Institute, Yaebod School in Bir Hassan, and some of its schools in Sidon and northern Lebanon. However, some of these shelters were closed within 72 hours of opening due to the inability to meet the refugees' needs, as UNRWA lacks the necessary funding. Previously, we and other popular bodies had warned of the shortcomings of the emergency plan announced by UNRWA, and its inability to meet even the minimum repercussions of the displacement, due to inadequate funding and perhaps flawed estimates by UNRWA's management.

The catastrophic situation faced by Palestinian refugees in Lebanon who have fled their homes exceeds the capacity of UNRWA, social institutions, and popular committees. Often, aid from civil society and associations is distributed to Lebanese displaced persons and shelters that house people outside of the Palestinian camps, including UNRWA's shelters, which accommodate Palestinians, Lebanese, and individuals from other nationalities.

Therefore, displaced Palestinian refugees from the camps and Palestinian communities need basic life necessities such as sleeping mats, food aid, medical supplies, financial assistance, and cleaning materials, especially as we approach the winter season. The continuation of the aggression for an extended period will likely exacerbate this issue, making it a real problem that must be addressed on multiple levels and from now on.

We call upon you to provide as much relief support as possible to the displaced families to meet their daily needs, by coordinating with social institutions working among the displaced. We have full confidence that our comrades, friends, and all supporters of the Palestinian and Lebanese people will respond to this call. Any support, no matter how simple or modest, is a significant contribution to thwarting the goals of the Israeli-American aggression.

"Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine"
- Department of Foreign Affairs –
- October 23, 2024

 

Book Review: Nature, Culture and Inequality

 

Written by: Duncan B. on 21 October 2024

 

Thomas Piketty, the author of Nature, Culture and Inequality is a French economist who specialises in the study of global inequality in its various forms. He was an editor of the World Inequality Report 2022, issued by the World Inequality Database.

Inequality of income and inequality of wealth are two important measures of inequality in a country. What percentage of income and wealth go to the top 10% of society compared to the bottom 10%? We see that in most countries, especially countries like the US the top 10% have the biggest share of the income and wealth of the country. The bottom 10% have only a very small percentage of the income and wealth. In Australia the top 20% control 48% of the income and 64% of the wealth. The bottom 20% have 4% of the income and 17% of the wealth.

In many countries the difference in income and wealth possessed by the top 10% is actually increasing at the expense of the bottom 10%. The level of inequality in a country can be influenced by government policies such as taxation systems that favour the richest individuals and companies over the ordinary people. Tax cuts for the highest income earners and numerous concessions for companies are examples of this. In Australia we have taxation concessions around housing such as negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions which favour investors who may own many houses over would-be first home buyers, contributing to inequality in the housing market.

The spokesmen for capitalism try to tell us that inequality is inevitable. Piketty says, “Those who benefit most from a system tend, for obvious reasons, to see inequalities as part of the natural order, and they are apt to characterise disparities as permanent and inevitable, warning against any change that might threaten the existing harmony.”

He cites Sweden as an example of country that went from being a highly unequal country to an extremely egalitarian country, thanks to the policies of social-democratic governments from 1932 to the 1990s.   (As Marxists we say that this does not alter the fact that Sweden is still a capitalist country.)

The neo-liberal policies pursued by governments overseas and in Australia greatly increased inequality as health, education, aged care, transport,  energy and other sectors of the economy were handed over to  the “market” for capitalists to extract billions of dollars in profits from them. Piketty calls for all of these to be taken back out of the market and returned to the public sphere.

 

Support for Palestinian people's struggle continues to grow.

Written by: Ned K. on 20 October 2024

 

The recent assassination of Palestinian leader Yahya Sinwar by the Israeli Defense Force has not dampened the spirits of the Palestinian people, nor the level of support across the world for the Palestinian people in their struggle against the Zionist Israeli regime and its imperialist backers.

Even in the relatively small city of Adelaide, attendance at this Sunday 20 October rally following Sinwar's assassination increased in numbers. Speakers from Australian Friends of Palestine Association (AFOPA) and Adelaide Sister's Association pointed out that the struggle of the Palestinian people did not start on 7 October 2023 and the mass media portrayal of the assassination of individual leaders of the Palestinian resistance movement since that time as a decisive victory for the Israeli Zionist regime ignored the fact that the struggle of the Palestinian people against the imperialist created Zionist state of Israel has been going on for over 70 years.

In fact, if the makeup of the people at the Adelaide rally is any indication, there are more people than ever from different backgrounds and communities attending. 

One AFOPA speaker pointed out how quick off the mark was Foreign Minister Penny Wong and PM Albanese to champion sanctions against Iran, but no sanctions on the Zionist state of Israel. The AFOPA speaker said it was plain for the people of the world to see that for the Australian, US and other western governments, Palestinian lives are worth less than Israeli lives.

The AFOPA speaker also reported that on this same weekend as the Sunday 20 October rally, the ALP annual State Convention finally passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire and end of occupied territories by Israel and for recognition of a state of Palestine.

He said this resolution was welcome news and although not the strongest worded resolution in support of the Palestinian people, it reflected the growing dissatisfaction of rank-and-file ALP members with the ALP leadership support for Israel. 

A University student leader also spoke at the Adelaide rally and said that it was important to support future protest rallies, including rallies at a conference of arms manufacturers like Lockheed Martin, Saab, BAE and others being held at the Marriot Hotel in Adelaide in mid-November