Monday, November 13, 2023

UPDATED
Suella Braverman sacked by UK PM for comments on pro-Palestine march handling


The New Arab Staff & Agencies
13 November, 2023

Braverman drew ire from the Prime Minister when she criticised the police's handling of a pro-Palestinian march that took place on Saturday.


Braverman had been accused of encouraging far-right protesters to take to the streets of London 
[James Manning - WPA Pool/Getty]

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has sacked Home Secretary Suella Braverman, one of his most senior ministers, a government source said on Monday, following comments she made last week about the police's handling of a pro-Palestinian march.

Braverman had last week defied Sunak by publishing an article attacking the police's handling of a march that took place on Saturday.

Critics said her stance helped inflame tensions and encourage far-right protesters to take to the streets of London, putting Sunak under pressure to take action.

(Reuters)

Sunak appoints ex-PM David Cameron foreign secretary in UK cabinet reshuffle

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak appointed former PM David Cameron to take over the UK's foreign policy dossier during a cabinet reshuffle on Monday, Sunak's first government shakeup since entering office in October 2022. He also sacked controversial interior minister Suella Braverman, replacing her with foreign minister James Cleverly.



Issued on: 13/11/2023 -
Britain's former prime minister David Cameron

Britain's former premier David Cameron was named the country's new foreign secretary on Monday in a surprise appointment by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak as he reshuffled his top team.

Cameron was Britain's leader from 2010 to 2016 before quitting after the Brexit referendum. His unexpected return to the front line of British politics comes after he spent the last seven years writing his memoirs and pursuing business interests, including in Greensill Capital, a finance firm that later collapsed.

Sunak also sacked controversial interior minister Suella Braverman as he reshuffles his top team ahead of a general election expected next year, replacing her with erstwhile foreign minister James Cleverly.

Sunak had come under growing pressure to axe Braverman, an outspoken right-winger, after critics accused her of heightening tensions during weeks of contentious pro-Palestinian demonstrations and counter-protests in Britain

Following her dismissal, Braverman said "it has been the greatest privilege of my life to serve as home secretary".

"I will have more to say in due course," she added.

The firing comes as the ruling Conservatives confirmed a major reshuffle of Sunak's top ministers was underway -- his first since becoming the country's leader on October 25, 2022.

"Here we go," the party said on X, formerly Twitter.

"Today @RishiSunak strengthens his team in government to deliver long-term decisions for a brighter future. Stay tuned for the latest."

The changes, set to be announced through the morning, were expected to reward loyalists and younger emerging MPs, after nearly 14 years in power takes its toll on the Tories' popularity.

The party has trailed the main Labour opposition by double-digit margins throughout Sunak's time in power, and is widely tipped to lose the next election due next year.

Braverman had stoked controversy throughout her tenure, taking a hardline stance on immigration in particular and regularly wading into so-called culture wars issues which are seen as dividing the electorate.

The right-winger attacked her critics as liberal "tofu-eating wokerati" while saying shortly after she was appointed that sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was her "dream" and "obsession".

But her position became increasingly untenable after she last week wrote an explosive newspaper article, apparently without Sunak's approval, accusing police of bias towards left-wing causes. It was blamed for stoking tensions ahead of a weekend of protests over Israel's war in Gaza, which coincided with Armistice Day events, and prompted calls for her to be sacked.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)


Ex-Prime Minister David Cameron makes shock return to UK government as foreign secretary

JILL LAWLESS
Updated Mon, November 13, 2023





Britain's former prime minister David Cameron leaves Downing Street, in London, Monday, Nov. 13, 2023. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Monday fired Home Secretary Suella Braverman, a divisive figure who drew anger for accusing police of being too lenient with pro-Palestinian protesters. In a highly unusual move, former Prime Minister David Cameron was named foreign secretary. It's rare for a former leader, and a non-lawmaker, to take a senior government post. The government said Cameron will be appointed to Parliament's unelected upper chamber, the House of Lords. 
(James Manning/PA via AP)


LONDON (AP) — Former British Prime Minister David Cameron made a shock return to high office on Monday, becoming foreign secretary in a major shakeup of the Conservative government that also saw the firing of divisive Home Secretary Suella Braverman.

Cameron, who led the U.K. government between 2010 and 2016, was appointed by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in a Cabinet shuffle in which he sacked Braverman, a divisive figure who drew anger for accusing police of being too lenient with pro-Palestinian protesters.

She was replaced by James Cleverly, who had been foreign secretary.

Cameron's appointment came as a surprise to seasoned politics-watchers. It's rare for a non-lawmaker to take a senior government post, and it has been decades since a former prime minister held a Cabinet job.

The government said Cameron was being appointed to Parliament's unelected upper chamber, the House of Lords. The last foreign secretary to serve in the Lords, rather than the elected House of Commons, was Peter Carrington, who was part of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's government in the 1980s.

Cameron, 57, said Britain was “facing a daunting set of international challenges, including the war in Ukraine and the crisis in the Middle East.”

“While I have been out of front-line politics for the last seven years, I hope that my experience — as Conservative leader for 11 years and prime minister for six — will assist me in helping the prime minister to meet these vital challenges," he said in a statement.

Cameron's appointment brings back to government a leader brought down by Britain's decision to leave the European Union. Cameron called the 2016 EU membership referendum, confident the country would vote to stay in the bloc. He resigned the day after voters opted to leave.

Sunak was a strong backer of the winning “leave” side in the referendum. Cameron's return, and Braverman’s sacking, are likely to infuriate the Conservative Party’s right wing and inflame tensions in the party that Sunak has sought to soothe.

Prominent right-wing lawmaker Jacob Rees-Mogg said sacking Braverman was “a mistake, because Suella understood what the British voter thought and was trying to do something about it.”

Sunak had been under growing pressure to fire Braverman — a hard-liner popular with the party's authoritarian wing — from one of the most senior jobs in government, responsible for handling immigration and policing.

In a highly unusual attack on the police last week, Braverman said London’s police force was ignoring lawbreaking by “pro-Palestinian mobs.” She described demonstrators calling for a cease-fire in Gaza as “hate marchers.”

On Saturday, far-right protesters scuffled with police and tried to confront a large pro-Palestinian march by hundreds of thousands through the streets of London. Critics accused Braverman of helping to inflame tensions.

Last week Braverman wrote an article for the Times of London in which she said police “play favorites when it comes to protesters” and acted more leniently toward pro-Palestinian demonstrators and Black Lives Matter supporters than toward right-wing protesters or soccer hooligans.

The article was not approved in advance by the prime minister’s office, as would usually be the case.

Braverman said Monday that “it has been the greatest privilege of my life to serve as home secretary,” adding that she would “have more to say in due course.”

Braverman, a 43-year-old lawyer, has become a leader of the party’s populist wing by advocating ever-tougher curbs on migration and a war on human rights protections, liberal social values and what she has called the “tofu-eating wokerati.” Last month she called migration a “hurricane” that would bring “millions more immigrants to these shores, uncontrolled and unmanageable.”

As home secretary Braverman championed the government’s stalled plan to send asylum-seekers who arrive in Britain in boats on a one-way trip to Rwanda. A U.K. Supreme Court ruling on whether the policy is legal is due on Wednesday.

Critics say Braverman has been building her profile to position herself for a party leadership contest that could come if the Conservatives lose power in an election expected next year.

The bold changes are an attempt by Sunak to reset his faltering government. The Conservatives have been in power for 13 years, but opinion polls for months have put them 15 to 20 points behind the opposition Labour Party amid a stagnating economy, persistently high inflation, an overstretched health care system and a wave of public sector strikes.

Last month Sunak tried to paint his government as a force of change, saying he would break the “30-year status quo” that includes the governments of Cameron and other Conservative predecessors.

“A few weeks ago, Rishi Sunak said David Cameron was part of a failed status quo. Now he’s bringing him back as his life raft,” said Labour lawmaker Pat McFadden.

As well as bringing about Brexit, Cameron's government imposed years of public-spending cuts after the 2008 global financial crisis that have frayed the country's welfare system and state-funded health service. After leaving office he was caught up in a scandal over his lobbying for Greensill Capital, a financial services firm that later collapsed.

Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London, said Cameron's appointment “is a measure of the desperation that surrounds this government.”

“It’s difficult to believe that this is going to impress voters, whether they are convinced Brexiteers who despise David Cameron for being a remainer, or convinced remainers who despise David Cameron for holding and losing a referendum," he said.

“On the upside, it’s a useful distraction from Braverman’s sacking, and as a former prime minister it will mean that the U.K. has rather more clout in international circles than perhaps might have been the case.”


Suella Braverman sacked and David Cameron back in the fold as Rishi Sunak stakes all on reshuffle

Nicholas Cecil and Jitendra Joshi
Mon, November 13, 2023


Rishi Sunak stunned Westminster by appointing David Cameron Foreign Secretary as he sacked Suella Braverman in a big-gamble reshuffle which risked sparking a Tory civil war.

The Prime Minister dismissed Mrs Braverman as Home Secretary after she was accused of stoking community tensions by alleging that the Metropolitan Police was biased in the way it dealt with protests ahead of the pro-Gaza march in London on Armistice Day.

Then, in a move at the far end of the political Richter scale, he made Mr Cameron — who agreed the referendum which led to Brexit — a peer and brought him back into government.

James Cleverly replaced Mrs Braverman as Home Secretary, moving from the Foreign Office, in a reshuffle which sent shock waves through Westminster.

Shortly after his appointment, Mr Cameron said: “We are facing a daunting set of international challenges, including the war in Ukraine and the crisis in the Middle East. While I have been out of front line politics for the last seven years, I hope that my experience — as Conservative leader for 11 years and Prime Minister for six — will assist me in helping the Prime Minister to meet these vital challenges.”

However, his appointment is likely to prove controversial, especially given his role in the Greensill scandal, even though he was cleared of breaking lobbying rules.

It could also rile Brexiteer MPs given that he campaigned strongly for Remain. There are now no women in any of the four great offices of state, Prime Minister, Chancellor, Foreign Secretary and Home Secretary.

But Mr Sunak hopes his appointment will mean he has a less divided Cabinet.

A No10 spokesman said: “This reshuffle will give the PM a united team to deliver the change this country needs for the long term.”

Mr Sunak dismissed Mrs Braverman after being urged to do so by a number of ministers following a series of controversies including branding pro-Palestinian demonstrations as “hate marches” and claiming that some homeless people live on the streets in tents due to “lifestyle choices”. After being sacked, she said: “It has been the greatest privilege of my life to serve as Home Secretary.”

She added, in what will be seen by some MPs as a threat to the PM: “I will have more to say in due course.” The reshuffle leaves Mr Sunak with one ex-prime minister back in his Cabinet but two potential senior critics on his backbenches, Mrs Braverman and former PM Liz Truss, who may well foment trouble against him, in pushing for a more Right-wing agenda, including immediate tax cuts.

Former prime minister Theresa May, who served as home secretary in Mr Cameron’s government, said the former leader’s experience on the international stage “will be invaluable” in his role as Foreign Secretary. Some Right-wingers were quick to criticise the PM’s reshuffle. Tory MP Andrea Jenkyns tweeted: “I support Suella Braverman... sacked for speaking the truth. Bad call by Rishi caving in to the Left!”

However, there will be relief among many ministers and other Conservative MPs who became increasingly appalled at Mrs Braverman’s behaviour which was seen as manoeuvring for a possible future Tory leadership contest.

New Home Secretary Mr Cleverly faces a potential baptism of fire on Wednesday when the Supreme Court rules on the Government’s plan to deport migrants to Rwanda. A dismissal by the topmost judges would force Mr Cleverly back to the drawing board to deliver on the PM’s vow to get a grip on the “small-boats” crisis.

Several middle-ranking and junior ministers announced they were quitting including long-serving education minister Nick Gibb, Brexiteer Neil O’Brien and Will Quince, both health ministers.

Shadow Cabinet minister Pat McFadden tweeted: “Reshuffling the ministers won’t change the Tory record over the past 13 years. It won’t make any difference to the cost of living or to public services. The only way to bring about change is to get rid of this failed Tory Government.”

Jeremy Hunt remains Chancellor and is due to deliver the Autumn Statement next week with growing pressure to deliver measures to kick-start the UK’s stalled economy.


(Evening Standard)

The drama at Westminster began shortly after 8.30am when it was confirmed that Mrs Braverman had been axed as Home Secretary.

A No10 source said the Prime Minister “asked Suella Braverman to leave Government and she has accepted”.

The Fareham MP last week was hit with a backlash by saying that aggressive Right-wing protesters were “rightly met with a stern response” by police officers while “pro-Palestinian mobs displaying almost identical behaviour are largely ignored, even when clearly breaking the law”.

She claimed police were showing “double standards” and made a widely-criticised comparisons with marches in Northern Ireland.

After far-Right protesters clashed with the police on Armistice Day, Scotland Yard made clear it believed Mrs Braverman’s intervention had not been helpful.

Alicia Kearns, chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee, tweeted: “Congratulations to David Cameron on his appointment — the best job in government.

“I look forward to working with him, and scrutinising his vision and leadership of the department at this most important of times.”

David Cameron named Foreign Secretary in sensational political return
Daniel Martin
Mon, November 13, 2023

David Cameron leaves No10 after being appointed Foreign Secretary - Carl Court


Rishi Sunak has brought David Cameron back into the Cabinet as Foreign Secretary and elevated him to the House of Lords.

In a move that stunned Westminster, he will take over from James Cleverly, who replaces Suella Braverman as Home Secretary after she was sacked.

But the return of the former prime minister, who quit No 10 in 2016 after losing the Brexit referendum, could be highly controversial, particularly over his links to China.

He has also criticised Mr Sunak’s government over scrapping the Manchester leg of the HS2 rail project and the decision to reduce the overseas aid budget.

Lord Cameron made clear he backed Mr Sunak and would work with him to help the Tories win the general election expected next year.

He said: “Though I may have disagreed with some individual decisions, it is clear to me that Rishi Sunak is a strong and capable Prime Minister, who is showing exemplary leadership at a difficult time.

“I want to help him to deliver the security and prosperity our country needs and be part of the strongest possible team that serves the United Kingdom and that can be presented to the country when the general election is held.”



Lord Cameron’s return is the first time a former prime minister has come back to the political front line since Alec Douglas-Home.

Douglas-Home had to resign his hereditary peerage and become an MP to enable him to become prime minister in 1963. He was in office for less than a year but returned to the Cabinet as foreign secretary in 1970 under Edward Heath’s administration.

Lord Cameron had to be awarded a seat in the House of Lords to take his new job, because he is no longer an MP.

It will be the first time a peer has held one of the great offices of state since Lord Carrington quit as foreign secretary in 1982 following Argentina’s invasion of the Falkland Islands.

During the Cameron administration there was a “golden era” of UK-China co-operation, something Mr Sunak last year described as “naive” following growing tensions with Beijing.

Ahead of a visit to China in 2015, Lord Cameron said: “It’s going to be a very important moment for British-Chinese relations, which are in a very good state, something of a golden era in our relationship.”

He previously served as the vice-chairman of a £1billion China-UK investment fund.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader who has been sanctioned by the Chinese regime, said: “I am astonished at this appointment. It seems to send a signal to China that we are pursuing business with them at all costs and any costs.

“Those who have been sanctioned now feel more abandoned than at any time. Those facing genocide and persecution will feel more abandoned than at any time.”

Pat McFadden, Labour’s national campaign co-ordinator, said: “A few weeks ago Rishi Sunak said David Cameron was part of a failed status quo; now he’s bringing him back as his life raft.

“This puts to bed the Prime Minister’s laughable claim to offer change from 13 years of Tory failure.”

Mark Harper, the Transport Secretary, said the decision to appoint Lord Cameron as Foreign Secretary was “an excellent move”.

“I was in David Cameron’s government as his chief whip,” he said. “He’s a team player, hugely experienced.

“Given the challenges facing us with the war in Ukraine and what’s going on in the Middle East, having a really experienced person coming in as Foreign Secretary, I think, is an excellent move.

“He’s a real team player and I look forward to seeing him around the Cabinet table.”

Lord Heseltine, the former Tory deputy prime minister, said the appointment of Lord Cameron was the “clearest signal that the sort of Right-wing lurch that we’ve seen and the anti-European movement that we’ve seen has been put to bed, and that will get a message across to people”.

Asked to sum up the return of Lord Cameron in one word, Lord Heseltine told Times Radio: “Excellent … I am delighted at the news. I am a great admirer of David Cameron and worked for him for many years.

“I think this will send an important signal to the country, but also to the world. So it’s excellent news.”

Suella Braverman sacked by Rishi Sunak

Daniel Martin
Mon, November 13, 2023 

Suella Braverman leaves home on Monday morning ahead of the reshuffle - TOBY MELVILLE

Suella Braverman has been sacked as Home Secretary as Rishi Sunak begins a reshuffle of his Cabinet.

A government spokesman said on Monday morning: “Rishi Sunak has asked Suella Braverman to leave government and she has accepted.”

Mrs Braverman said: “It has been the greatest privilege of my life to serve as Home Secretary. I will have more to say in due course.”

The Home Secretary’s position had been under pressure since last week when she wrote an unauthorised article in which she criticised the Metropolitan Police for a “double standard” over their handling of protests.

She also attacked “pro-Palestinian mobs” and said protest scenes were “disturbingly reminiscent” to those seen in Northern Ireland.

Mrs Braverman was accused by some of exacerbating tensions and for some of the extreme-Right violence seen at Saturday’s Armistice Day events in Whitehall.

Downing Street said the day after the article was published that it had not been signed off, raising questions over the Home Secretary’s position.

Sir Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: “Suella Braverman was never fit to be Home Secretary. Rishi Sunak knew this and he still appointed her.

“It was the Prime Minister’s sheer cowardice that kept her in the job even for this long. We are witnessing a broken party and a broken government, both of which are breaking this country.

“This whole sorry saga has shown the Conservative party for what they truly are.

“An unruly mob more focused on fighting and undermining each other rather than standing up for their constituents and fixing the country that they have broken.

“They need to put us all out of our misery and call a general election now.”


Mrs Braverman was appointed Home Secretary by Liz Truss but had to resign six weeks later when it emerged she had breached the ministerial code by sharing an official document from her personal email address with a colleague in Parliament.

She was reappointed six days later, by which time Mr Sunak had become prime minister.

The new prime minister said she had “made an error of judgment but she recognised that she raised the matter and she accepted her mistake”.

Mrs Braverman became a highly controversial Home Secretary, facing criticism for using words such as “invasion” to describe illegal immigration.

Earlier this month, she criticised pro-Palestinian marches scheduled for Armistice Day, citing “reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas”.

That sparked calls for her resignation for “fanning the flames of division”, in the words of Humza Yousaf, the Scottish First Minister.

A No 10 source said: “Suella has gone because the Prime Minister wants a united team to deliver the changes this country needs for the long term.”

Sunak Fires Braverman and Names David Cameron Foreign Secretary

Kitty Donaldson
Mon, November 13, 2023 at 3:08 AM MST·3 min read
6




(Bloomberg) -- Rishi Sunak fired Home Secretary Suella Braverman after she defied his authority over handling of a pro-Palestinian march and was accused of emboldening a far-right counter-protest which turned violent on Saturday.

The premier appointed James Cleverly to replace her, moving from the foreign office. An official familiar with the matter said the move is part of a broader Cabinet reshuffle. In an unexpected move, former Prime Minister David Cameron was confirmed as the new foreign secretary shortly after being filmed entering 10 Downing Street.



Sunak had appointed the pugilistic Braverman to his government to mollify the right fringe of his party when he became prime minister just over a year ago. But an awkward political alliance was increasingly a liability as Braverman’s language became more strident. Her remark that homeless people sleep on streets as a “lifestyle choice” also angered Tories in recent days.

But the breaking point appeared to come after Braverman accused London’s Metropolitan Police of bias in a newspaper commentary last week. That came just hours after Sunak had appeared to resolve an escalating political row with the force’s commissioner about pro-Palestinian protests overlapping with annual events to commemorate Britain’s war dead.

Her intervention was blamed for drawing out far-right groups that clashed with officers during counter-protests in London and led to 145 arrests. Two Cabinet members on Sunday described the challenge to the prime minister’s authority as untenable, while the Labour Party accused her of inflaming tensions.

Ousting her is likely to lead to Braverman becoming a fierce critic of the administration at a crucial time. The UK Supreme Court is due to rule on Wednesday on the legality of the government’s plan to deport asylum-seekers to Rwanda, a plan championed by both Braverman and Sunak.

If it rules against the government, politicians on the Tory right are likely to ramp up demands for Britain to leave the European Convention on Human Rights. Braverman is among those who have voiced her support for doing so, and the risk for Sunak is that he has now created martyr for the cause.

“It has been the greatest privilege of my life to serve as Home Secretary,” Braverman said in a statement. “I will have more to say in due course.”

But had Sunak kept her, he would have fed efforts by opposition Labour Party leader Keir Starmer to paint the prime minister as weak, while risking a revolt from more moderate members of his party who he needs to try to win over centrist voters ahead of a general election expected in 2024.

A reshuffle also gives Sunak the chance to move on from the first phase of his administration spent trying to stabilize the UK economy after his predecessor Liz Truss’s disastrous tenure. Cleverly was a survivor of Truss’s Cabinet, but has proved loyal to Sunak. Ahead of fiscal statement next week, there is little expectation that Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt, who was installed after Truss’s catastrophic budget to calm the markets, will be moved on.

Trailing Starmer’s Labour by about 20 points in national polls, the prime minister is running out of time to persuade voters to give the Tory party — in power since 2010 — another stint in office.

(Updates with confirmation of David Cameron’s appointment.)

How can David Cameron re-join the Cabinet without being an MP?

Joe Sommerlad
Mon, November 13, 2023 


Former Conservative prime minister David Cameron has made a shock return to government after being appointed foreign secretary in a bombshell Cabinet reshuffle.

Mr Cameron, who is not an elected MP but was made a peer on Monday, is replacing James Cleverly in the role as he moves to the Home Office to replace Suella Braverman.

The controversial home secretary was sacked in the emergency reshuffle after a month that began with her suggesting homelessness was a “lifestyle choice” and ended with her being blamed for far-right protesters disrupting a pro-Palestine rally she had branded a “hate march”, a tense situation that lead to violent clashes and 100 arrests.

Mr Cameron had appeared alongside Mr Sunak and other former prime ministers at the Cenotaph in Whitehall on Remembrance Sunday to pay respects to Britain’s war dead, just hours before accepting his successor’s invitation to serve as foreign secretary.

Elected Conservative Party leader on 6 December 2005, Mr Cameron led a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats from May 2010 and then a Tory majority administration from May 2015.

His tenure in Downing Street ended on 13 July 2016 after the referendum on Britain’s future within the European Union (EU), which he had called, ended with a narrow win for the Leave campaign, prompting the pro-Remain PM to step aside.

Mr Cameron duly stood down as MP for Witney in Oxfordshire in September 2016 and has since spent his time residing in leafy Chipping Norton, writing his memoirs, helping out at the local food bank and otherwise pursuing opportunities as a lobbyist, occasionally to controversial effect.

But how can the former PM become foreign minister without being elected? We take a look below:
How can David Cameron return to government without being an MP?

The reason Mr Cameron can return to Cabinet despite no longer serving as an elected MP is that King Charles III has just handed him the “dignity of a Barony of the United Kingdom for life”, a hastily-awarded life peerage that entitles him to enter the House of Lords and therefore take up the role.

This is permitted because, under Britain’s unwritten constitution, it does not expressly say that a person must be an MP to become a minister. However, the ministerial code does stipulate that a secretary of state must be a member of the House of Commons or the Lords in order to qualify for the position.

Making Mr Cameron a peer, therefore, clears the path for him to serve as foreign secretary, although the process of formalising his title could take several weeks as it will require a number of legal documents, including letters patent and a writ of summons, to be drafted, submitted and approved.

Former prime ministers David Cameron, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and John Major attend the Remembrance Sunday ceremony at the Cenotaph (Getty Images)

However, even then the appointment is not without complications. As the SNP’s leader in Westminster, Stephen Flynn, was quick to point out on Monday, Mr Cameron will only be accountable to parliament’s select committees, rather than to the members directly, because he is not a member of the Commons.

Tory MP Sir Michael Fabricant was also among those complaining that Mr Cameron “won’t be accountable to MPs other than before a select committee” – noting that he will not be allowed to make statements, answer urgent questions, or take part in foreign office questions in the Commons.

In taking the role, Mr Cameron becomes the 15th former prime minister to serve in a later government led by someone else, following in the footsteps of former Tory PMs Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Neville Chamberlain and Arthur Balfour.

Another notable example of an unelected minister from recent history serving the British government is Lord David Frost, who was Brexit minister in the aftermath of the referendum and Boris Johnson’s chief negotiator to the EU before resigning from government in 2021.
What has Cameron said – and what has been the reaction?

Anticipating hostility given his recent criticism of Mr Sunak’s decision to scrap the northern leg of the HS2 high-speed rail project, Mr Cameron acknowledged on Monday that he “may have disagreed with some individual decisions” by the current administration but hailed his new boss as “a strong and capable prime minister”.

Writing on X, formerly Twitter, he said: “We are facing a daunting set of international challenges, including the war in Ukraine and the crisis in the Middle East.

“At this time of profound global change, it has rarely been more important for this country to stand by our allies, strengthen our partnerships and make sure our voice is heard.”



Among those immediately critical of Mr Cameron’s appointment was the aforementioned Mr Flynn, who posted on X: ”Truly remarkable that during a time of huge international unrest, not least in Ukraine and Gaza, the House of Commons will not be able to directly scrutinise the work of the actual foreign secretary. The UK is not a serious country.”

Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Layla Moran meanwhile cited the 2021 Greensill lobbying scandal as grounds for revoking his qualifying peerage.

“Bringing back a scandal-hit, unelected former prime minister who has been criticising Sunak’s government at every turn has the stench of desperation,” she said.

“There is not even the bottom of the barrel left for Sunak to scrape in the Conservative Party. David Cameron was at the heart of the biggest lobbying scandal of recent times. Handing him a peerage makes a mockery of our honours system. Cameron’s peerage should be blocked given his shady past.”

Pat McFadden, the Labour Party’s national campaign coordinator, observed: “A few weeks ago, Rishi Sunak said David Cameron was part of a failed status quo – now he’s bringing him back as his life raft.

“This puts to bed the prime minister’s laughable claim to offer change from 13 years of Tory failure.”


Suella Braverman sacked in Cabinet reshuffle

Sophie Wingate and Nicholas Cecil
Mon, November 13, 2023 

Suella Braverman sacked in Cabinet reshuffle

Suella Braverman was sacked on Monday morning by Rishi Sunak.

The Prime Minister asked her to leave his Government in a Cabinet reshuffle and she agreed.

Ministers are understood to have been urging the Prime Minister to fire her after a series of controversial outbursts.

Asked about Ms Braverman’s political future amid the reshuffle speculation, armed forces minister James Heappey told GB News early on Monday: “Whatever the Prime Minister has got planned for today has not been shared with me."

He declined to back her keeping her Cabinet job, telling BBC Breakfast: "That's a matter for the Prime Minister."

Pressed on the Home Secretary's "hate march" comments and accusations of bias against the Met Police, he added: "Those aren't words that I would have used myself."

He also stressed: "Who serves in the Government at any moment is a matter for the Prime Minister alone.

"I have already reflected that I felt that the weekend at large sadly was let down by a lot of hate, a lot of anger, and too much politics."

Asked if Ms Braverman's remarks had contributed to tensions, as suggested by Scotland Yard, Mr Heappey added on Sky News: "There has been too much second guessing of the Metropolitan Police by politicians on the media."

Mr Sunak is looking to tighten the laws to make it easier to ban marches and prosecute those glorifying terrorism, according to several newspapers.



He looks set to press Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley to avoid a repeat of Saturday’s ugly scenes in London when he meets the police chief in the coming days.

He has said both far-right “thugs” and “those singing antisemitic chants and brandishing pro-Hamas signs and clothing” must face “the full and swift force of the law”.

Mrs Braverman meanwhile doubled down on calls for pro-Palestinian protests to be stopped as she warned that London’s streets are “being polluted by hate, violence and anti-Semitism” and hit out at “sick” chants and placards at Saturday’s march.

Her remarks on Sunday made little mention of far-right counter-protesters she has been accused of emboldening by previously speaking of pro-Palestinian “mobs” and police bias for allowing the rally to go ahead.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper blamed the unrest on Mrs Braverman’s “appalling and unprecedented attack” on the police’s impartiality and her “deliberate” stoking of tensions.


The Met Police said seven men have been charged with offences including assault on an emergency worker, criminal damage and possession of an offensive weapon.

Officers made 145 arrests – mostly counter-protesters – and nine officers were injured as they prevented a violent crowd reaching the Cenotaph on Saturday.

Police said that while the pro-Palestinian march did not see the sort of violence carried out by far-right groups, investigations into serious offences relating to antisemitism and hate crimes continue.

Mr Sunak will urge the Met Police to immediately arrest protesters seen using antisemitic slogans, The Times reported, after images of marchers wearing Hamas-style headbands and signs with the slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”.

His crackdown could also see laws around fireworks, smoke bombs and flares tightened up and new laws to prevent protesters from climbing on statues, according to The Sun.

The threshold at which police can ban marches due to safety concerns would be lowered to take into account the “cumulative effect” of weeks of marches.

Sir Mark had resisted political pressure to block the Gaza march coinciding with Remembrance events, saying the scale of potential trouble fell short of the high threshold the law demands for a ban.

Mr Sunak has repeated his threat to hold the Met chief “accountable” for that decision at their upcoming meeting.

Violence by right-wing groups near the Cenotaph on Armistice Day was “unprecedented”, the Met Police’s deputy assistant commissioner said.

Speaking to Sky News on Sunday, Laurence Taylor said: “What came as a surprise was the intent of the people who were coming.

“Particularly with that right-wing group, violence at 10 in the morning is unprecedented.”

Downing Street did not respond to queries about Mr Sunak’s protest crackdown.









 



Ford UAW workers in Louisville vote on new contract. What we know

Olivia Evans, Louisville Courier Journal
Updated Mon, November 13, 2023 

UAW Local 862 President Todd Dunn cast his ballot on the vote to ratify a Ford contract at the Galt House in Louisville, Ky. on Nov. 12, 2023.


United Auto Workers at Ford Motor Co. in Louisville headed to the polls Sunday to vote on a tentative agreement that, if passed, would immediately give all workers an 11% wage increase, restore cost-of-living allowances and new retirement benefits.

The 12,000 Louisville area Ford workers at the Kentucky Truck Plant and the Louisville Assembly Plant, represented by UAW Local 862, are voting on the tentative agreement along with 53 other union locals nationwide.

The results from Local 862's voting are expected to be announced Monday.


Todd Dunn, president of UAW Local 862, the largest autoworkers' local, previously told The Courier Journal, "... We've got a contract that's the best contract we've seen in two decades."

Ford and the UAW, the union representing 57,000 Ford workers nationally, reached a tentative agreement on a new four-year contract on Oct. 25.

Reaching this contract was no easy feat. The UAW, led by recently elected International President Shawn Fain, enacted a new strike strategy against the Detroit Three automakers — Ford, General Motors and Stellantis — after failing to reach an agreement before the contract expired Sept. 14 at 11:59 p.m.

The "stand up" strike Fain crafted made its way to Louisville Oct. 11 when the UAW called the KTP, home of the Super Duty truck, out to strike. Some 9,000 Louisville Ford workers were on strike for two weeks before a tentative agreement was announced.

In Louisville, workers voted Sunday from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. The UAW will announce the final status of the tentative agreement and if it has been ratified after all local unions across the nation have voted. Local elections on the tentative agreement are expected to last through mid-November.

Dexter Estes, a member of the Local 862 color guard, said this contract brings a lot to the lives of members, specifically the "young folks."

"I'm happy for them, I'm happy for this contract, I'm happy we've reached this point," Estes said after voting in favor of the contract.

What are workers saying at the ratification polls?


UAW Local 862 members cast their ballots on the vote to ratify a Ford contract at the Galt House in Louisville, Ky. on Nov. 12, 2023.

By 9:07 a.m. in Louisville, members of Local 862 made a motion to open the polls, and thousands of workers filled the Galt House Hotel's Grand Ballroom lobby to cast ballots.

Kenneth Walker, a 28-year member of Local 862 and member of the union's color guard, said he voted "yes" for the contract for the "the betterment of my livelihood."

"We negotiated a good contract, and I want to come out and do my part in my contract," Walker said.

For Walker, the best part of the contract is the retirement benefits package. Walker plans to retire soon, so having strong retiree benefits was crucial to him. The tentative agreement offers a retirement buyout up to $50,000, a 401(k)-annuity retirement option, retiree lump sum bonuses and expanded education benefits to attend college.

"The retirement that they got here and what they're offering right now is beneficial for some of us and will give us a good score on retirement," Walker said.

While many workers came in, voted and quickly left, Local 862 was hosting a meeting in the Grand Ballroom where members could ask questions about the contract and hear from UAW representatives and bargaining committee members. Dunn said the goal of this was to allow members a chance to wager any concerns and learn the union's thought process through bargaining.

"[Workers] get to go and talk to the international reps ... then you can go to the polls and actually vote yea or nay," Marcus Cheatom, a union steward for Local 862, said.

Cheatom said he voted to ratify the contract because it "made a big step toward" returning Ford to a career destination for workers and a place where people with only a high school diploma could earn a good living with high wages, company provided health care and retirement benefits.

"It's important for members to vote because it's our contract, and you pay your dues, so therefore you should have a say in the contract," Cheatom said. "We want everyone to get the facts, get your analysis, and then make the decision based on what you feel is better for you, the present and the future."

How have other UAW locals voted on the tentative agreement?


UAW Local 862 President Todd Dunn, right, greeted UAW Color Guard member Dexter Estes during the vote to ratify a Ford contract at the Galt House in Louisville, Ky. on Nov. 12, 2023.

Nationwide, 25 of the 54 UAW locals representing Ford workers had already voted on the contract as of Sunday. Every local that voted so far, except Local 788 in Florida, has voted in favor of the contract by a high margin.

The Michigan Assembly Plant final assembly and paint, which was the first Ford plant called to strike, voted 82.4% in favor of the tentative agreement.

The Chicago Assembly Plant, which was also called to strike Ford, voted to ratify the contract with 56.7% of voters in favor of the potential contract.

Overall, as of Sunday morning, the national contract vote swayed 70.8% in favor of ratifying it.

"I didn't get everything I personally wanted, but there's no doubt this contract is historic in some ways," said Shawn McIntyre, affectionately known as "Chappy" at the Louisville Assembly Plant. "We got a lot that's going to change lives now; we can always fight for more later."

EV revolution in KY: How new UAW Ford agreement makes Louisville 'center of the universe' for electric vehicles

More: 'Kentucky is the new Michigan.' What Ford deal means for growth in state

What's in the contract: Ford workers are heading to the polls. What we know about Ford, UAW tentative contract

Contact business reporter Olivia Evans at oevans@courier-journal.com or on Twitter at @oliviamevans_.

This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: UAW, Ford tentative contract agreement goes to a vote in Louisville

Ford production workers at Kentucky, Louisville vote against new labor deal


Reuters
Sun, November 12, 2023 

United Auto Workers (UAW) union members picket outside Ford's Kentucky truck plant


(Reuters) -Production workers at Ford's Louisville assembly and Kentucky truck plants have voted against the tentative labor agreement, while skilled trades workers voted in favor, the local chapter of the United Auto Workers (UAW) said on Monday.

The ratification of the contract was voted down by 55% of the production workers whereas 69% of the skilled trades workers, which includes maintenance and construction employees backed it, the UAW Local 862 said in a Facebook post.

The union did not disclose the overall percentage of the votes in favor or the total number of votes cast.

The vote signals that approval of the deal, which is set to significantly raise Ford's costs, is not guaranteed. The union and the company did not respond to Reuters requests for comment.

The automaker had last month pulled its full-year forecast due to uncertainty over the pending ratification of the deal with the UAW.

Union workers are voting on contracts from each of Chrysler-owner Stellantis, GM and Ford, after the first coordinated strike against Detroit's Big Three automakers.

Of the total votes cast at Ford's various facilities so far, 70.7% of workers have voted in favor of the deal, according to a UAW vote tracker.

Workers at some of the company's major plants including the Dearborn Truck plant in Michigan are yet to vote.

On Friday, union members at General Motors' Flint assembly plant in Michigan narrowly voted against the proposed contract with the U.S. automaker.

(Reporting by Gokul Pisharody and Shivansh Tiwary in Bengaluru; Editing by Dhanya Ann Thoppil and Arun Koyyur)


Expect More UAW Organizing at Non-Union Plants

 

NOVEMBER 13, 2023

Facebook

Photograph Source: The White House – Public Domain

The United Auto Workers has been on a roll. First, it wrapped up negotiations with Ford. Then on October 28, with Stellantis. The UAW had struck Stellantis for 44 days. “We’ve achieved what just weeks ago we were told was impossible,” said the union’s indefatigable leader, Shawn Fain. In all, the UAW won a 25 percent raise over four and a half years, an 11 percent pay boost at ratification, a 150 percent pay hike for temps, a 37 percent jump in the top wage and a 68 percent increase in starting pay. Plus, the second pact saves jobs at a factory in Belvedere, Illinois, previously slated for closure, according to the union.

Then on October 30, the New York Times reported that “the UAW is said to have a tentative deal with G.M.” So the union’s seven weeks of “Stand-Up” strikes against the Big Three automakers paid off, proving yet again that strikes work – which is exactly why employers always bemoan their perils. Yes, perilous to CEOs who may have to trim their bloated bonuses to compensate workers more properly – though I’ve yet to read of one instance, ever, of that happening to any corporate bigwig. Ceo pay is sacrosanct. Worker pay, of course, that’s another story, one that only solidarity brings to a happy ending. This is why this tentative contract with G.M., which resembles those with Ford and Stellantis, is such good news.

G.M. is the biggest U.S. car company by sales, employing 46,000 UAW workers, who soon will vote on ratifying the contract. “G.M. said last week that the strike had lowered its earnings by about $800 million…” This is in keeping with the Big Three’s laments that the strike primarily benefitted non-union Tesla, Honda and Toyota. This is BS. Far more likely is that the UAW’s contract wins jumpstart unionizing at those companies. Previous organizing has not borne fruit. But now with new, and evidently very competent UAW leadership, that could change. Get out the popcorn and watch – you’re liable to see an uptick in union enthusiasm at those corporations in the coming months. And, of course, lots of management dirty tricks, combined with efforts to placate staff. Notably, on November 1, non-union Toyota hiked worker wages in the wake of the UAW deal.

Indeed, “one of our biggest goals coming out of this historic contract victory is to organize like we never organized before,” Fain said on October 29. “When we return to the bargaining table in 2028, it won’t be just with a Big Three, but with a Big Five or Big Six.” Tesla is a union target, which, according to Bloomberg October 30, is “the most valuable automaker in the world, the electric-car leader and employs tens of thousands of non-union workers across California, Texas, Nevada and New York.”

Indeed, this strike zeroed in on EV productions from the get-go. The UAW wants good union jobs in the transition to green vehicles; it has said so explicitly. So organizing Tesla would be the bulls-eye for any future campaign. “Tesla’s roughly 20,000 worker plant in Freemont, California,” Bloomberg notes, “currently has a UAW organizing committee whose members are talking to co-workers about the advantages of collective bargaining.” But not everyone is optimistic. “The UAW would love to get into Tesla,” Bloomberg quoted a former Freemont plant employee and UAW activist, “but I don’t think they have a chance.”

A big reason for that pessimism is Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk. His “vigorous pushback helped squash” an earlier union drive. Going up against this tycoon, infamous for his far-right views and the vociferous owner of Twitter, would be quite a fight. But it’s one the UAW is evidently willing to engage.

What helped the union beat G.M. was striking its most profitable plant, just outside Dallas, the huge Arlington Assembly. With 5000 workers, it is, LaborNotes quoted an industry analyst on October 24, ‘“the most profitable auto plant in the world,’ producing 30 percent of G.M. revenue.” Labornotes also quoted one worker who hoped the Arlington strike was UAW’s “last push to get them to come to the table with a good offer.” They indeed did so. Her hopes were not misplaced. Union leadership correctly calculated that starving G.M.’s cash cow would force it to see reason in its standoff with its six-day-a-week assembly workers. Remember, “G.M. top brass posted revenue of $44 billion in July through September.” No plutocrat in their right mind wants to jeopardize that.

Not surprisingly, some people were rather sour about these developments. “Detroit Is Paying Up to End the UAW Strike. Now Carmakers Will Live with the Cost,” griped a recent Wall Street Journal headline. I guess WSJ believes the corporations didn’t make a nasty enough effort to break the strike. Had the Big Three hired scabs or resorted to other, standard underhanded tricks, that still might not have sufficed for the gung-ho, union-busting publication. WSJ wanted the strike to fail.

Meanwhile, CNBC on November 4 confirmed the UAW/G.M. deal. Earlier, CNN on October 30 had reported that the tentative compact “could bring an end to the union’s unprecedented strike against all three of the nation’s unionized automakers.” Of course, the rank and file must ratify these contracts, and they could, conceivably, be voted down. But workers don’t strike on a whim, and these settlements are pretty good. So in all likelihood, they will fly. Still, according to CNN, the rank and file recently nixed a pact with Mack Trucks, “where nearly 4000 UAW members went on strike on October 8 after voting no on their own tentative agreement. The Mack Truck workers remain on strike.”

In addition to improved 401(k) retirement benefits and record wage gains, Fain has shown with this strike that the union can win and win big. Out-of-the-box thinking helped, too. In fact, that’s apparently Fain’s forte. And he’ll need plenty of it, if he truly aims to put all of the Big Six under contract with the UAW in the next few years. Especially if he wants to organize Tesla. Remember, Musk personally attacked an organizer on social media during the last union drive, demonstrating his willingness to sink as low as necessary to clobber the union. And according to National Labor Relations Board rulings, Tesla resorted to illegal tactics. Musk also called the unionizing effort “morally outrageous.” I’m sure most other American oligarchs and the best Congress money can buy would agree.

Eve Ottenberg is a novelist and journalist. Her latest book is Lizard People. She can be reached at her website.

Children’s health increasingly endangered by MAGA movement

by Joan McCarter for Daily Kos
Daily Kos Staff
Sunday, November 12, 2023 at 8:00:13a MST



When it comes to children’s health, there are two terrifying headlines this week. The Washington Post reports that “CDC data shows highest level yet of vaccine exemptions for kindergartners.” The New York Times says, “At Least 2 Million Children Have Lost Medicaid Insurance This Year.” These interlinking stories are both the results of decisions by Republicans to put MAGA anti-vaccine politics above children.

Vaccination refusal for kindergarteners increased from 2.6% during the 2021-2022 school year to 3% in 2022-2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found in its most recent review of vaccination records. Every state and Washington, D.C., requires proof of vaccination for measles, whooping cough, and polio at a minimum. Every state allows exemptions for health reasons, but an increasing number of states allow them on religious or “philosophical” grounds.

No, it’s not just MAGA parents who refuse to participate responsibly in civil society by protecting their and other children. But the big increase, according to a December 2022 survey from Kaiser Family Foundation, is among Republicans. “Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, there has been a 24 percentage-point increase in the share” of people who say “parents should be able to decide not to vaccinate their school-age children, even if this creates health risks for others.” That’s an increase from 20% in 2019—before the pandemic and MAGA vaccine hysteria—to 44% in 2022.


Plenty of those kids and their school and playmates who either aren’t vaccinated or are put at greater risk by being exposed to unvaxxed kids don’t have health insurance anymore since pandemic-era expansions ended; more than 2 million of their policies, as the Times reports. It’s not clear how many have found coverage from other sources, Medicaid expert Joan Alker told the Times. She estimates that there are at least 1 million children without coverage.

That information comes, again, from the Kaiser Family Foundation, which has been following the “unwinding” of Medicaid coverage since the pandemic expansion of the program expired. That’s just among the 21 states that report the data on who has been kicked off the program by age.

“As of November 8, 2023, at least 2,006,000 children had been disenrolled out of 5,238,000 total disenrollments in the 21 states” KFF reports. Here’s the chart of those 21 states. It’s pretty clear that some of the reddest states have been the most effective in taking health care away from children.




The Medicaid unwinding process has been complicated and difficult for most states. Through the pandemic, Medicaid enrollees didn’t have to continuously prove their eligibility for benefits and 21.2 million people, including children, were added to the program during the pandemic. Some states (mostly the blue ones) worked hard to reach out to enrollees to explain to them how to keep their families covered. And some states (lots of the red ones) were less proactive in helping their citizens.

Both issues are political, and the results are children subject to harm. Kicking kids off of Medicaid and promoting the idea that vaccinations are dangerous and that public health isn’t as important as MAGA beliefs are part and parcel of the Republican ideology these days. That would be the self-proclaimed “party of life,” forcing children to be born so that they can then be neglected and out-and-out harmed by Republican policies.
Haley and Ramaswamy show the rising political power of Indian Americans, even though polling points to an Indian diaspora that overwhelmingly votes Democrat. 


Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, left, and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley speak during a Republican presidential primary debate hosted by FOX News Channel, Aug. 23, 2023, in Milwaukee. Ramaswamy and Haley, two of the leading contenders for the Republican presidential nomination, are Indian Americans, even though polling points to an Indian diaspora that overwhelmingly votes Democrat. The two candidates are running significantly behind former President Donald Trump and also trail Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, but they’re outpacing others in the field. 
(AP Photo/Morry Gash, File)

DECISION 2024
BY ASSOCIATED PRESS NATIONWIDE
PUBLISHED  NOV. 05, 2023

The tension between Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy was hard to miss when they last met on a debate stage.

“Every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber for what you say,” Haley told Ramaswamy.

Responding to the broadside, Ramaswamy argued “we will be better served as a Republican Party if we’re not sitting here hurling personal insults.” He later told reporters he would “use smaller words next time to make it easier” for Haley.

The two are poised to meet again on Wednesday for the third presidential debate, one of their final chances to make a case in front of a large audience before voting begins in the GOP primary next year. Though they are polling far behind former President Donald Trump in the race for the 2024 nomination, Haley and Ramaswamy represent the growing political influence of Americans of Indian descent and are a reminder of the nuanced views within the Indian diaspora.

What You Need To Know
Two of the Republicans running for president are Indian American, even though polling points to an Indian diaspora that overwhelmingly votes for DemocratsFormer U.N. Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and business entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy are polling far behind front-runner Donald TrumpBut they represent the growing political influence of Americans of Indian descent. And they're a reminder of the nuanced views within the Indian diasporaRepublicans may not be on the verge of winning over the Indian diaspora in America. But even marginal gains could be notable in closely contested states

“It is a growing, heterogeneous community,” said Milan Vaishnav, the director of the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who co-wrote a study about how Indian Americans vote.

Haley and Ramaswamy exemplify the diversity of views among Indian Americans.

A former South Carolina governor and later U.N. ambassador for Trump, Haley generally aligns with the party's traditional establishment, particularly when it comes to foreign policy. The 51-year-old has called for continued support for Ukraine in its war with Russia and has portrayed the 38-year-old Ramaswamy as untested in world affairs. A biotech entrepreneur, Ramaswamy has pilloried the GOP’s establishment wing and questioned the need for continuing to back Ukraine.

They both are out of sync with the broader community of Indian Americans, who overwhelmingly support Democrats. A recent survey by the Pew Research Center found that 68% of Indian American registered voters identified as Democrats and 29% identified as Republicans.

“What we are seeing with the Republican field is not representative of where the Indian American population is as a whole,” Vaishnav said.

Republicans may not be on the verge of winning over the Indian diaspora in America. But even marginal gains could be notable in closely contested states.

There are segments of the diaspora that still support, fund and engage in advocacy related to Indian politics. But for most Indian Americans, issues stateside matter more, said Maina Chawla Singh, a scholar-in-residence at American University's School of International Service.

“The political positions for Indian Americans will be shaped by what matters within the U.S. context — whether it is reproductive freedom, anti-immigrant policies, recession or hate crimes,” she said. “That is what ultimately swings it for them because it is their future.”

Sangay Mishra, a political science professor at Drew University in New Jersey, said he believes Indian Americans now are well placed to produce conservative thinkers and political aspirants because they can easily get behind ideas such as a free market, low taxes and the meritocracy.

"If we say 3 out of 10 Indian Americans are Republicans, we can conclude that these candidates are not aberrations, but they also do not represent the dominant thinking in the community,” he said.

Indian Americans have now “settled in and become a part of the U.S. society” compared with where they were between the 1960s and the 1980s when the first wave arrived, Mishra said.

He said Trump’s election in 2016 also motivated more progressive Indian Americans to get involved in local city council and school district races.

“I’ve seen examples of people who felt like they needed to challenge that environment where populations such as immigrants, women and Muslims were being marginalized." The election in 2008 of Barack Obama as America's first Black president and Kamala Harris, whose is half Indian American, as vice president in 2020, also played a role, he said.

While Mishra and other researchers see no potential shift in party allegiance among younger voters, 26-year-old Rohan Pakianathan, a graduate student of public policy at Rutgers University, says he can envision himself working in a conservative think tank someday. Pakianathan is supporting Ramaswamy.

“I identify with Vivek because I think that’s what the future of politics and the future of the Republican Party should be,” he said.

Like Ramaswamy, Pakianathan’s parents emigrated to the United States from southern India. Even though his parents are Democrats and progressive, they respect Ramaswamy’s candidacy, he said.

Pakianathan, who is Christian, says Ramaswamy’s Hindu faith is not an issue for him because he views America as a Christian country that was founded on Judeo-Christian values.

Pakianathan said he sometimes feels alone in his own community, with his sister and most of his friends leaning Democrat, but he has never had a problem engaging in civil debates.

“Eventually, I’d like to see America have a candidate whom both parties can acknowledge and respect,” he said. “I hope we can get to a place where it doesn’t have to be one side against another.”

Henry Olsen, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, said the candidacy of Indian American candidates is an extension of a “real openness” the Republican Party has shown to people of color.

“There is no barrier to the rise of talent when talent shows itself,” he said.

Regardless of these candidates’ prospects, the Republican Party does have an urgent need to “do well with people of color” because their share of America's electorate will continue to rise, Olsen said.

He added that the GOP might also have to position itself as “less observably and doctrinally the Christian party” in order to appeal to large swaths in diaspora communities that are not Christian, as well to those who are unaffiliated with any organized religion.

“If you tell people they are not welcome, they will most likely not knock on the door," he said.
SO MUCH FOR FACTORIES IN U$A

Foxconn sends satellites to space as the business of making iPhones and laptops slows, diversification effort accelerates


BYJANE LANHEE LEE, BRUCE EINHORN AND BLOOMBERG
November 12, 2023

Foxconn's Young Liu at Hon Hai Tech Day in Taipei last month.
I-HWA CHENG/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES


The world’s biggest producer of iPhones is going to outer space.

Two prototype low-Earth orbit satellites made by Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., better known as Foxconn, took off aboard a SpaceX rocket from Vandenberg Space Force Base in southern California on Saturday.

The launch of the LEO satellites marks a key moment for the Taiwanese electronics manufacturer as it diversifies into new sectors, a shift that is taking greater urgency as some of its established businesses such as smartphones and laptops struggle. Foxconn is aiming to demonstrate that it has satellite technology to tap growing demand for communications from space.

While Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp. has made and launched more than 5,000 LEO satellites for its Starlink constellation, Foxconn is betting it will be able to make satellites primarily for corporate and government clients.

The satellites, co-developed with Taiwan’s National Central University, are the size of a backpack, weigh about 9 kilograms (20 pounds) each and carry cameras, communication devices and other equipment. They are designed to orbit Earth every 96 minutes at an altitude of 520 kilometers (323 miles).

New Growth


Since taking over from founder Terry Gou in 2019, Foxconn Chairman Young Liu has looked for ways to diversify — focusing on electric vehicles, digital health and robotics, as well as technologies for artificial intelligence, semiconductors and communications satellites.

“I needed to find some something so that the company is able to grow for the next 10, 15 years,” Liu said in an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek.

Revenue at Foxconn, the world’s third-largest private employer after Walmart Inc. and Amazon.com Inc., is expected to drop about 6% this year to NT$6.2 trillion ($192 billion), according to estimates compiled by Bloomberg News.

Order Book

While Apple Inc. needs millions of iPhones a quarter and frequently updates models, customers can go a long time between orders for LEO satellites, so the businesses is much less predictable, said Tim Farrar, president of Telecom, Media and Finance Associates Inc., a consulting firm in Menlo Park, California. Foxconn makes about two out of every three iPhones in the world.

For an outsourcing manufacturers like Foxconn, “unless you can find another one that comes along at the right moment, your life can be very difficult,” he said.

Government orders could provide Foxconn with some security as it builds out its satellite business, according to Farrar.

“Foxconn is thinking, if the Taiwanese government gives us a baseline of orders every year, that will be OK,” he said.

Taiwan is working on a plan to launch its first LEO communication satellite, part of a strategy to develop space-based alternatives to the undersea cables that provide most of the island’s internet connections.

Read More: Foxconn Makes Your iPhone. Now It’s Aiming to Make Electric Cars

Another line of support will be Foxconn’s electric-vehicle business, since they require real-time communication technology, said Jason Wang, a Foxconn analyst with MasterLink Securities Corp. in Taipei.

“You need to have a solution in place for your car to use,” Wang said. “If they want to export this business, they at least need to have an infrastructure in place to demo the technology in Taiwan.”

The company’s background in electronics and know-how gained from making smartphones, games consoles and other devices should help with that.

“Taiwan is very good at making all different kinds of commercial products in electronics,” said Shiang-yu Wang, a research fellow at the Academia Sinica’s Institute of Astronomy & Astrophysics in Taipei. “These companies can easily switch” to space.

— With assistance from Debby Wu and Reed Stevenson
Ayanna Pressley Denounces GOP for Trying to Gut LGBTQ+ Housing Funds

The congresswoman from Massachusetts criticized the exclusion of funding that was meant to go toward an LGBTQ+ affordable housing project, slamming the decision as a blow to LGBTQ+ senior housing rights.
ADVOCATE
NOVEMBER 12 2023 

Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley took a firm stand on the House floor last Monday against a Republican-led housing appropriations bill that omitted critical support for The Pryde, an LGBTQ+ affordable housing initiative. The project, which aims to assist LGBTQ+ seniors in the Boston area, had $825,000 in federal funding removed by the GOP majority on the House Appropriations Committee.

“I oppose this legislation for the draconian cuts and dangerous provisions included in it,” Pressley said, condemning the exclusion as a glaring oversight in a bill that she believes otherwise addresses critical funding priorities. The congresswoman accused her colleagues of hypocrisy, saying, “It would seem with my colleagues across the aisle that the word freedom is selectively applied.”

Ayanna Pressley on Introducing Bill to Advance Trans Rights ›


Highlighting the hardships faced by LGBTQ+ seniors, the Democrat emphasized, “It does not apply to my bodily autonomy. It is not applied to intellectual freedom for our women, African-Americans, or LGBTQ siblings when it comes to our books, and it does not apply to the freedom to love who you love.”

Ayanna Pressley Blasts GOP, Affirms Support for The Pryde LGBTQ+ Senior Housing Project in Bostonwww.youtube.com

“The Pryde... would meet a critical need in my district at a time when mortgages are skyrocketing, and one-third of LGBTQ seniors are living in poverty,” Pressley stated, shedding light on the economic struggles within her constituency.

Pressley, vice chair of the Task Force on Aging and Housing, argued against the bill’s implications.

Republicans are choosing homophobia over housing, profits over people, cruelty over compassion,” she said.

Pressley further criticized the Republican action as a display of contempt, connecting the denial of funds to broader societal issues.

“This act of policy violence contributes to the physical violence that far too many LGBTQ folks experience,” she said.



Is Israel the loyal watchdog of US imperialism?

The US and Israel’s relationship is enduring, but that doesn’t mean it is always easy, explains Dáire Cumiskey


Joe Biden and Benjamin Netanyahu

Israel has always been a watchdog for US imperialism that can discipline and attack all of its enemies in the region. Sometimes political outliers reveal this truth when others won’t.

Independent candidate for the 2024 presidential election, Robert F Kennedy Jr, recently said that “Israel is a bulwark for us… It’s almost like having an aircraft carrier in the Middle East. It’s our oldest ally.”

US president Joe Biden alluded to this relationship when he said, “If there were not an Israel, we would have to invent one to make sure our interests were preserved.”

Israel’s role as the watchdog for US imperialism was established during the middle of the twentieth century.

This partnership was noted by Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 1951. It wrote that “Strengthening Israel helps Western powers maintain stability in the Middle East. Israel is to become the watchdog.”

“If the Western powers should sometimes prefer to close their eyes, Israel could be relied upon to punish one several neighbouring states whose discourtesy to the West went beyond the bounds of the permissible.”

Israel was able to prove itself to the US when it provoked the Six-Day War with Jordan, Egypt and Syria in 1967. From then on, US funding to Israel increased dramatically.

Between 1946 and 2016, the US paid almost £100 billion to the terror state. Research from the Security Assistance Monitor (CIP) found that in the 22 years since 2000, Israel has purchased over $9.2 billion worth of US arms. The US arms industry helps equip the Israeli killing machine. Without the US government granting $3.8 billion to be injected into Israel every year, its economy would collapse.

Biden has been a loyal supporter of Israel in Congress for the last five decades. In return he’s been rewarded with campaign donations and speaking fees from Washington’s pro-Israel lobby.

But it’s important not to fall into the trap of saying the US simply supports Israel because of money and lobbies. Instead, it is because the US state knows how valuable Israel is as an imperialist ally.

While support for Israel has been a pre-condition for every US president for the last five decades, it is not an easy relationship.

US administrations sometimes try to reign in their watchdog, but often, it lashes out on its own. In 2017, former US foreign secretary John Kerry was forced to criticise Israel’s settlement building programme that was illegal under international law.

Following Israel’s assault on Gaza in 2021, it was the US which, once again, urged the Israeli state to show restraint.

It was only because of the persuasion of US officials that Israel was forced to concede to beginning four‑hour pauses in fighting in Gaza last week.

Blinken has also suggested US opposition to a long-term occupation of Gaza, speaking at a G7 foreign ministers meeting on Tuesday last week.

While the US and Israel remain tight allies, both states have different objectives. The US wants Israel to protect its imperial interests in the Middle East, while Israel wants to complete its Zionist project in Palestine. These two objectives don’t always align.

Protests highlighting Biden’s relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that underpin the Palestinian’s oppression will shape US politics ahead of the presidential election next year.

An unprecedented 300,000 people marched in solidarity with Palestine earlier this month.

More mass protests are needed to grow the movement for Palestine and will be vital to ending the US’s relationship with Israel.

SOCIALIST WORKER 
Biggest ever Palestine solidarity demo in British history

Hundreds of thousands of people turned the streets of central London into a sea of solidarity with Palestine


By Socialist Worker journalists
Saturday 11 November 2023


A mass of people made their way through the streets of London on the Palestine march (Picture: Socialist Worker)

The national march for Palestine—of at least 800,000 people—in London on Saturday made even the massive protests of the last month seem small.

“Now I have hope, now I think we can make a real difference to help stop the agony of Gaza,” protester Rania told Socialist Worker. She was born in Ramallah in Palestine and fears for her family and friends.

It was so big that there was a demo to the demo. Half an hour before the advertised start time, around 50,000 or more marchers packed the mile-long street from Oxford Circus to the assembly point at Marble Arch

Marcher Alex said, “I have been on the sit-ins and marches. I can’t rest and just go back to ‘normal life’. It’s hard for me to understand why even more of us aren’t on the streets and closing down buildings and places where people work. We need to stop society.”

Mariam is a GP. She told Socialist Worker that she couldn’t stand aside and watch a genocide happen in real-time. “As a health worker I have to stand against what’s happening in Gaza,” she said. “Israel is bombing hospitals and ambulances and killing my colleagues.

Raw fury at Israel and its backers was everywhere. Maryam came from Manchester to be at the demonstration because she was “just so angry” “I can’t take the double standards,” she told Socialist Worker.

“Why is it that when the Ukrainian people fight back with Molotov cocktails everyone celebrates them but if the Palestinians do the same they are terrorists? I’m also sick of the media saying things like ‘Palestinians were killed’—no they were murdered.

“I know why this double standard exists—because the Palestinians are mostly Muslims.

Marchers were proud to have defied the cops’ and home secretary Suella Braverman’s attempts to halt the demonstration and slur protesters.

“Piss off Braverman, we’re on the streets and you can’t stop us. Your lies about ‘hate marches’ are so rubbish,” said health worker Andy Wollerton from the West Midlands. “Braverman’s the hate-person.”

At the rally at the end of the march, Lindsey German from the Stop The War Coalition said, “The police wanted to call off the march. The prime minister wanted it called off. Braverman wanted to ban the march. But we marched and we will keep marching.

“If there is any violence today it is the fault of pound shop Enoch Powell, the home secretary. She should be sacked.”

Encouraged by Braverman, the thugs of the far right fought the cops at the Cenotaph war memorial in Whitehall as they showed how they remember wars. Meanwhile, their fuhrer, Nazi Tommy Robinson, drove to safety in a taxi.

Demonstrators knew who to blame for Western support for Israel. As they arrived at the US embassy in south London, they chanted, “Joe Biden—blood on your hands. Rishi Sunak—blood on your hands. Keir Starmer—blood on your hands”.

Anger at Starmer ran through the march. Hazel from east London said, “He’s a murderer, I hate him more than Sunak because he’s supposed to be the opposition. He will do anything to keep in with the rich, even ignore kids’ deaths.”

Imran Hussain, the MP who resigned as a Labour shadow minister this week, told the rally, “It was the people of Bradford who sent me to Westminster. They expect me to stand up against injustice. This is beyond a humanitarian crisis, it’s a breach of international law and a war crime.”

Labour MP Apsana Begum said, “The situation is urgent. It is chilling—as are the attempts to vilify those opposing mass killing.

“History will judge those that have the green light to slaughter. Demand an immediate ceasefire and an end to the oppression of the Palestinians. None of us are free till we are all free.”

There is a point—very rare—when a march moves from a normal demonstration to a city-halting, government-defying, revolt-inspiring social force.

Saturday 11 November was one of those. All of those who were part of it will speak of it to friends, workmates and those they live alongside in the next few days. They will remember it for years to come.


Full coverage of the struggle in Palestine

People speak sometimes of a change “from quantity to quality”. It means that increasing size doesn’t mean an event is bigger than another one, but that it becomes much more significant.

This should be the spur to urgent and more militant resistance that’s desperately needed to break the British government from its full-throated support for Israel’s crimes. The magnificent march has to be a launch pad for even more effective action.

There must be more demos, more sit-ins, more occupations and blockades, more campuses disrupted. And we need more discussion, more debate, more educating ourselves and talking about a stronger socialist fight on all the class issues workers face, as well as Palestine.

This was by far the biggest ever march for Palestine in Britain—and that’s partly because it’s not just about Palestine, but all the injustice people face. The trade union block on the march was bigger than previous ones with banners from branches or the national NEU, UCU, Unite, CWU, RMT, Aslef and PCS.

Stop The War has called a workplace day of action for Wednesday—15 November. Everyone should try to build it and make it disruptive.

Those who are already set to strike that day should make Palestine a theme of their day and urge others to join them. This includes 15 further education colleges, the Go North East bus strikers, the Barnet mental health social workers and others.

The organisers of Saturday’s march called for local protests across Britain next Saturday 18 November, and said they will announce another national demonstration soon.

Freeing Palestine will take a revolution. This movement, if it escalates still further, can point the way to building the forces that can make one.Around 15,000 people took to the streets of Glasgow.
Around 2,000 people joined a march for Palestine in Cardiff. Some protesters then occupied Cardiff Central station.