Wednesday, January 04, 2023

Envisioning a World Without Nuclear Weapons


 
 JANUARY 4, 2023
Facebook

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

January 22 marks the second anniversary of the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, a global lifeboat supported by 70% of the world’s countries. Meanwhile, the US Department of Energy’s 2023 budget request for nuclear weapons’ upgrade is more than $21 billion and close to $8 billion for radioactive and chemical cleanup at nuclear weapon sites across the country. Stack this up against the same department’s 2023 budget for energy efficiency and renewable energy – $4 billion – and we see the future: weapons trump wind turbines; war worsens climate crisis.

Moreover, the government’s budget has no line items for the massive existential costs of nuclear weapons, three of which are described here:

* the dread that world-ending nuclear bombs provoke in humans (unless we have become “numb to… that culture of mass death”);

* the “forever” radioactive contamination that eludes cleanup to human and environmental safety standards, the estimated cost of just one site, Hanford, Washington, being $300 billion to $640 billion; and

* the theft and poisoning of indigenous peoples’ lands and culture for mining uranium, generating bomb-grade plutonium, and conducting above ground atomic bomb testing.

Hanford, Washington is the site of the largest plutonium-production reactors in the world from 1944 to 1987 (including for the bomb dropped on Nagasaki). The Hanford land, bordering the Columbia River, was effectively stolen from four Indigenous tribes and peasant farmers by the federal government and is now “arguably the most contaminated place on the planet,” according to Joshua Frank, author of Atomic Days.

The Hanford plutonium-making site has killed and contaminated fish, waterfowl and other biological life in the Columbia River and polluted two hundred square miles of the aquifer beneath. It contains 177 leaky underground storage tanks holding 53 million gallons of radioactive and chemically hazardous waste – an atomic wasteland which may never be remediated. The worst and very-real scenario for this site and its workers is a Chernobyl-like explosion from leaking hydrogen gas.

While nuclear weapons governments and their bomb-making industries are criminally sleepwalking into what could mean the end of our planet’s life, many others – scientists, high-level military, citizens and whole countries – are countering the weapons holders’ political idiocy with principled intelligence.

* At their 40th reunion in Los Alamos, New Mexico, 70 of 110 physicists who worked on the atomic bomb signed a statement supporting nuclear disarmament. When have the brightest scientists of their day ever admitted that their most notable work was a colossal mistake?

* On February 2, 1998 retired General George Butler, former Commander of US Strategic Air Command addressed the National Press Club: “The likely consequences of nuclear weapons have no…justification. They hold in their sway not just the fate of nations but the very meaning of civilization.” Sixty other retired generals and admirals joined him calling for nuclear weapons abolition.

* Against immense pressure from nuclear-armed states, most aggressively the United States, 122 countries agreed in July 2017 to ban nuclear weapons. At the heart of the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) is an explicit ethical goal: to protect the world’s peoples from the humanitarian catastrophe that would ensue were nuclear weapons employed.

* By the end of 2022, 68 countries ratified the Treaty and 23 more are in the process.*At least 30 more countries have promised to join the Treaty.

* Since 2007, ICAN, an international organization with partners in over one hundred countries, has mobilized people throughout the world to convince their governments to support a ban on nuclear weapons.

Mayors for Peace from over 8,000 global cities call for the abolition of nuclear weapons.

The new UN Treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons bolsters the hope that the United States and the eight other nuclear giants will grow up into pragmatic, if not ethical adult governments and eliminate forever their genocidal weapons. One nation did so: South Africa developed nuclear weapons capability and then voluntarily dismantled its entire program in 1989.

The Road Less Taken

In 1963 President John Kennedy gave at American University’s commencement what has been deemed the most important speech by a US president – a speech on peace with the Soviet Union. But “what about the Russians?” everyone asked. Kennedy responded “What about us…Our attitude [toward peace] is as essential as theirs.” According to historian Jim Douglass, “John Kennedy’s strategy of peace penetrated the Soviet government’s defenses far more effectively than any missile could have done.” Promoted across the Soviet Union, Kennedy’s speech and his behind-the-scenes diplomacy with Khrushchev led toward de-fusing Cold War tension and planted the seed of a world without nuclear weapons and war. This seed awaits germination.

If the U.S. could once again replace its masculinist power with creative foreign policy and reach out to Russia and China with the purpose of dismantling nuclear weapons and ending war, life on Earth would have a heightened chance.

Patricia Hynes is a board member of the Traprock Center for Peace and Justice and active in the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and Nuclear Free Future. Her recent book, Hope, But Demand Justice (2022) is available in bookstores.

Russia risks causing IT worker flight with remote working law

ON JANUARY 4, 2023
By EU Reporter Correspondent


Russia’s IT sector is in a state of flux and could lose more workers due to planned legislation regarding remote working. Authorities are trying to attract back some of those tens of thousand who have left Russia without requiring them to end ties.

Because IT workers are mobile, they were prominent among those who fled Russia after Moscow sent its army to Ukraine on 24 February, and the hundreds of thousands that followed when a military order-up was issued in September.

According to the government, 100,000 IT professionals work for Russian companies abroad.

Legislation is currently being considered for this year, which could ban remote work in certain professions.

Fearful of Russian IT professionals working in NATO countries, and possibly sharing sensitive security information, Hawkish lawmakers have suggested banning Russian IT specialists from leaving Russia.

However, the Digital Ministry stated in December that a complete ban could make Russian IT companies less efficient and thus less competitive. "In the end, who can attract the best talent, even those from overseas, will win."

'NEGOTIATING with TERRORISTS'

Many young Russians are disillusioned and have moved to other countries like Georgia, Latvia or Armenia, where the Russian language can be easily understood. However, others have taken a greater leap to Argentina.

Roman Tulnov (36-year-old IT specialist) said that he didn't intend to return to Russia in any way.

"I wanted to go for a while. Everything became clear on February 24, 2012. He said that he understood that Russia was overpopulated. He credited mobilization for the chance to work in six different time zones and keep his job.

"Before mobilization, no one thought of giving the go-ahead to people to move to where-knows-where."

Vyacheslav Volodin (the powerful head of Russia's lower chamber of parliament, or State Duma), has stated that he would like to see higher taxes for those who have relocated abroad.

Yulia, 26, a product designer, estimated that 25% of her team would prefer to quit than return under duress to Russia.

She said: "Such an alternative choice is somewhat like negotiating with terrorists: 'Come back or we'll make you job impossible and for your company as well as your employees'."

Some Russian expatriates might be able to avoid paying taxes altogether. The personal income tax of 13% is automatically deducted from residents' employees, but it is not applicable to those who work in Russia-based companies.

Sasha, a professional online poker player, is also from Argentina and said that he has stopped paying Russian taxes.

He said: "When you pay taxes, you support the state's military expansion." "I don't pay taxes and I don't plan on."

Was the Southwest Airlines Meltdown Impacted By the “Great Share-Buyback Scam”?


 
JANUARY 4, 2023

LONG READ
Facebook

Photograph Source: Colin Brown – CC BY 2.0

My radio/TV program and my daily Substack newsletter, Hartmann Report, together are a small business. The only way I can increase my income from that business is by increasing the advertising revenue to the show, getting more people signed up for the newsletter, or both.

Build the business, in other words. Do the hard work every day. Keep my “customers” informed and thus happy: add value through research and share what I learn along the way.

It used to be that way with big business as well — companies grew in value because of good management and continual reinvestment in people, facilities, and product — until Ronald Reagan adopted neoliberalism and rewrote the rules of business.

Southwest Airlines passengers, for example, are today lamenting lost time with loved ones, lost luggage, and lost money spent on hotels, airline reroutes, and rental cars.

They missed weddings and funerals, spending time with family, and some confronted life-threatening situations as luggage-packed medications went missing and dialysis appointments had to be skipped.

All, apparently, so senior executives at Southwest and their morbidly rich investor cronies could get billions richer.

Here’s how it works.

If you’re the CEO of Southwest Airlines, or most any publicly traded corporation, there are two main ways you can increase your own compensation.  They are:

1. Build the company: Invest in workers and technology. Open new routes. Provide better service to passengers. Upgrade your planes so people will want to fly with you. Pay your people better to build employee retention.

2. Use company profits to buy back and retire Southwest stock.

According to corporate watchdog Accountable.US, most of the evidence suggests the immediate predecessor to Southwest’s new CEO chose door number two as often as possible.

How the stock buyback scam works

But how and why does it happen that CEOs and senior executives make a pile of money when they direct their own corporation to buy back its stock out of the marketplace?

And how did this manipulation of stock prices ever get decriminalized after being illegal for a half-century?

Imagine you’re the CEO of Acme Airlines, a company valued at $10 billion. The company has issued a billion shares of stock that are currently trading at $10 a share ($10 x 1 billion shares = $10 billion).

As the CEO, you’re not only paid a salary, you also have the two typical forms of “stock incentives” modern corporations give their senior executives.

The first is “performance compensation,” meaning as the price of the stock goes up you get bonuses and/or an increase in your pay. The second is that you’re partly compensated with stock or stock options (the right to buy stock at a predetermined typically low price).

If you can increase the share price of Acme Airline’s stock, you not only get a big bonus for hitting your “performance” target, but the stock you hold or can buy at a fixed (lower) price also increases in value. You get rich(er)!

But let’s also say that you’re not interested in building Acme as a way of increasing the stock price: that’s a lot of work and takes years. You want big bucks fast.

So, you simply direct your company to go into the marketplace, to the stock exchange where Acme is traded, and buy up, say, a hundred million shares.

The company is still worth $10 billion, the value of all the planes, landing slots, goodwill, corporate buildings, and assets: none of that has changed.

You haven’t added a single customer or paid a single flight attendant, mechanic, gate agent, or pilot an extra penny. You haven’t improved service or widened the seats in the planes to get in new customers. All you’ve done is use $1 billion in company profits to buy a hundred million shares at $10 each and “retire” them.

But now that the company has bought and retired a hundred million shares, instead of there being a billion shares in circulation there are only 900 million, even though the company is still worth just $10 billion.

As a result of your directing Acme to do that “share buyback,” every share that still exists is worth roughly 10% more because there are 10% fewer of them.

Which means the piles of shares you’ve gotten in compensation are now worth 10% more, too. And because the stock price went up, you’ll be getting a nice “performance” bonus at the year’s end.

This was once a crime – and should be now

This used to be a crime called “stock price manipulation” and was one of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s and Congress’ early targets when they went after the Wall Street crooks who brought us the Republican Great Depression of the 1930s.

Congress created the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 1934 and FDR put Joe Kennedy (JFK’s father) in charge of it; Kennedy ironically told my old friend the late Gloria Swanson that he was chosen because, she told me, FDR had wisecracked that, “It takes a crook to catch a crook.”

Kennedy, knowing how the game worked, outlawed stock buybacks as one of his first official acts.

But in 1982 President Reagan endorsed this very form of corporate corruption as part of his new neoliberal Reaganomics agenda, decriminalizing it for the first time in almost a half-century.

Lest you think it improbable that modern CEOs would do this, as it’s so obviously corrupt and harmful to the company itself, consider this headline from the corporate watchdog group Accountable.US:

“Southwest Cancellation Crisis Follows Execs’ Choice to Reward $5.6B to Shareholders Instead of Investing in Infrastructure”

As their press release lays out:

“Government watchdog Accountable.US called the airline’s cancellation crisis a problem of its own making after slashing its workforce by over 1,400 in 2021 and choosing to spend $5.6 billion on stock buybacks in the 3 years leading up to the pandemic rather than making investments in infrastructure to be better prepared for extreme weather events like this week…”

This Reaganomics neoliberalism scam has made America’s corporate CEOs and stock speculators among the wealthiest people in the world, while keeping down wages and benefits for everybody else. It’s hurt the competitiveness of American business.

It started with Reagan’s putting John Shad— the Vice Chairman of the monster investment house E.F. Hutton — in charge of the SEC, which regulates monster investment houses.

Shad wasted no time in deregulating stock buybacks, instituting in 1982 what’s now known as “Rule 10b-18” that made stock buybacks explicitly legal for the first time since 1934.

Since then, share buybacks have become the most personally profitable business scam CEOs and senior executives can run against their own employees, companies, and communities.

When Reagan and Shad made this change in 1982, the average compensation of CEOs was around 30 times that of their average employee.  CEO’s often lived in the same communities as their workers, or in a just slightly more upscale part of town.

Today CEO compensation is between 254 and 1000 times the average employee, depending on the industry, and CEOs live in palatial estates with servants’ quarters, yachts, and private jets; much of that increase in their annual income is the result of their companies’ repeatedly executing stock buybacks over the past 40 years.

Corporate CEOs call this “maximizing shareholder value” and claim it’s how capitalism is supposed to work.

As more and more CEOs got in on the scam since Reagan legalized it in the 1980s, it’s come to account for much of the 40-year explosion in the price of publicly traded stocks.

Investors don’t complain because they’re making out well, too (and 84 percent of all stock in America is owned by the top 10 percent).

How the share buyback scam hurts Americans

It’s also why so much of America’s corporate infrastructure is rotting, from leaking methane from oil rigs to toxic spills from chemical factories to industrial waste being discharged into our environment instead of being cleaned up.

After all, why spend money on improving the company — or even on routine maintenance and safety — when you can personally cash in just as effectively by simply using your company’s revenues to engineer a stock buyback scheme every year?

As William Lazonick wrote for The Hill in 2018:

“Most recently, from 2007 through 2016, stock repurchases by 461 companies listed on the S&P 500 totaled $4 trillion, equal to 54 percent of profits. … Indeed, top corporate executives are often willing to incur debt, lay off employees, cut wages, sell assets, and eat into cash reserves to ‘maximize shareholder value.’”

You’d think that if a company’s stock was going up in value that would indicate it is doing well and could even pay its employees better.

In fact, the CEOs of companies need cash to do these buybacks, and to get that cash they often lay off workers and even cut back on their main business just to enrich themselves and their senior executives.

As Emily Stewart wrote that same year for Vox:

“The thing is, when companies are investing in stock buybacks and dividends, they’re spending money they could use on something else.

“The Roosevelt Institute in May released a report estimating that Walmart, for example, could boost hourly wages to more than $15 an hour with the $20 billion it was using for a buyback. A separate study from the Roosevelt Institute released in July found that companies spent nearly 60 percent of net profits on buybacks from 2015 to 2017.

“It estimated that with the money allocated to buybacks, companies such as Lowes, CVS, and Home Depot could give each of their workers a raise of at least $18,000 a year [on top of their current income!].

“Harley-Davidson in February announced a nearly $700 million stock buyback plan just days after saying it would close a plant in Kansas City. Wells Fargo is spending $25 billion on buybacks and is at the same time laying off workers in multiple states.”

Share buybacks have replaced growing a business as the main way CEOs jack up their compensation to buy a new mega-yacht or ski chalet in Switzerland. And its just as much of a scam today, and just as destructive to working people and our nation, as it was in 1929 when it helped crash the market.

Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have been shouting about this from the rooftops for decades. Hillary Clinton brought it up in her 2016 campaign for president, something that no doubt cost her some CEO support.

At the time, Financial Times US National Editor Ed Luce wrote, in an article titled Hillary’s War on Quarterly Capitalism:

“The case for reforming shareholder capitalism is strong. The level of US investment [in actual business activity] is at its lowest since 1947. Last year, according to Goldman Sachs, S&P 500 companies spent more than $500bn on share buybacks. This year it is expected to hit $600bn.”

That was in 2015. Just so far this year:

+ Macys bought back 28.9% of their shares spending $2 billion they could have otherwise used to expand the business or raise workers’ pay.

+ Chesapeake Energy bought back 20.6% using $2 billion.

+ Diamondback Energy spent $4 billion to buy back 17.9 percent of their own shares.

+ For Morgan Stanley it was 14.8% of shares at a cost to the company of $20 billion.

The entire list — hundreds of billions in share buybacks just this year — is on this Marketbeat site.

When the biggest oil companies in America reported record profits this year, ripping off American drivers with sky-high gas prices, Reuters reported on April 29:

“Exxon earlier this year more than doubled its projected buyback program to $30 billion through 2022 and 2023. Shell said it would buy back $6 billion in shares in the current quarter, while Chevron boosted its annual buyback plans to a range of $10 billion to $15 billion, up from $5 billion to $10 billion.

“Exxon shares rose 4.6% to $96.93. Chevron shares rose almost 9%, closing at $163.78.”

CNBC reports:

“Apple started to pay quarterly dividends and repurchase its shares in March 2012. Since then and through last summer, Apple has spent over $467 billion on buybacks, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence, which calls the iPhone maker the ‘poster child’ for share buybacks.”

Facebook, which apparently doesn’t have enough cash to hire people to keep Nazis off their platform, has made its top stockholder, Mark Zuckerberg, the richest millennial in America in part through share buybacks, announcing in their third quarter 2021 earnings report:

“We repurchased $14.37 billion of our Class A common stock in the third quarter and had $7.97 billion remaining on our prior share repurchase authorization as of September 30, 2021. We also announced today a $50 billion increase in our share repurchase authorization.”

Progressives Try to Stop the Scam

Democratic politicians have been working for years to try to end this corrosive practice. Senator Tammy Baldwin wrote in a 2015 letter to the SEC’s chair:

“Stock buybacks use profits to purchase a company’s own stock instead of investing in the worker training, research, or innovation necessary to promote long-term growth. … In the past, this money went to productive investments in the form of higher wages, research and development, training, or new equipment. Today, cash is being extracted from companies and placed on the sidelines. Buybacks are now undermining the stock market’s role in capital formation.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren noted:

“Buybacks create a sugar high for the corporations. It boosts prices in the short run, but the real way to boost the value of a corporation is to invest in the future, and they are not doing that.”

In 2019, Senators Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer co-authored an article for The New York Times in which they told America:

“Between 2008 and 2017, 466 of the S&P 500 companies spent around $4 trillion on stock buybacks, equal to 53 percent of profits. An additional 40 percent of corporate profits went to dividends. When more than 90 percent of corporate profits go to buybacks and dividends, there is reason to be concerned.

“First, stock buybacks don’t benefit the vast majority of Americans. That’s because large stockholders tend to be wealthier. Nearly 85 percent of all stocks owned by Americans belong to the wealthiest 10 percent of households. Of course, many corporate executives are compensated through stock-based pay. So when a company buys back its stock, boosting its value, the benefits go overwhelmingly to shareholders and executives, not workers.”

Pointing out that share buybacks inflate the wealth of the top 10% of Americans who own most of this nation’s stocks — increasing inequality — while generally screwing the people who work for those companies, they added:

“[W]hen corporations direct resources to buy back shares on this scale, they restrain their capacity to reinvest profits more meaningfully in the company in terms of R&D, equipment, higher wages, paid medical leave, retirement benefits and worker retraining.”

Small businesses like mine and millions of others across this nation can’t engage in this sort of manipulation to seemingly pull money out of thin air. Large businesses shouldn’t be able to, either.

It’s time to declare the 42-year Reagan Revolution’s neoliberal experiment a failure, and outlaw the share buybacks that are one of its most visible markers. Joe Kennedy knew what he was talking about when he criminalized them, even if he was a crook.

A first step toward restoring vitality to America’s business sector and providing much-needed funds to return America to our position as the world’s innovator — with the world’s most prosperous middle class, as we were before Reagan’s introduction of neoliberalism — is to once again outlaw stock buybacks.

Decolonize, de-Imperialize, and Restore Sovereignty

 
JANUARY 4, 2023
FacebookTwitter

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

As a child of the 1950s and ‘60s I cannot help but see flashes of Vietnam in Empire’s latest – hopefully its final – military expedition(s).  Social media platforms and television propaganda maintain a persistent numbness.  Institutional and individual indifference breeds a hunger for bread and circuses, football, Disneyland, talk shows and star-spangled “influencers,” who excrete toxic slime from every crack and crevice.  The system now occupies every square inch of terrain.  Bureaucrats, bored out of their minds, nevertheless read the latest memo from Washington directing street operations programmed to steer the “hive mind” hither and yon, round and round, to a place called nowhere.

It’s hard aimless work averting eyeballs — already robbed of their gaze — day in, day out, away from the wretched, inhumane global slave quarters and killing zones where pillage of the last untrammeled forests, grasslands, and scenic vistas produce commodities and emerging, synthetic  “Green” markets needed to keep the insatiable machines, financial schemes and meaningless political simulations from totally melting down.  Down this road is one logical end: suicide.

Will this latest proxy war keep Western (vassal) societies in Europe and elsewhere under control as they face increasingly difficult hardships, a direct result of the suicidal policies of the U.S. government’s mannequin class.

I have questions.

Will 2023 witness further deceleration, decline and collapse of Western colonialism under papal rule?  Will the “Doctrine of (Christian) Discovery,” which began just over 500 years ago finally expire?  Will the Inter Caetera, a papal bull from Pope Alexander VI in 1493, be rescinded?

An excerpt:

Alexander, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to the illustrious sovereigns, our very dear son in Christ, Ferdinand, king, and our very dear daughter in Christ, Isabella, queen of Castile, Leon, Aragon, Sicily, and Granada, health and apostolic benediction. Among other works well pleasing to the Divine Majesty and cherished of our heart, this assuredly ranks highest, that in our times especially the Catholic faith and the Christian religion be exalted and be everywhere increased and spread, that the health of souls be cared for and that barbarous nations be overthrown and brought to the faith itself.   (Emphasis added)

What lies beyond war in Ukraine?  Will the PR firms, mainstream media and intelligence agencies be able to hold back the growing discontentment, and keep social, cultural and financial illusions from imploding?  How much more hardship can the Western middle class endure before the pitchforks come out hunting for oligarchs and billionaires who clearly understand the stakes if they cannot deliver a quality of life greater than today’s unpayable debts?

Retreat or liquidation/suicide?  Everyone knows who is to blame for the consequences of de-industrialized, hyper-financialized economies.  Can American Empire find a way to escape de-imperialization and de-colonization and a radical re-configuration and re-storation of sovereignty?  How quickly can popular revolt overthrow our dilapidated American oligarchy?

A transformation is always brewing, cycling.  It’s a good time to imagine and embrace with conviction a future with fewer lies and a whole lot less corruption, chaos and mass murder for fun and profit by, and for, the parasite class.

Global hierarchy and centralization have failed demonstrably.  People now see and feel the deep disfunction in once-trusted institutions. Masses of people struggling to survive are no longer fooled by the failed simulations, fake institutions and greedy tyrants who pushed “free-market” prosperity and gave back nothing but misery.  Hoarders of illegitimate wealth should be preparing for their long-awaited encounter with karma.

The meme for 2023 should read as follows: “De- comes before Re-.”  De-colonization, de-imperialization, de-centralization and de-molish slavery is the first order of business.

“That which is ready to fall, shall ye also push!”  – Friedrich Nietzsche

Imagine!  Create!  Rise from the ashes, imagine liberation from debt slavery and restoration of sovereignty and dignity to indigenous nations, communities, families, man (man and woman) and all of Mother Earth’s lifeforms.

Steve Kelly is a an artist and environmental activist. He lives in Bozeman, Montana.  

Rohingya Refugees Are Departing for Southeast Asia in Increasing Numbers

While some travel overland from Bangladesh to Thailand, others are embarking upon dangerous and often deadly ocean voyages.


By Rajeev Bhattacharyya
January 04, 2023

Rohingya children gather sticks at a refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, March 2018.
Credit: UN Women/Alison JoyceADVERTISEMENT

Rohingya refugees are increasingly embarking upon hazardous journeys to Southeast Asia to escape the dangers of an uncertain life in the refugee camps of eastern Bangladesh.

In early December, around 150 such refugees were stranded at sea off Thailand’s coast after their boat broke down. Rights activists suspect that many may have died and requested the country’s authorities to rescue the survivors.

The episode came on the heels of a number of similar incidents to have occurred intermittently over the past two years. Late in 2021, for instance, there was a standoff involving a boat carrying Rohingya refugees and the Indonesian navy, which ended after 18 hours with a rescue of the refugees by the navy.

The trail to Southeast Asia and the Middle East from refugee camps in Bangladesh and the Rohingya-inhabited region of Myanmar’s Rakhine State began decades ago, after the Myanmar military launched Operation Dragon King (Nagamin) against Rohingya in the late 1970s

Several more military operations followed in the decades thereafter, compelling hundreds of Rohingya to relocate to Bangladesh and other countries. The biggest exodus was in 2017, when the Myanmar military launched attacks that forced more than 700,000 people to cross the border into Bangladesh, where most now remain.

The Rohingyas, a Muslim minority group living predominantly in Rakhine State, are often described as the world’s most persecuted people. They have been at the receiving end of institutionalized discrimination and repression by Myanmar’s ethnic Bamar-dominated military.

Conversations over the telephone with three Rohingya refugees rehabilitated at different camps in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, revealed details of the immigration to overseas destinations in Southeast Asia that could continue in the future.

“People are continuously escaping from the camps in Cox’s Bazar. The numbers keep on changing but it could be somewhere between 50 and 100 people every day who leave for Southeast Asia,” claimed a refugee in his early 30s. “It is likely that more people are exiting from the camps in Bangladesh than from the Rohingya inhabited zone in Myanmar’s Rakhine State.”ADVERTISEMENT


Emigration has picked up dramatically after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic began to recede around two years ago. The journey is arranged by a network of brokers who are active in a majority of the 34 refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar and the Rohingya region in Rakhine State. But only the families who can cough up the exorbitant rates demanded by the brokers can hope to depart for Southeast Asia.

According to the refugees, the current rate charged by the brokers is around $4,800- $5,800 per person. On many occasions, families sell all their belongings to obtain the necessary funds, which can also be paid in installments. But that is not the end of the story. Sometimes the brokers employ a range of tactics to extract more money from the families before they are allowed to depart.
One refugee recalled an instance in which a broker forcibly separated a child from his parents and detained him near Sittwe, the state capital of Rakhine State, for many days as he wanted more money. The family was allowed to proceed further in the journey only after his demands were fulfilled.

Brokers hand over every group to other brokers at specific destinations on the two routes through which the refugees are ferried. The overland route originates at Teknaf and passes through Maungdaw and Sittwe in Rakhine State and then onward to Thailand overland via Ayeyarwady Division.

Photographs that are in circulation at some camps in Cox’s Bazar reveal that refugees are usually herded beneath the merchandise in trucks that ply the route between Yangon and Ayeyarwady Division. On November 27, a truck transporting many refugees hidden beneath sacks of ginger skidded off the road near Yangon. A few days later, the bodies of 13 men, most of them teenagers, were found dumped near Ngwe Nanthar village in Hlegu township.

Many groups of Rohingya refugees have been detained in Ayeyarwady over the past several months. According to an estimate, more than 400 refugees were sent to prison in the region since the military coup in Myanmar early in 2021.

The other route is by sea on rickety boats to various countries in Southeast Asia. Most of the escapees prefer Malaysia to other countries owing to its government’s past leniency toward Rohingya refugees (though this may be changing). Harrowing tales had surfaced about the experiences of refugees after reaching Thailand, where they have been imprisoned or forced into bonded labor unless more funds are paid.

More than 1 million Rohingya refugees are lodged at the camps in Cox’s Bazar.] An uncertain future coupled with the squalid conditions in the camps here have prompted an increasing number of refugees to undertake hazardous journeys to Southeast Asia.

The refugees claimed that education and health facilities have been enhanced at all the camps with the active assistance of some NGOs but are still inadequate for the entire population in Cox’s Bazar. They lamented the lack of employment opportunities in Bangladesh, which has compelled more teenagers and young adults to escape from the camps in search of greener – and safer – pastures.
Drone advances in Ukraine could herald battlefield dawn of autonomous killer robots

Experts warn it’s likely only a matter of time before both sides take relatively small step of deploying even smarter lethal weapons, setting stage for profound change in warfare

By FRANK BAJAK and HANNA ARHIROVA
Today, 

Ukrainian soldiers launch a drone at Russian positions near Bakhmut, Donetsk region, Ukraine, December 15, 2022. (LIBKOS/AP)


KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Drone advances in Ukraine have accelerated a long-anticipated technology trend that could soon bring the world’s first fully autonomous fighting robots to the battlefield, inaugurating a new age of warfare.

The longer the war lasts, the more likely it becomes that drones will be used to identify, select and attack targets without help from humans, according to military analysts, combatants, and artificial intelligence researchers.

That would mark a revolution in military technology as profound as the introduction of the machine gun. Ukraine already has semi-autonomous attack drones and counter-drone weapons endowed with AI. Russia also claims to possess AI weaponry, though the claims are unproven. But there are no confirmed instances of a nation putting into combat robots that have killed entirely on their own.

Experts say it may be only a matter of time before either Russia or Ukraine, or both, deploy them.

“Many states are developing this technology,” said Zachary Kallenborn, a George Mason University weapons innovation analyst. “Clearly, it’s not all that difficult.”

The sense of inevitability extends to activists, who have tried for years to ban killer drones but now believe they must settle for trying to restrict the weapons’ offensive use.


Firefighters work after a drone attack on buildings in Kyiv, Ukraine, October 17, 2022. (Roman Hrytsyna/AP)

Ukraine’s digital transformation minister, Mykhailo Fedorov, agrees that fully autonomous killer drones are “a logical and inevitable next step” in weapons development. He said Ukraine has been doing “a lot of R&D in this direction.”

“I think that the potential for this is great in the next six months,” Fedorov told The Associated Press in a recent interview.

Ukrainian Lt. Col. Yaroslav Honchar, co-founder of the combat drone innovation nonprofit Aerorozvidka, said in a recent interview near the front that human war fighters simply cannot process information and make decisions as quickly as machines.

Ukrainian military leaders currently prohibit the use of fully independent lethal weapons, although that could change, he said.

“We have not crossed this line yet – and I say ‘yet’ because I don’t know what will happen in the future,” said Honchar, whose group has spearheaded drone innovation in Ukraine, converting cheap commercial drones into lethal weapons.

File: Ukraine’s Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov at a news conference at the Web Summit technology conference in Lisbon, Portugal, Nov. 3, 2022 (AP Photo/Armando Franca, File)

Russia could obtain autonomous AI from Iran or elsewhere. The long-range Shahed-136 exploding drones supplied by Iran have crippled Ukrainian power plants and terrorized civilians but are not especially smart. Iran has other drones in its evolving arsenal that it says feature AI.

Without a great deal of trouble, Ukraine could make its semi-autonomous weaponized drones fully independent in order to better survive battlefield jamming, their Western manufacturers say.

Those drones include the US-made Switchblade 600 and the Polish Warmate, which both currently require a human to choose targets over a live video feed. AI finishes the job. The drones, technically known as “loitering munitions,” can hover for minutes over a target, awaiting a clean shot.

“The technology to achieve a fully autonomous mission with Switchblade pretty much exists today,” said Wahid Nawabi, CEO of AeroVironment, its maker. That will require a policy change — to remove the human from the decision-making loop — that he estimates is three years away.

Drones can already recognize targets such as armored vehicles using cataloged images. But there is disagreement over whether the technology is reliable enough to ensure that the machines don’t err and take the lives of non-combatants.


A drone is seen in the sky seconds before it hit a building in Kyiv, Ukraine, on October 17, 2022. (Efrem Lukatsky/AP)

The AP asked the defense ministries of Ukraine and Russia if they have used autonomous weapons offensively – and whether they would agree not to use them if the other side similarly agreed. Neither responded.

If either side were to go on the attack with full AI, it might not even be a first.

An inconclusive UN report suggested that killer robots debuted in Libya’s internecine conflict in 2020, when Turkish-made Kargu-2 drones in full-automatic mode killed an unspecified number of combatants.

A spokesman for STM, the manufacturer, said the report was based on “speculative, unverified” information and “should not be taken seriously.” He told the AP the Kargu-2 cannot attack a target until the operator tells it to do so.

Fully autonomous AI is already helping to defend Ukraine. Utah-based Fortem Technologies has supplied the Ukrainian military with drone-hunting systems that combine small radars and unmanned aerial vehicles, both powered by AI. The radars are designed to identify enemy drones, which the UAVs then disable by firing nets at them — all without human assistance.

The number of AI-endowed drones keeps growing. Israel has been exporting them for decades. Its radar-killing Harpy can hover over anti-aircraft radar for up to nine hours waiting for them to power up.

Other examples include Beijing’s Blowfish-3 unmanned weaponized helicopter. Russia has been working on a nuclear-tipped underwater AI drone called the Poseidon. The Dutch are currently testing a ground robot with a .50-caliber machine gun.


A Switchblade 600 loitering missile drone manufactured by AeroVironment is displayed at the Eurosatory arms show in Villepinte, north of Paris, on June 14, 2022. (Michel Euler/AP)

Honchar believes Russia, whose attacks on Ukrainian civilians have shown little regard for international law, would have used autonomous killer drones by now if the Kremlin had them.

“I don’t think they’d have any scruples,” agreed Adam Bartosiewicz, vice president of WB Group, which makes the Warmate.

AI is a priority for Russia. President Vladimir Putin said in 2017 that whoever dominates that technology will rule the world. In a December 21 speech, he expressed confidence in the Russian arms industry’s ability to embed AI in war machines, stressing that “the most effective weapons systems are those that operate quickly and practically in an automatic mode.”

Russian officials already claim their Lancet drone can operate with full autonomy.

“It’s not going to be easy to know if and when Russia crosses that line,” said Gregory C. Allen, former director of strategy and policy at the Pentagon’s Joint Artificial Intelligence Center.

Switching a drone from remote piloting to full autonomy might not be perceptible. To date, drones able to work in both modes have performed better when piloted by a human, Allen said.

The technology is not especially complicated, said University of California-Berkeley professor Stuart Russell, a top AI researcher. In the mid-2010s, colleagues he polled agreed that graduate students could, in a single term, produce an autonomous drone “capable of finding and killing an individual, let’s say, inside a building,” he said.

Ukrainian soldiers shoot at a drone that appears in the sky seconds before it hit a building in Kyiv, Ukraine, on October 17, 2022. (Vadym Sarakhan/AP)

An effort to lay international ground rules for military drones has so far been fruitless. Nine years of informal United Nations talks in Geneva made little headway, with major powers including the United States and Russia opposing a ban. The last session, in December, ended with no new round scheduled.

Washington policymakers say they won’t agree to a ban because rivals developing drones cannot be trusted to use them ethically.

Toby Walsh, an Australian academic who, like Russell, campaigns against killer robots, hopes to achieve a consensus on some limits, including a ban on systems that use facial recognition and other data to identify or attack individuals or categories of people.

“If we are not careful, they are going to proliferate much more easily than nuclear weapons,” said Walsh, author of “Machines Behaving Badly.” “If you can get a robot to kill one person, you can get it to kill a thousand.”

Scientists also worry about AI weapons being repurposed by terrorists. In one feared scenario, the US military spends hundreds of millions writing code to power killer drones. Then it gets stolen and copied, effectively giving terrorists the same weapon.

To date, the Pentagon has neither clearly defined “an AI-enabled autonomous weapon” nor authorized a single such weapon for use by US troops, said Allen, the former Defense Department official. Any proposed system must be approved by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and two undersecretaries.

That’s not stopping the weapons from being developed across the US. Projects are underway at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, military labs, academic institutions and in the private sector.

Then-Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin tests goggles with an electronic connection that allows him to see the view from an unmanned drone aircraft, during an exhibition of equipment displayed at Russia’s Civil Defense Academy in Moscow’s Khimki surburbs, November 12, 2010. (RIA Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky/AP)

The Pentagon has emphasized using AI to augment human warriors. The Air Force is studying ways to pair pilots with drone wingmen. A booster of the idea, former Deputy Defense Secretary Robert O. Work, said in a report last month that it “would be crazy not to go to an autonomous system” once AI-enabled systems outperform humans — a threshold that he said was crossed in 2015, when computer vision eclipsed that of humans.

Humans have already been pushed out in some defensive systems. Israel’s Iron Dome missile shield is authorized to open fire automatically, although it is said to be monitored by a person who can intervene if the system goes after the wrong target.

Multiple countries, and every branch of the US military, are developing drones that can attack in deadly synchronized swarms, according to Kallenborn, the George Mason researcher.

So will future wars become a fight to the last drone?

That’s what Putin predicted in a 2017 televised chat with engineering students: “When one party’s drones are destroyed by drones of another, it will have no other choice but to surrender.”