Keeping Cattle on Public Land Is Bad for People, Cows, Wildlife, and the Planet 

by Erika Schelby — 28/09/2023

The U.S. beef industry is destroying the American Wild West and worsening the climate crisis.

When conservationist Aldo Leopold persuaded the U.S. Forest Service in 1924 to establish the nation’s first federally approved wilderness of more than 500,000 acres around the headwaters of the Gila River in southwestern New Mexico, he did not anticipate that this priceless pristine land would be invaded by cattle. This problem would take root around the mid-1970s after a bankrupt rancher “abandoned his cattle in the wilderness.”

Similarly, he did not foresee the shrinking of global wilderness areas, the issuing of destructive grazing permits for 1.5 million cattle on U.S. public lands, or the challenges posed by planetary climate change.

To this day, unbranded feral livestock in the Gila Wilderness cause extensive damage to a delicate riparian ecosystem and the land and wildlife on this protected federal terrain.

Livestock waste also harms the Southwest’s last free and untamed stretch of a major river—the Gila, a tributary of the Colorado River. As soon as this wild stream leaves the Gila Wilderness and continues its long journey to Yuma, Arizona, where it joins the Colorado River, every drop of it is spoken for.

Native Americans who have lived along the river course for 2,000 years had to compete with European settlers to access this water. Eventually, the competition for it became one of the most enduring struggles in developing the arid Western U.S. The water demand has intensified under the influence of the ever-rising population in the American Southwest, paired with severe droughts experienced in this region.

Over the years, the Forest Service has removed 756 cattle—shot dead or captured alive—from the Gila Wilderness, according to a March 2023 article in El Defensor Chieftain. Controversy has surrounded all attempts to remove the feral population. In the attempted cull in March 2023, about 150 animals roamed the area; of these, only 19 wild cows were eliminated. To stop this culling operation of the feral herd by helicopter, the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association tried to get a temporary restraining order, which the U.S. District Court rejected in February 2023.

The ranchers’ association argued that this aerial campaign inflicted cruelty and that the cows should be rounded up instead. The Forest Service, however, maintained that historically, the “use of ground-based methods alone did not sustainably reduce the feral cattle population” owing to the rugged landscape and the wild behavior of the animals. The cattle growers’ stance on the humane treatment of cattle is not unfounded and might have carried more weight had it also extended to cruelties endured by livestock on factory farms or in slaughterhouses.

While denying the request made by the ranchers, Judge James Browning wrote in his decision, “No one disputes that the Gila cattle need to be removed and are doing significant damage to the Gila Wilderness.” Moreover, Camille Howes, Gila National Forest Supervisor, said, “This has been a difficult decision, but the lethal removal of feral cattle from the Gila Wilderness is necessary to protect public safety, threatened and endangered species habitats, water quality, and the natural character of the Gila Wilderness.”

New Mexico’s outdoor-loving people agreed. According to an Albuquerque community newspaper named The Paper, 93 percent of the 5,973 comments submitted regarding the removal of cattle from the Gila Wilderness “were supportive of [the] lethal removal of the cattle, according to public data posted by NM Wild.”

A Shrinking Wilderness

Defending New Mexico’s Gila Wilderness is only one example of similar measures that are ongoing across the country and worldwide to preserve these areas. The last wilderness areas on Earth are shrinking at a troubling rate. Wildland is being lost quickly as the rise in human population fuels the demand for food, water, and minerals, among other things. As Steve Carver and Lex Comber from the University of Leeds pointed out in the Conversation, “There aren’t many corners of the world left untouched by humanity.”

A mapping study by the University of Queensland in 2017 documented a 10 percent loss of Earth’s wilderness since the early 1990s. According to a 2017 statement by UQ professor and director of science at the Wildlife Conservation Society James Watson, untouched areas would not survive the subsequent 50 years if this loss continued at the same rate. The water cycle, the nitrogen cycle, biodiversity, and pollination are also being negatively affected by this wilderness degradation.

In February 2023, scientists at the Weizmann Institute of Science published the first global census of wild mammal biomass. The biomass of these wild mammals on land and at sea is “dwarfed” by the total weight of cattle, pigs, sheep, and other domesticated animals. It was also much lower than the biomass of humans. The census revealed that while the biomass of wild mammals on land and at sea weighed 60 million metric tons, domesticated livestock accounted for a whopping 630 million metric tons, and humans added 390 million metric tons.

Human activity has negatively impacted the planet and has played a significant role in the extinction of several wild animals and plants. According to another study, “The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01 percent of all living things… Yet since the dawn of civilization, humanity has caused the loss of 83 percent of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.” Many people and scientists are now working toward halting the irreversible damage being caused by humanity.

The 30 Percent Protection Plan

Historically, the United States has a poor record as a champion of biodiversity. In the 1990s, when then-President Bill Clinton signed the foundational Convention of Biological Diversity, it was not ratified by the required two-thirds Senate majority. So, when President Joe Biden entered the Oval Office and launched the so-called 30×30 plan and the “America the Beautiful Initiative,” there was some skepticism. Both programs set the ambitious goal of conserving 30 percent of U.S. land and waters by 2030. (The 2022 annual report for the initiative is available online.)

The United Nations Biodiversity Conference that took place in December 2022 in Montreal (COP15)—in which the United States participated informally—ended with the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) by 188 nations. According to the UN Environment Program, “The plan includes concrete measures to halt and reverse nature loss, including putting 30 percent of the planet and 30 percent of degraded ecosystems under protection by 2030.” Dubbed the “30 by 30 goal,” the agreement hopes to stem the ongoing extinction crisis; about 1 million species are at risk of disappearing forever.

All this represents a tall order with conflicting conditions and goals. While the world’s remaining wilderness areas are steadily shrinking, COP15 urgently seeks to protect 30 percent of nature by 2030. To achieve this goal, developed countries like the U.S. must play a more active role in biodiversity protection. The United States is the world’s largest economy and has the financial resources to help meet this goal. Also, it is one of the five countries that hold most of the remaining wilderness in the world.

Currently, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) gives out 18,000 permits, allowing some 1.5 million cattle to graze across 155 million acres of federal land—an area equal to the combined size of California and Oregon. In Welfare Ranching: The Subsidized Destruction of the American West, the book’s co-author and ecologist George Wuerthner said that the BLM usually just rubber stamps the permits without carrying out sufficient environmental analysis about allowing grazing.

For ranchers, grazing cattle on public land is indeed a bargain. In 2023, the BLM and the Forest Service grazing fee per animal unit (measured in AUMs: the amount of forage necessary to sustain a cow and her calf per month) was $1.35 per month, which has remained unchanged since 1986. “John Janicek, a Dallas-based attorney who has written about the impacts of the grazing program on climate change,” said that this amount is less than one would pay to feed a goldfish.

Ironically, while the American population believes it is funding public lands and national parks to access them and enjoy these landscapes, the taxpayers are generously subsidizing this fee paid by the ranchers, making this “a bad deal financially and environmentally.” On private land in the West, the grazing fee is much higher at around $23.90 a month in 2022.

Research has shown that livestock grazing and overgrazing are the major causes of desertification, soil carbon loss, lower water holding capacity, loss of species, and eradication of native plants. In addition to this, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), heat-trapping methane emissions saw the fourth-largest increase on record in 2022, with human activity like landfill and livestock being sources for the increase in these emissions. Grazing cattle are a major source of emissions in the United States.

As a pathway to the 30×30 goal, our valuable public lands require a completely different approach. They need our help reducing habitat fragmentation and environmental degradation and maintaining species biodiversity. One way to achieve this is to ensure that wildlife populations can move freely to adapt and thrive. The establishment of wildlife corridors would aid the movement of animals and ensure that gene flow and seed distribution functions are unrestricted.

Chris Bugbee, a wildlife conservationist at the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity, said, “There’s no place for cows in these Western ecosystems. It never was a good idea to open up millions of acres to grazing. And especially now, with drought and climate change advancing, it’s a really, really bad idea.”

Still, ranching is a deeply rooted part of the American identity. Countless stories, myths, and movies about cattle, proud cattlemen, and rugged cowboys exist. Ranching is well established, is part of the American tradition, has friends in high places, and has maintained cooperation with federal agencies over many years. Any change to limiting these practices now is likely to be met with resistance from the ranchers who forget that raising cattle on public land is a privilege and not a right.

For the moment, the cattle industry—or beef-production industry, as it is also called—must be pleased to hear that officials in the Interior and Agriculture departments of the U.S. government have indicated the inclusion of “active grazing lands used by ranchers for cattle, horses, goats, and sheep” as conserved and protected for the 30×30 goals. Andrew Rothman of the WildEarth Guardians has an answer to that: “The idea that public lands open to logging and grazing should count toward the 30×30 Initiative is a bunch of ‘hooey.’”

So, how can the public make sense of these clashing, contradictory positions? The plans of the Biden administration are lofty and beautiful. They encourage local solutions, and that is where the plan’s best intentions collide with conflicting front-line interests and complications.

Consequently, the question is: Will we conserve or not conserve? Or do we avoid an answer, preferring an agreeable exercise in self-deception instead? Will we pretend to keep some of America beautiful while at the same time allowing the cattle ranchers to go on as usual? Is it all just for keeping up appearances?

Solutions: Agitate and Adapt

One practical solution is available for cutting the Gordian knot: stop grazing on public land altogether. It may be done by revitalizing lawmakers’ political will and ensuring persistent pressure from constituents.

While a complete end to grazing on public lands seems complicated to achieve given the political support the cattle ranchers enjoy, the meat industry is already being forced to reduce their herd sizes owing to the challenges posed by adverse climate impacts like the Western megadrought and rising feed costs. That alone will constrict livestock quantities for years to come. Consumers may find beef in lower quantities and at higher prices at the grocery store.

Shoppers are adjusting to all this and general inflation by buying less meat and cheaper cuts. Kroger reported that customers are buying 36 percent less meat and fish, according to an August 2022 article by the Food Institute. As for beef prices, they have risen steadily. The 2023 average price for a pound of ground beef was $5.43. In 2008, the cost was $3.04; in 1998, it stood at $1.84. Of course, a significant part of this increase in price over the years has been due to inflation, but that’s not the entire story.

So, will these factors lead to Americans eating less meat? After all, according to an analysis done by Statista in 2018— based on data provided by the OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook (Edition 2021)—Americans are the biggest human carnivores on the planet, devouring an average of 219 pounds (99 kg) of meat every year. Australia and Argentina follow in second and third place, respectively. This is despite the fact that beef has the highest carbon footprint: Only 44 grams of beef produces the same amount of greenhouse gas as 50 onions.

Ranching may be forced to change under the iron laws of climate breakdown. The number of animals raised may become much smaller. Beef could soon be a far more expensive food, something that will be indulged in every now and then.

Climate change and the resulting drought, coupled with unregulated human activity, have already affected the salmon population, pushing the fish toward extinction. The impacts of these missteps are being felt in California, which has witnessed “the closure of recreational and commercial king salmon fishing seasons along much of the West Coast due to near-record low numbers of the iconic fish returning to their spawning grounds” in 2023. This has led to fish prices rising and salmon becoming “even more of a delicacy.”

To avoid this story from repeating itself and affecting the availability of beef in the future, people need to make tough choices about what is more important for them: Tolerating subsidized and destructive beef production on “our” public lands or giving active support to the initiative of keeping 30 percent of the country protected.

Amid so much worrying information, one thing is clear. If we want a healthy population, society, and economy, we need a healthier planet, which can only be achieved if we learn to live more sustainably and consciously instead of indulging in overconsumption and destroying the precious resources provided by nature.

Erika Schelby is the author of Looking for Humboldt and Searching for German Footprints in New Mexico and Beyond (Lava Gate Press, 2017) and Liberating the Future from the Past? Liberating the Past from the Future? (Lava Gate Press, 2013), which was shortlisted for the International Essay Prize Contest by the Berlin-based cultural magazine Lettre International. Schelby lives in New Mexico.

This article was produced by Earth | Food | Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Why Healthy Forests Mean Fewer Pandemics

in Environmental Protection — by Reynard Loki — 17/09/2023

As scientists continue to research the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic, one fact has become clear: Deforestation is linked to emerging diseases. When humans destroy forests to create land for human use, whether it’s for farming, mining, logging, infrastructure development, or urban expansion, biodiversity is diminished. And as some species go extinct, the ones that remain and even flourish in degraded forest ecosystems—like bats, rats, and birds—are those that are more likely to be hosts for deadly viruses that can jump to humans.

COVID-19, SARS, and Ebola—three infectious diseases that spread across national borders since 2002—share one thing in common: They were transmitted to humans from wild animals living in tropical forests, which are losing more than 100 trees per second due to rampant, unsustainable deforestation. It is also important to note that cutting down trees negatively impacts not only biodiversity and human health but the climate: Deforestation is responsible for 30 percent of global carbon emissions.

Human Activity Creating Reservoirs of Zoonotic Disease

Researchers in England examined over 6,800 ecological communities across six continents and found trends connecting disease outbreaks to regions where biodiversity has been diminished due to human activity. Their study, published in the journal Nature in August 2020, concluded that “global changes in the mode and the intensity of land use are creating expanding hazardous interfaces between people, livestock and wildlife reservoirs of zoonotic disease.”

Some scientists had been sounding this alarm for many years, but it had fallen on deaf ears. “We’ve been warning about this for decades,” said Kate Jones, an ecologist at University College London who was one of the study’s authors. “Nobody paid any attention.”

Calls to Maintain Healthy Forests

Now is the time for governments to pay attention to the science: To prevent the next pandemic, efforts must be made to rein in rampant deforestation. In an essay published in the journal Science in July 2020, a group of scientists made the case that reducing both deforestation and the wildlife trade would result in a lower risk of future pandemics. “The clear link between deforestation and virus emergence suggests that a major effort to retain intact forest cover would have a large return on investment even if its only benefit was to reduce virus emergence events,” they write.

Epidemiologist Ibrahima Socé Fall, who heads emergency operations at the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, echoes that call. “Sustainable development is crucial,” he said. “If we continue to have this level of deforestation, disorganized mining, and unplanned development, we are going to have more outbreaks.”

Sustainable Development Means Sustainable Livelihoods

Investing in sustainable solutions also means investing in sustainable livelihoods. And so part of reducing deforestation is understanding the needs of rural communities living in or alongside forests, including providing economic incentives to protect the natural ecosystems around them. Giving Indigenous groups legal rights to their land is one way. In 2009 in India’s Narmada District, for example, villagers were able to secure legal rights to their land and resources, which led to more sustainable land management.

“Being secure in the knowledge that they own their land has meant that these communities have an incentive to protect and improve it for the future,” writes Edward Davey, the international engagement director of the Food and Land Use Coalition, an initiative to improve the world’s food and land use systems. “Villagers can now invest in actions like leveling, terracing, and irrigating farmland for greater productivity. Some villages are also taking steps to prevent illegal forest clearing and forest fires, by patrolling the forest and brokering community agreements to manage fire.”

In addition, research indicates that improving rural healthcare can lead to a reduction in illegal logging. In one study conducted by researchers from the United States and Indonesia, villagers in rural Borneo were given discounts on health clinic visits, which offset the medical costs that were often paid for by illegal logging. “The greatest logging reductions were adjacent to the most highly engaged villages,” write the study authors. “Results suggest that this community-derived solution simultaneously improved health care access for local and indigenous communities and sustainably conserved carbon stocks in a protected tropical forest.”

Advocacy Groups Call for Action

In early 2021, several environmental groups and advocacy organizations co-sponsored a public petition—signed by more than 87,000 people as of July 2023—urging the Biden administration and Congress to curb deforestation in an effort to lower the risk of the next pandemic. Specifically, the petition calls for $2.5 billion in the next COVID relief bill to “support healthcare and jobs training for indigenous people in every tropical rainforest community, and support impoverished nations to build the healthcare systems to stop outbreaks before they spread.”

The petition’s sponsors, which include Brazilian Rainforest Trust, Endangered Species Coalition, and Mighty Earth, argue that “[e]nding deforestation is our best chance to conserve wildlife, one of the quickest and most cost-effective ways to curb global warming, and absolutely crucial to prevent the next deadly, global pandemic.”

“We are all interconnected,” famed primatologist Jane Goodall told PBS NewsHour. “And if we don’t get that lesson from this pandemic, then maybe we never will.”

Reynard Loki is a co-founder of the Observatory, where he is the environment and animal rights editor. He is also a writing fellow at the Independent Media Institute, where he serves as the editor and chief correspondent for Earth | Food | Life. He previously served as the environment, food, and animal rights editor at AlterNet and as a reporter for Justmeans/3BL Media covering sustainability and corporate social responsibility. He was named one of FilterBuy’s Top 50 Health and Environmental Journalists to Follow in 2016. His work has been published by Yes! Magazine, Salon, Truthout, BillMoyers.com, Asia Times, Pressenza, and EcoWatch, among others. He volunteers with New York City Pigeon Rescue Central.

This article was produced by Earth | Food | Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Ursulakleguin.com

https://www.ursulakleguin.com/the-word-for-world-is-forest

The Word for World is Forest - Ursula K. Le Guin 

The Word for World Is Forest was originally published in the anthology Again, Dangerous Visions in 1972. It was published as a standalone book in 1976 by ...

Theanarchistlibrary.org

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ursula-k-le-guin-the-word-for-world-is-forest-1

The Word for World Is Forest | The Anarchist Library 

Written in the glare of the United States' war on Indochina, and first published as a separate book in that war's dire aftermath, The Word for World is Forest ...

Tor.com

https://www.tor.com/2020/08/05/the-word-for-world-is-forest-ecology-colonialism-and-the-protest-movement

The Word for World Is Forest: Ecology, Colonialism, and ... ... 

Aug 5, 2020 ... The Word for World Is Forest: Ecology, Colonialism, and the Protest Movement ... A biweekly series, The Ursula K. Le Guin Reread explores anew the ...

Nusantaranaga.wordpress.com

https://nusantaranaga.wordpress.com/2020/01/01/american-imperialism-in-space-a-review-of-ursula-k-le-guins-the-word-for-world-is-forest

A Review of Ursula K. Le Guin's The Word for World is Fo... 

Jan 1, 2020 ... As an allegory for American Imperialism and the Vietnam war, The Word for World is Forest is a blunt, unsubtle instrument. We see the struggle ...

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

INDIA

Allegations of over-invoicing of imported coal by the Adani Group and others and its adverse impact on electricity consumers’ interests- Call for an independent judicial enquiry

in India — by E A S Sarma — 16/10/2023

To

Shri Rajiv Gauba

Cabinet Secretary

Government of India

Dear Shri Gauba,

I had earlier addressed you vide my letter of April 6, 2023 (https://countercurrents.org/2023/04/most-mineral-block-allocations-violate-the-doctrine-of-public-trust/‘) referring to prima facie evidence of several Central government agencies extending undue benefits to the Adani Group, which involved serious concerns of propriety, infringement of different laws including those that exist to safeguard the interests of the tribals, violation of the apex court’s directions in 2014 in the Coalgate case that mineral blocks should not be allotted through any procedure other than a competitive route, the adverse implications of the concessions from the point of view of the national interest (recent legislative changes to allow private mining of beach sands) and finally their long-term adverse implications for the taxpayers and the electricity consumers at large.

In my letter of October 7, 2023, addressed to the Finance Minister, with a copy marked to you (https://countercurrents.org/2023/10/sebis-ongoing-investigation-into-allegations-against-the-adani-group-hit-a-dead-end/), I raised further concerns at undue dilution by SEBI in 2018 of its 2014 FPI regulations to weaken its own ability to locate beneficial ownership of FPIs at a time when there was already an ongoing investigation against the Adani Group, the Finance Ministry’s (Dept of Economic Affairs’s) relaxation of overseas investment rules in 2022 to make it easy for domestic companies to stash illicit wealth in overseas shell companies, evade taxes and possibly manipulate domestic stock market through round-tripping their funds and the Corporate Affairs Ministry deliberately not providing a definition for “overseas shell companies” in Companies Act and other relevant laws.  

I earnestly hoped that the government would get those allegations independently investigated in view of their seriousness from the public and national interest points of view. Apparently, the government has chosen not to act, for reasons best known to it, forcing me to infer that there are extraneous pressures that have preempted any such investigation. 

There are more and more allegations emerging against the Adani Group that cause further serious concern, this time about the over-invoicing of imported coal in different States to the detriment of electricity consumers. According to some estimates made in June 2022 (https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/commodities/use-of-imported-coal-in-thermal-plants-to-cost-power-consumers-dear-says-aipef-8659431.html), coal imports have resulted in the electricity charges going up by Rs 0.70-1.00 per kWh and imposed a cost burden of more than Rs 24,000 Crores on the economy, mostly on the States. Since the Centre continues to force the States to import coal even now, the damage suffered by the States would be far greater.

The coal shortage situation has largely arisen from gross mismanagement of indigenous coal supplies on the part of the Centre. Instead of addressing it in consultation with the Ministry of Coal, the Ministry of Power compounded the problem by invoking its authority under Section 11 of the Electricity Act, 2003, somewhat irregularly, and imposed an unreasonable obligation on State utilities to meet a minimum of 10% of their coal demand through imports, allowing a field day to some domestic business houses owning overseas coal mines to take full advantage of it by over-invoicing coal supplied from those overseas mines to State power utilities and laundering funds to their overseas shell companies. There were allegations about this in the past but investigations undertaken by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) etc, could not make headway in the absence of necessary support from the Central government.

For one reason or the other, there has been no let up in the coal crisis as yet, allowing the Ministry of Power to continue forcing the States to import coal, which has apparently allowed business houses like the Adani Group to profit at the cost of the States.

With specific refrence to coal supplied by the Adani Group from Indonesia to domestic power plants over the last few years, an overseas news organisation, Financial Times[FT] found (https://www.ft.com/content/7aadb3d7-4a03-44ba-a01e-8ddd8bce29ed) that the group used “offshore intermediaries” to import billions of dollars worth of coal at prices that were at times more than double the market price. One of the said intermediaries apparently is owned by a Taiwanese businessman who was named by FT as a hidden shareholder in Adani firms. 

While what the FT investigation has revealed may still amount only to an unsubstantiated allegation, the veracity of which needs to be investigated further, nevertheless, if the FT findings are true, it implies that the said coal importer had over-invoiced coal imports significantly, thereby overcharging the State power utilities that were forced by the Centre to import coal and, indirectly imposed an unconscionably high cost burden on electricity consumers in different States, which imported coal through the Adani companies. Such a high cost of coal also crippled the finances of the State power utilities. If it is factually correct that the coal importer had laundered illegally earned profits through intermediaries to overseas shell companies, it amounts not only to tax evasion but also accumulating wealth illegally in overseas entities and possibly manipulating the domestic stock market.. 

This is not the first time that such investigative reports appeared in the public domain on alleged irregularities associated with the Adani Group in terms of undisclosed overseas shell companies through which the Group had apparently laundered money and also manipulated the domestic stock market. A few months ago, the US short-seller, Hindenburg published a report on the subject (https://hindenburgresearch.com/adani/) . The FT itself published a report (https://www.ft.com/content/474706d6-1243-4f1e-b365-891d4c5d528b) sometime ago on alleged overseas shell companies of the Adani Group. 

While the allegations made by Hindenburg are presently subject to judicial scrutiny, as stated earlier, the circumstances under which SEBI diluted its own well thought out FPI regulations of 2014 in 2018, when it had an ongoing investigation before it against the Adani Group, call for a closer look.

In addition, there have been reports alleging out-of-the-way favoured treatment meted out by Central government agencies since 2014 to tweak procedures to allot coal blocks to the Group and concessions granted in terms of making exceptions under environment and forest conservation laws. The relevant reports, the veracity of which needs to be investigated, are accessible at

https://www.occrp.org/en/

https://www.reporters-collective.in/trc/coal-forests-part-1

https://www.reporters-collective.in/newsletters/advantage-adani-power-industry-lobbies-coal-ministry-unlocks-dense-forests-for-mining

https://www.reporters-collective.in/newsletters/investigation-modi-governments-exceptional-favour-to-adani

https://www.reporters-collective.in/twitter-threads/coal-files-part-2-thread

https://www.reporters-collective.in/newsletters/centre-overturns-coal-reforms

https://www.reporters-collective.in/newsletters/adani-group-lobbied-to-remove-curbs-on-hoarding-farm-laws-did-just-that

https://www.reporters-collective.in/trc/adani-group-complained-against-farm-law-govt-diluted-it-to-allow-hoarding-by-corporates

https://www.reporters-collective.in/videos/coalfiles-govt-grants-unfair-advantage-to-biz-houses-in-coal-deals

While those investigative reports may amount only to allegations to be further examined for their factual accuracy, the fact remains that they point to favours apparently extended by the present government at the Centre to the Adani Group on several fronts, on a very large scale, and if those allegations are found to have some substance, it implies that they have caused a significant dent to the public exchequer, violated the norms stipulated by the apex court on the need to allot coal and other mineral blocks only through competitive bidding procedures and imposed a cost burden on State power utilities and electricity consumers. Those allegations are far too serious to be brushed aside.

As far as over-invoicing of coal imports is concerned, it is possible that there are several other domestic companies also importing coal from overseas mines and supplying it to State power utilities at over-invoiced prices. It is necessary to get all such coal imports investigated thoroughly.

The allegations on connivance between different agencies of the  Central government, the regulatory authorities and the Adani Group relate to a wide range of sectors of the economy and it is desirable that all such allegations are examined together through a credible system of independent investigation, in order to get clarity on the bigger picture of possible high-level collusion between different government agencies and the group. Piecemeal investigation by Central investigation agencies would not serve the purpose nor would it invoke public credibility. In my view, the only way to get those allegations enquired into would be by a high-level judicial commission, which would no doubt  take help from several Central investigating agencies such as the Income Tax Dept, Enforcement Directorate (ED), Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), RBI and SEBI and exercise oversight on the same. It is important that such an enquiry is completed in a time-bound manner so as to ensure that actual facts underlying the allegations are available for the Parliament and the public to consider.

As long as there is a delay on the part of the Centre to act on the above lines, it would lend more and more credence to the above-cited allegations in the public mind. It is important that the Central government comes clean on this at the earliest so as to ensure that the trust reposed in it by the public is fully justified.

I hope that the government will act on this at the earliest.

Regards,

Yours sincerely,

E A S Sarma

Former Secretary to the Government of India

Visakhapatnam

Overpricing of Coal Imports By Adani Group Led to Higher Profits, Customers Overcharged for Fuel: FT

A detailed FT investigation points to Adani’s use of “offshore intermediaries” to import $5 billion worth of coal at prices that were at times more than double the market price. One of these firms is owned by a Taiwanese businessman who was named by FT as a hidden shareholder in Adani firms.

Gautam Adani. Photo: Adapted from Chirag200201/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0

The Wire Staff

12/OCT/2023


New Delhi: The London-based reputed financial daily, Financial Times, in a detailed investigation, titled, The mystery of the Adani coal imports that quietly doubled in value, has found that Adani, “the country’s largest private coal importer, has been inflating fuel costs” leading to “millions of Indian consumers and businesses overpaying for electricity.”


The FT report speaks of how Gautam Adani is described as ‘Modi’s Rockefeller’, referring to his sharply rising fortunes in the past ten years, when his 10 listed companies have “thrived” and he has emerged as “India’s biggest private thermal power company and biggest private port operator.”

A US short-seller Hindenburg Research’s report in January this year raised serious questions about several aspects of how Adani functioned which led to serious questions arising globally about the group and also about regulatory mechanisms in India. Stock market watchdog Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) came under fire even when the Supreme Court expert committee pointed to certain changes in rules that may have made it easier for Adani to escape scrutiny.

Also read: Because of Repealed Provisions, SEBI Hit ‘Opaque Structure’ Wall While Investigating Adani: SC Panel

Adani has denied the charges, both those levelled by Hindenburg and then of coal import over-pricing by the Financial Times and said it has been vindicated by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI’s) decision this year to withdraw an appeal to the Supreme Court in a case against one of the 40 importers named in 2016. It said, “the issue of overvaluation in the import of coal was conclusively settled by India’s highest court of law.”

FT cites the “unresolved nature of the DRI investigation and the apparent continuation of the alleged practices” raising “fresh questions about the relationship between Adani and the administration of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.”

Watchdog SEBI’s role too has come in the limelight after it emerged that it knew about allegations against Adani Group since 2014, that a letter which was part of the OCCRP-FT-The Guardian’s investigation showed.

The most recent scandal to hit Adani were allegations that the chairman of SEBI at that time was “now an independent director of Adani-owned NDTV.”

Financial Times has raised three key points in its investigation, after looking at 30 shipments of coal from Indonesia to India by an Adani company over 32 months between 2019 and 2021.

The Adani Group has rejected charges of wrongdoing. Adani has termed the investigation as being based on an “old, baseless allegation”, and is “a clever recycling and selective misrepresentation of publicly available facts and information.”

Inflated prices of imported coal

The inflation in imported coal that FT alleges Adani has been doing may have sometimes, per the report, allowed it to make 52% profit margins in an industry where profit margins are otherwise considered low.

In all cases that FT examined, it says “prices in import records were far higher than those in corresponding export declarations.”

During the journeys, from where they were imported back to a port in India, usually owned by Adani, “the value of the combined shipments unaccountably increased by over $70 million.”

Among the specific instances the London-based financial daily has found, it says that in January 2019, coal meant for Adani, departed “the Indonesian port of Kaliorang in East Kalimantan carrying 74,820 tonnes of thermal coal destined for the fires of an Indian power station. During the voyage, something extraordinary occurred: the value of its cargo doubled.”

While “in export records the price was $1.9mn, plus $42,000 for shipping and insurance. On arrival at India’s largest commercial port, Mundra in Gujarat run by Adani, the declared import value was $4.3mn.”

The inflation in imported coal that FT alleges Adani has been doing may have sometimes, per the report, allowed it to make 52% profit margins in an industry where profit margins are otherwise considered low. File image of the Adani Mundra port in Gujarat’s Kutch. Photo: Emperor Genius at English Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0

This allowed for “52% profit margins” as a result of over-invoicing, and leading to unusual profits.

FT says “annual profits at Adani Enterprises quadrupled over the past five years, to earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation of $1.2bn in the most recent financial year.”

Little-known middlemen companies used to import paid higher

FT says that Adani Enterprises, the group’s oldest and most valuable company, generates the lion’s share of its sales and profits from its coal trading division called Integrated Resources Management (IRM).

This division, “boasts of its expertise in logistics and commodity trading” based in four global offices and 19 Indian locations.

In its most recent financial year, which ended in March, IRM reported trading 88 million tonnes of coal, says the news report. Its results for the final quarter of that year, the first set of accounts published after Hindenburg’s report, covered a three-month period when the market price of coal had halved.”

Yet, notes FT, “IRM thrived, delivering a 24% rise in earnings before tax and interest to Rs 8.3 billion ($101 million), on a 6% rise in sales to Rs 186 billion ($2.3 billion)”

But IRM did not make extraordinary profits. Three “middlemen” companies it used to buy coal from, that supplied the Adani group with coal, appear to have made more substantial amounts”. FT identifies them as Hi Lingos in Taipei, Taurus Commodities General Trading in Dubai, and Pan Asia Tradelink in Singapore.

For 42 million tonnes of coal supplied by its own operations in that time, the Adani group declared an average price of $130 per tonne. But for the 31 million tonnes of coal supplied by its three middlemen, the average price declared per tonne was $155, per tonne. This was at a “20% premium worth almost $800 million.”

FT identifies Hi Lingos as being owned by Chang Chung-Ling, a Taiwanese businessman previously “identified by the FT as a potentially controversial owner of Adani stock.”

The second middleman company Taurus, it says, is run from Dubai and whose ownership it was unable to conclusively establish.

The third company, Pan Asia Coal Trading, which “primarily supplied Adani Power and did not have other Indian customers for coal in the records reviewed by the FT.”

Senior industry traders FT spoke to, “questioned the use of little-known trading houses, as large buyers of coal generally prefer to partner with big trading houses that have strong credit ratings and a reliable record for commodity deals involving the exchange of hundreds of millions of dollars.”

FT does not rule out the possibility of higher quality coal in some cases leading to a marginally higher price, yet, it notes that Adani also appears to have supplied itself with “unusually expensive coal. For the 508 shipments with a calorific value where Adani companies were listed as both supplier and importer, most — 87% — were priced higher than the closest Argus benchmark, at a median premium of 24%.”

Argus is an independent provider of market intelligence to the global energy and commodity markets, and is treated as a provider of price benchmarks globally.


For 42 million tonnes of coal supplied by its own operations in that time, the Adani group declared an average price of $130 per tonne. But for the 31 million tonnes of coal supplied by its three middlemen, the average price declared per tonne was $155, per tonne. This was at a “20% premium worth almost $800 million.” Credit: PTI

Also read: Adani’s Acquisitions: Why India Needs to Keep Track of the Costs

Public pays higher prices for power?

The other important implication of the allegedly overpriced coal, that the FT investigation draws attention to, is the charge that these high costs translated directly into higher prices paid by consumers, especially in Gujarat where the opposition Congress party has already flagged the issue.

In August this year, opposition politicians in Gujarat accused the state government of making almost $500 million in excess payments to Adani Power over five years under a power purchase agreement linked to the price of coal.

The opposition claimed a letter from the state power utility GUVNL showed it had paid the sums to Adani for coal procured at premium prices, and that “Adani had not provided paperwork.”

“GUVNL paid Rs 13,802 crore ($2 billion) as energy charges to the company. But if coal rates as per Argus index is taken into consideration, then only Rs 9,902 crore ($1.5 billion) should have been paid,” the opposition leader is quoted as saying.

The government then, notes FT, said that the payments were interim and “subject to adjustment,” while Adani called the allegations “baseless” and said the contract had been quoted out of context.

A spokesperson for the Adani group told FT that “coal procurement on long-term supply basis in India is done through an open, transparent, global bidding process thereby eliminating any possibility of price manipulation.”

Gautam Adani and business practices of his companies have been under scrutiny ever since Hindenburg’s report became public. You can read the Hindenburg report here and Adani’s response here.

INDIA

PUCL : “Withdraw the prosecution against Arundhati Roy & Showkat Ali”

in Human Rights — by People's Union For Civil Liberties — 13/10/2023

The PUCL condemns the decision of the Delhi Lieutenant-Governor Vinay Kumar Saxena to grant  Delhi Police sanction to prosecute writer Arundhati Roy and Sheikh Showkat Hussain, (former Professor of International Law at Central University of Kashmir), in a 2010 case for offences under  sections 153A, 153B and 505 of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint itself pertains to  speeches  by Arundhati Roy and others  at a convention on Kashmir, ‘Azadi: The Only Way’, organised in New Delhi in October 2010.

It is baffling that a 2010 related case is now on the front burner, with sanction being granted by the L-G, almost thirteen years after the alleged incident.  The case itself pertains to speech which allegedly fell within the IPC provisions relating to ‘promoting enmity between different groups,(Section 153-A),  ‘imputations or assertions prejudicial to national integration’ (Section 153-B) as well as statement conducing to mischief (Section 505).  According to the LG, though her speech fell within the understanding of sedition ( Sec 124-A), sanction to prosecute for sedition was not given as  ‘the Supreme Court on May 5, 2022, in another case has directed that all pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under Section 124A (Sedition) of IPC shall be kept in abeyance and thereafter the three-Judge Bench headed by CJI had referred the matter to Constitution Bench on September 12, 2023’

A mature constitutional democracy ought not to prosecute speech, which by itself has no direct causal connection to violence or disorder. It is shameful that an FIR was even registered for speech which by all accounts did not incite or provoke any form of violence.

It does great disservice to the Modi government’s belief  that India is the ‘mother of democracy’, when the  ‘mother’ prosecutes one of her most illustrious children.  Arundhati Roy is one of India’s most eminent writers who has used her writing to amplify the concerns of those whose voices are ignored or muted.  In her writing be it on the Indian nuclear tests, the dams on the Narmada or of  the US war on Iraq she has sought to remind Indians and indeed the inhabitants of the world of the human costs of nuclear technology, development and war.

Her voice matters in contemporary India because her essays though crafted in a highly individual, poetic  and literary voice, ‘rose from the heart of a crowd’.  She characterised her own writing as not ‘neutral commentary’,  but rather as ‘just another stream that flowed into the quick, immense rushing currents that I was writing about.’ By writing about issues which the powerful would rather forget, she forged her ‘contribution to our collective refusal to obediently fade away’.

As a writer she has been unafraid to  tackle difficult and controversial issues. In a constitutional democracy, such voices even if they shock or disturb the government ought to have free play, because dissent is the beating  heart of a democracy.

Mahatma Gandhi spoke about the importance of dissent most powerfully during his prosecution for sedition in colonial times:

“Section 124-A under which I am happily charged is perhaps the prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen. Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by law. If one has no affection for a person or system, one should be free to give the fullest expression to his disaffection, so long as he does not contemplate, promote or incite violence…”

`Speech’ in Gandhi’s words, should have the ‘fullest expression’, with the only limit point being the promotion of violence. The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court also limits  the understanding of sedition to speech which directly results in or incites violence.  In Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab in 1995, the Supreme Court adjudicated the question as to whether shouting slogans including, “Khalistan Zindabad” in a crowd the day Indira Gandhi was assassinated amounted to sedition. The Supreme Court noted, ‘We find it difficult to hold that upon the raising of such casual slogans, a couple of times without any other act whatsoever the charge of sedition can be founded.’ The Supreme Court went on to chastise the policemen who filed the case, stating that, ‘It does not appear to us that the police should have attached much significance to the casual slogans raised by two appellants, a couple of times and read too much into them’

Indian democracy is not so fragile as to be threatened by the expression of a dissenting opinion. The LG granting sanction to prosecute  is a  particularly  egregious  and  constitutionally suspect exercise of state power as is evidenced by the fact that even thirteen years post the utterance of the words those words have not resulted in any violence.

Arundhati Roy is being prosecuted for ‘worrying the edges of the human Imagination’ for writing as if ‘the only thing worth globalizing is dissent’ and believing that dissent is ‘India’s best export’. This is a tragedy for a country which prides itself as being the ‘mother of democracy’.

The PUCL demands that the prosecution be withdrawn with immediate effect against both Arundhati Roy and Sheikh Showkat Hussain.

Kavita Srivastava, President

Dr. V. Suresh, General Secretary

People’s Union for Civil Liberties

INDIA

Sijimali Bauxite Mining Project Hearing Held Under Massive Police Repression

in India — by Press Release — 17/10/2023

Despite the intense police repression, the people of Kashipur have stood up against the Odisha Government coercively facilitating this project for Vedanta. We bring to you the developments of the last 24 hours from the night before the Public Hearing to the end of it. It was held today at Sunger High School premises in Kashipur Block of Rayagada district, Odisha.

Ø  On the 15th night, armed police and paramilitary personnel began positioning themselves at the main roads leading to villages known to oppose the mining project. Roads were monitored by company-sponsored goons and a few local village youths. They seemed to have a list of names of media persons and political agents whom they should allow into the villages and used slang and rough language to intimidate and send back anyone outside the ‘list’. Even then, some youths seemingly with the company goons, helped activists and media persons enter the area.

Ø   In the morning, women from Banteji village were beaten up by police on the way to the public hearing. They protested. Friends and supporters of the movement tweeted to the Chief Minister to stop the violence. 

Ø  People walked in with slogans, banners and placards. Strategically, they occupied the space in front of the podium and did not allow a single pro-company deposition to happen. More than 20 community members, including women, spoke loud and clear about their opposition to the proposed bauxite mining and cited reasons for this opposition.

Ø  Addressing members of the Odisha State Pollution Control Board (OSPCB), district administration, police administration and Vedanta officials, people raised their voices against the ongoing police repression and the criminal role played by company-sponsored goons and agents. They narrated incidents of abuse, beating, forced entry into their houses, theft of cash, and harassment of women and girls both in their houses and in public at the local markets. They asserted that the repression was being carried out by company-sponsored goons at the forefront with the tacit support of the local police and paramilitary personnel. Leaders and community members demanded answers from the government about this state-corporate-police nexus but those organising the public hearing had no answers!

Ø  As ordered by the High Court, two activists – Dibakar Sahu and Jitender Majhi  -were escorted by police from the Raygada jail. They deposed at the public hearing against the proposed project.

Ø  About the draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report submitted by Vedanta, the chief concern expressed was that the report has deliberately hidden several facts about the ecological diversity and ecosystem of Sijimali. Villagers pointed out that Vedanta’s report does not mention the sacred abode of the supreme deity of the Kandha and Damba communities, Tiji Raja, and the annual rituals and festivals the local people perform at Sijimali hilltop in December every year. They also pointed out that the report has no mention of the 200-odd perennial streams that emerge from Sijimali or the dense forests on the hilltop that have diverse tree species like sal, tamarind, piya sal, aamla, harida, bahada and that the collection of siali leaves and honey is the major source of local peoples’ NTFP income. They pointed out that there is no mention of several sacred caves on Sijimali which are worshipped as abodes of animals whom the local people worship and hold rituals inside the caves to invoke the animal spirits every year. Some of the most important caves are Parapar and Baghpar.  All those who deposed clearly mentioned that the EIA report does not mention about the local peoples’ cultural heritage and generations-old relationship with nature and the traditional community forest governance principles that they all practice to conserve the forests, lands, and mountains in Sijimali. The statements were loud and clear about the unconditional ban on mining at Sijimali and that Vedanta should go back.

Ø  Keeping in line with the proactive media misinformation that has been happening since early August, some local media TV channels and reporters began to spread misinformation about the procedures and testimonies at the public hearing. They reported that the public hearing was cancelled due to law-and-order problems.  Many even tried to create a narrative that several villagers demanded that Vedanta must open a local refinery if it wants to start bauxite mining in Sijimali.

Ø  The ADM, Rayagada and ASP, Rayagada addressed the media that the public hearing was completed peacefully and with discipline; the ADM added that the process was successfully carried out and the report on the proceedings of the public hearing will be submitted to OSPCB soon. This has become the modus operandi. Stating that it ended peacefully despite the vibrant protest is but a claim that their ritual is over. 

Ø  However, today’s protest seems to have already set the tone for the next hearing. The Sijimali Bauxite Mining Project spreads over both Thuamul Rampur block in Kalahandi District and Kashipur block in Rayagada District. The public hearing for Thuamul Rampur block is scheduled at Kerpai High School premises on October 18th

#SijimaliMatters

Contact Email ID: sijimalimatters@gmail.com

Stop State Repression Against Protesters Against Bauxite Mining in Odisha

in Human Rights — by Press Release — 15/09/2023

NSS protest outside Kalyansinghpur PS on August 6.

“The rule of law does not do away with the unequal distribution of wealth and power, but reinforces that inequality with the authority of law.  It allocates wealth and poverty in such complicated and indirect ways as to leave the victims bewildered.” – Howard Zinn

Since the first week of August, in Raygada, Kalahandi and Koraput districts, there has been continuous state repression on people belonging to the Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes, who have been protesting against Bauxite mining in the areas to protect their lives and livelihood, and on those individuals who have been extending support and solidarity to the protesting people.  This not only goes against constitutional values but is also a mockery of the rule of law.  As students of democracy and the constitution it is a matter of great concern for us.

Nine persons of the Niyamgiri Surakhsya Samiti, including its leaders, activists and supporters, have been booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) with some of its stringent provisions. One of them has been abducted by the police, kept in illegal detention, physically tortured and then shown arrested and sent to the jail. Similarly, in midnight raids of villages in Sijimali, Kutrumali and Manjingmali areas in Thuamul-Rampur and Kashipur blocks, 23 people have been arrested.  In a similar operation one person from the Kodingamali area has been arrested.  We strongly believe that protection of one’s livelihoods to live a life of dignity and to protest against any infringement on this is a fundamental right of citizens.  Attempts have been made to manufacture consent of innocent people, who are opposed to the mining based development policies of the government, by means of fraud, trickery and allurement.  And those who dissent, the police are using force to get their consent, which is criminalization of dissent.

What is of further concern is the way veteran environmentalist Sri Prafulla Samantara, was abducted with his hands tied and face covered, from a hotel in Rayagada and later dropped at his home in Brahmapur.  Sri Samantara had gone there to extend legal assistance to the arrested people, and was to address a press meet to expose the role of the government, the police and the companies.  We believe that the police are involved in this incident. In our view, using the police force like goons is a sign of a democratic state gradually turning into a police state.

We also feel that local people in their efforts to protect the hills and mountains, rivers and streams are not only protecting their lives and livelihoods, but also protecting the nature and the commons for our future generations.  At a time when the world is in the midst of a crisis due to climate change and efforts are being made at various levels to protect and conserve the natural environment and ecology, we feel that it is our fundamental constitutional duty to support their efforts.

Therefore, we demand that,

• Police repression should stop immediately.
• Formulate a development policy in consultation with the people, ensuring their dignity and which is in tune with their lives and culture, rather than pursuing development based on repression.
• Let us not destroy the local environment and ecology in the name of development.

Signed by,

1. Hrudananda Routray, Advocate
2. Dhaneswar Mohanty, Adv.
3. Umakanta Pattnaik, Adv.
4. Dhanurdhar Sundaray, Adv.
5. Binod Ku. Sahu, Adv.
6. Pradeep Kumar Das Mohapatra, Adv.
7. Sukeshi Maharana, Adv.
8. Mruganka Mauli Pattnaik, Adv
9. Bibhuti Bhushan Pattnaik, Adv.
10. Sudhir Das, Adv.
11. Akhyaya Ku. Nanda, Adv.
12. Sirshendu Prasad Rout, Adv.
13. Sukanta Ku. Behera, Adv.
14. Bandita Rath, Adv
15. Madhu Madhab Jena, Adv.
16. Golak Prasad Naik, Adv.
17. Dukhishyam Das, Adv.
18. Bhaskar Ch. Maharana, Adv.
19. Bijay Ku. Panda, Adv.
20. Subhasish Panda, Adv
21. Biswapriya Kanungo, Adv

Three Cautions for the Anti-Imperialism Movement

— by Bharat Dogra — 06/10/2023

The anti-imperialism movement has always been a very noble effort and at the same time it is an effort that is essential at a very basic level in present day conditions. Its nobility is linked to its capacity for advancing justice and equality, in the process saving many human lives. In addition the opposition to imperialism is also an essential part of the wider efforts to check the survival crisis created by several serious environmental problems led by climate change as well as weapons of mass destruction. Imperialism has an important role in creating and accentuating the survival crisis. Those efforts which are most likely to succeed in checking the survival crisis need to have an important component of opposing imperialism.

However while the centrality and significance of the role of opposing imperialism is well-established, in keeping with the needs and conditions of our times the movement of opposing imperialism must observe some important cautions.

Firstly, it should be made very clear all along that the movement is always directed only against the imperialist forces of any country behaving in imperialist ways, and never against the people of any country. At present the biggest center of imperialism and the most important and powerful imperialist country is the USA. However most of the people of the USA are also suffering from increasing difficulties which are caused essentially by the same imperialist forces becoming aggressive and unjust internally too. The assassinations of President John Kennedy and of President Allende, or of Martin Luther King and of Patrice Lumumba are related as essentially the same forces of aggression and injustice are responsible for all of these big tragedies, sometimes turning on their firepower outside the country and sometimes inside the country. What is more, the guns pointing outwards turn inwards when someone inside tries to check them from firing outside. As a result, the forces of injustice inside the biggest imperialist power too are strengthened. Hence while the forces of imperialism in the USA are unleashing great destruction on other countries, these are also unleashing destruction on their own people by increasing injustice, inequality, denial of basic needs, homelessness, racism, alienation, depression, self-harm, violence, arms proliferation, crime and incarceration. In this sense, a large number of people within the USA are also the victims of the forces of imperialism.

Such an understanding prepares the anti-imperialism movement for more specifically targeting the forces of imperialism and never the people of any country or nationality or color or creed. The anti-imperialism movement is essentially a movement for creating justice, equality and peace among all people of world, regardless of nationality, color or creed.

Secondly, particularly in the conditions of the present day world, the anti-imperialism movement must aim for solving all problems in peaceful ways and for peaceful solutions to emerge. The weapons of destruction available to the forces of imperialism are so dangerous that the path of peace is the best path for the anti-imperialism movement and the effort should always be to resolve issues in such a way that solutions based on durable peace can emerge.

Thirdly, while there is no doubt that the the most powerful and aggressive imperialist forces today are concentrated in the USA and its close allies, this does not exclude the possibility of very aggressive forces of imperialism at a future date being concentrated in some other countries, particularly China. One should be conscious of this all the time, so that there can be a constant strengthening of people against not just the imperialist forces in the USA and its major allies but against imperialist forces in any country from a future perspective as well.

There has been a lot of discussion of US preparations of a war against China in the near future before it becomes even stronger in economic, technological and military terms. Clearly in such a situation the anti-imperialism movement must be protective towards China and try it best to prevent US aggression. However this does not prevent the movement from ignoring the imperialist streak exhibited by China from time to time, and its strong territorial ambitions with the associated aggression.

In fact with the possibility always open that any big breakthrough in weapons of mass destruction technology can give a country a decisive edge at least for some years, the possibilities of either alternative centers of imperialism emerging or the USA further strengthening its imperialist grip cannot be ruled out and the anti-imperialism movement must be willing to target whatever is the most aggressive imperialist force on a priority basis.

Creating a strong anti-imperialism peaceful movement within the big centers of imperialism is a very important challenge ahead. This movement should be active on a continuing basis. Many more people here can come forward on a platform of peace rather than a platform of anti-imperialism. So the peace movement can be the bigger mass movement but the peace movement without a perspective of anti-imperialism cannot go very far. Hence the continuing presence of anti-imperialism movement is very important even for the peace movement to realize its proper potential.

Briefly, the anti-imperialism movement should try to create a wide space on the basis of three very obvious facts or truths. Firstly, the most important task today is to save the life-nurturing conditions of our planet which are threatened by very serious environmental problems led by climate change and by weapons of mass destruction. Secondly, this task cannot be accomplished without resisting and defeating the forces of imperialism because in their quest for dominance these forces of imperialism search relentlessly for more and more destructive weapons as well as for those ‘get-ahead-at-all-costs’ patterns of economic growth which generally involve more hazards and pollution. Thirdly, opposition to imperialism is a must for increasing justice and equality at world level which in turn is necessary for meeting the basic needs and for the dignity of all people. Based on this understanding, the anti-imperialism movement can attract more and more people and also create very creative linkages with several other social movements of high relevance.

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Planet in Peril, Protecting Earth for Children and A Day in 2071.