Amazon protests in Europe target warehouses, lockers on busy Black Friday
2023/11/24


LONDON (Reuters) - Workers and activists across Europe plan demonstrations against U.S. e-commerce giant Amazon on Friday, aiming to disrupt its warehouses and prevent merchandise from reaching Amazon parcel lockers on one of the busiest shopping days of the year.

On Black Friday, the day after the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday, many retailers slash prices to boost sales. Originally known for crowds lining up at big-box stores in the U.S., the event has increasingly moved online and gone global, fuelled in part by Amazon, which advertises ten days of holiday discounts this year from November 17 to November 27.

In Germany, Amazon's second-biggest market by sales in 2022, workers at five fulfilment centres in Bad Hersfeld, Dortmund, Koblenz, Leipzig, and Rheinberg, will go on strike for 24 hours from midnight Thursday to demand a collective wage agreement, trade union Verdi said.

An Amazon spokesperson in Germany said workers are paid fair wages, with a starting salary of more than 14 euros ($15.27) an hour, and have additional benefits, adding that deliveries of Black Friday orders will be reliable and timely.

More than 1,000 workers at Amazon's warehouse in Coventry, England, will strike on Friday, according to trade union GMB, as part of a long-running dispute over pay. Trade unionists are also organising a demonstration at Amazon's UK headquarters in London.

An Amazon UK spokesperson said the strike would not cause any disruption.

Amazon's parcel lockers are also being targeted. Many Amazon shoppers use its lockers, which are located in train stations, supermarket car parks, and street corners, to receive their orders.

In France, anti-globalisation organisation Attac is encouraging activists to plaster them with posters and ticker tape, potentially blocking delivery workers and customers from being able to open them.

Attac, which calls Black Friday a "celebration of overproduction and overconsumption", said it expects the protest to be wider than last year, when it estimates 100 Amazon lockers across France were targeted.

Italian trade union CGIL called for a Black Friday strike at the Castel San Giovanni warehouse, while Spanish union CCOO called for Amazon warehouse and delivery workers to stage a one-hour strike on each shift on "Cyber Monday", the last day of Amazon's ten-day sale.

"Make Amazon Pay", a global campaign coordinated by UNI Global Union, said strikes and protests would take place in more than 30 countries from Black Friday through to Monday.

($1 = 0.9168 euros)

(Reporting by Helen Reid and James Davey in London, Matthias Inverardi in Dusseldorf, Elisa Anzolin in Milan, Corina Pons in Madrid, Editing by Sharon Singleton)






Amazon's logistics workers in Spain plan Cyber Monday walk-outs
2023/11/20



MADRID (Reuters) - Spanish union CCOO on Monday called on 20,000 warehouse and delivery workers at Amazon's local unit to stage a one-hour strike on each shift on Nov. 27, a date known by retailers as 'Cyber Monday', and the same on the following day to demand better wages and working conditions.

There are three working shifts a day at Amazon in Spain.

"It is symbolic, but it is a first move and we will consider other kind of actions in the future," the union's secretary general for Amazon, Douglas Harper, told Reuters.

CCOO, the largest union at the U.S. retailer in Spain, wants the company to improve labour safety and acknowledge workplace risks in Spain, boost human resources staff and raise wages, arguing that the pay does not reflect the volume of workload.

"Our staff in all of Spain already work in a safe and modern environment with competitive wages and benefits," a local Amazon spokesperson said in a statement sent to Reuters.

Cyber Monday is the first working day after Thanksgiving, an important date for retailers as consumers return to work and start ordering Christmas gifts.

Even though the date is not that significant in European countries as they do not celebrate Thanksgiving, online retailers also offer discounts and launch special offers similar to those in the United States.

Logistics workers at Amazon on both sides of the Atlantic have complained about working conditions and unionisation is starting to build pressure on the company. A group of workers walked out in Britain earlier this month despite a pay raise in October.

Amazon has grown fast Spain in the past couple of years in both logistics for its e-commerce business and data centres to support its cloud computer unit, Amazon Web Services.

(Reporting by Inti Landauro, editing by Andrei Khalip and Susan Fenton)

© Reuters

Workplace Discrimination Saps Everyone’s Motivation − Even if It Works in Your Favor

When people work for discriminatory managers, they put in less effort.

November 24, 2023 by The Conversation US Leave a Comment

By Brent Simpson, University of South Carolina

When people work for discriminatory managers, they put in less effort. That’s true both when managers are biased against them and when they’re biased in their favor, according to a new paper that Nicholas Heiserman of Oklahoma State University and I have published in the journal Nature Human Behaviour.

To demonstrate this, we placed nearly 1,200 research participants in several experiments designed to mimic work settings, where they and other “workers” made decisions about how much effort to dedicate to a task.

In some experiments, we had participants complete number searches – by counting how many times “3” appeared in a large table of numbers, for example. The more searches a participant completed, the higher their effort was rated. Participants, working in pairs or in small groups, were told that their manager would award a bonus to one person based on how many number searches the workers completed.

To create a discriminatory situation, participants were told that there were two types of employees: blue and red. Participants were always assigned to be blue. One-third of the participants were told that the manager had a bias against blue employees, while another third were told that the manager was biased in their favor. The rest didn’t receive any information one way or the other.

We found that those workers who knew their managers discriminated – whether it was for them or against them – completed fewer number searches than participants in the control group.

By measuring workers’ expectations that they would receive a bonus, our experiments also help show that discrimination reduces work productivity by separating effort from rewards.

This makes intuitive sense: If you know your boss is biased against people like you, you’ll have less incentive to work hard, since you know you’re unlikely to get promoted regardless. Similarly, if your boss is biased in favor of people like you, you’ll probably get promoted anyway. So, again, why work hard?

Why it matters

It’s well established that workplace discrimination leads to reduced earnings and advancement opportunities for members of disadvantaged groups.

But our results suggest that it can lower productivity of all workers, even those advantaged by it – which means discrimination may hurt firms’ bottom lines more than has been assumed.

Another of our key findings helps explain why the effects of discrimination on work effort can worsen over time. Specifically, we found that even though working for a discriminatory boss made everyone put in less effort, the disadvantaged showed the largest decline.

We suspect this could lead to a vicious cycle, where targets of discrimination respond by putting in less effort than advantaged workers. In turn, their managers may come to see them as lazier, less competent or less deserving of promotions – which can strengthen their original biases.

To test this, we ran an additional study with participants who had managerial experience. We showed them the work effort of two groups of participants from our experiments: one group that had been discriminated against, and one that benefited from discrimination against others. The latter group had higher productivity.

We labeled these groups generically as “red types” and “blue types,” and while the managers knew that one group had put in more effort, they didn’t know discrimination was the reason why.

We found that managers readily stereotyped both groups, perceiving members of the advantaged group as warmer and much more competent. Further, they said they would strongly prefer to hire, work with, promote and give bonuses to members of the advantaged category.

These findings show how discrimination can lead to behavior by employees that strengthens the negative stereotypes underlying the original act of discrimination, or even spread discriminatory stereotypes to new managers.

What’s next

Studying discrimination based on invented categories in simulated work environments can help us understand the basics of how it works, but it ignores differences in how bias operates when it comes to, for instance, race versus gender, or sexuality versus parental status. An important goal for future research is to better understand how the processes we observe play out for these real-world bases of discrimination.

For instance, following a related study, future research might measure racial biases of managers in organizations and the productivity of employees who work for them. Based on our research, we would expect employees whose managers are racially biased to be less productive than employees whose managers aren’t.

But we may expect different effects if, rather than racial discrimination, we studied the well-established pattern of discrimination against mothers in the workplace. That’s because, as we have shown in our prior work, some mothers don’t interpret clearly biased treatment of them in the workplace as discriminatory. So what happens when people work for biased managers but don’t recognize it? That’s an important question to address in future work.

The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

Brent Simpson, Professor of Sociology, University of South Carolina

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The ADL is leading the attack against free speech on Palestine

The Anti-Defamation League's call for the FBI and IRS to surveil, investigate, and possibly prosecute student activists is a new level in its McCarthyite campaign to silence any and all criticism of Israel.

BY AMIRA JARMAKANI

MONDOWEISS

NOVEMBER 20, 2023 11

JONATHAN GREENBLATT OF THE ADL IN JANUARY 2022. 

SCREENSHOT FROM ADL VIDEO.

Columbia University’s recent suspension of its Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP) chapters was just the latest examples of the unfolding attacks on free speech when it comes to Palestine in the United States. Among the troubling aspects of this trend is the role outside groups are playing in university actions since October 7, including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which has been leading the charge against SJP chapters nationally.

Despite being widely understood as a mainstream civil rights organization, the ADL has a long history of surveilling and infiltrating social justice and human rights organizations, silencing advocacy for Palestine, and particularly working to silence any and all criticism of Israel.

Students for Justice in Palestine, in particular, has been in the crosshairs of the ADL’s repression campaign for at least a decade. One of the main avenues for doing so has been to equate anti-Zionism, and really any form of criticism of Israel, with antisemitism. Such conflations lay the groundwork for the ADL to make its oft-repeated claim that SJP and JVP are the “photo inverse of the extreme right” and even to implicate them in the rise of antisemitic hate crimes.

These talking points have culminated in calls from the ADL for law enforcement to surveil, investigate, and possibly prosecute student activists. In a public letter released on October 25, the ADL and Brandeis call on university administrators to investigate and potentially criminalize Students for Justice in Palestine on baseless charges of “material support” for terrorism, a call echoed and aggrandized by ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt in his November 15 call for the FBI and the IRS to investigate these student groups.

In addition, the ADL recently described Jewish Voice for Peace – a group long devoted to dismantling antisemitism – as a “hate group.” The impetus for the claim was the October 27 sit-in in Grand Central Station, which called for a ceasefire in Gaza. Repeating the mantra that anti-Zionist groups are the “photo inverse of white supremacists,” the ADLs weaponization of antisemitism effectively censors critics of Israel.

For instance, the ADL works hard to ban the use of words like apartheid and genocide in relation to Israel, even though leading human rights institutions and scholars have used the same words to describe Israel’s actions. Moreover, in a move that is clearly aligned with white supremacist goals, the ADL has even taken legal action against a K-12 school, claiming that the content in its ethnic studies curriculum is antisemitic for, among other things, describing Israel as “settler colonialist.”

Belying the political aims of repression behind its “No Place for Hate” campaign, the ADL makes ample space for the hateful and despicable policy of criminalizing dissent.

In reality, the ADL’s conflation of criticism of Israel with hate speech and right-wing extremism serves three purposes. First, it works to reinforce the conflation of Zionism and Judaism. Second, it works to distance the ADL from its own support for right-wing extremism. And lastly, not unlike the right’s appropriation of leftist identity politics, it functions to weaponize the language of civil rights for the purpose of upholding the status quo. It is through this triangulated process, for instance, that the ADL evokes “hate speech” to demonize the non-violent BDS movement.

The ADL’s calls to investigate SJP and other groups, ratchet up the ADL’s longstanding efforts to silence criticism of Israel to a new level of McCarthyite climate of fear and repression. It is through this new McCarthyism that the ADL’s investments in institutionalizing white supremacy become abundantly clear.

The history of working with law enforcement to criminalize Black and brown communities is well documented. It is no surprise, then, that the ADL would invoke the “material support for terrorism” clause, introduced in Title XII (Terrorism) of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and and Law Enforcement Act, which Michelle Alexander and others have credited with the rise of mass incarceration that especially targeted Black men. It’s also no surprise that the ADL has found support for these baseless accusations of “material support for terrorism” with the Biden administration, since Biden was the architect of the 1994 Crime Bill. Though he originally won support for the Bill by stoking fear about “predators on the streets,” some 25 years later – in the aftermath of the George Floyd uprisings – Biden admitted the bill was a mistake. We can’t wait 25 years to realize the dangerous precedent of baselessly charging student groups with a felony linked to terrorism.

Legislation aimed at curtailing extremism has also served to vastly expand the surveillance of Black and brown communities. One historian’s point that McCarthyism should more accurately be called Hooverism is applicable to the ADL, given its history of working with the FBI to surveil Black liberation movements, Arab and Muslim groups, and other civil and human rights organizations. Indeed, the ADL continues to spy on organizers, including groups like SJP and JVP, through affiliates like the Israel on Campus Coalition (ICC), which infiltrates and spies on the groups and then feeds the ADL data from the ICC’s web of campus spies.

For the ADL – or any entity – to charge a student group with material support for terrorism while the U.S. sends billions of material support to aid a genocidal military campaign that has so far killed over 13,000 civilians in Gaza is unconscionable. It keeps no one safe – neither from violence nor discrimination. By designating pro-Palestinian advocates as “extremists,” the ADL uses the alibi of white supremacism to foment repression, censorship, and policing of those on the left who are critical of Israel. This is the moment to see the ADL for what it is: an organization that will not hesitate to weaponize antisemitism to chill speech and squash liberation movements. Drop the ADL.

Amira Jarmakani

Amira Jarmakani, she/they, is Professor of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies and affiliated faculty with the Center for Islamic and Arabic Studies at San Diego State University.

NONE DARE CALL IT GENOCIDE
Influential Israeli national security leader makes the case for genocide in Gaza

In an Op-Ed titled "Let’s Not be Intimidated by the World," Israeli ret. Major General Giora Eiland argues that all Palestinians in Gaza are legitimate targets and that even a “severe epidemic" in Gaza will "bring victory closer.”

BY JONATHAN OFIR

MONDOWEISS

NOVEMBER 20, 2023 

RET. MAJOR GENERAL GIORA EILAND


Since October 7, there has been no shortage of genocidal calls from Israeli leaders, as well as clear plans, also at ministerial level, for the complete ethnic cleansing of Gaza. And while the usage of biblical euphemisms like Prime Minister Netanyahu’s “Amalek” reference may appear too vague for some, even if the story suggests killing infants, on Sunday ret. Major General Giora Eiland, former head of the National Security Council and current advisor to the Defense Minister decided to spell out genocide more explicitly.

In a Hebrew article on the printed edition of the centrist Yedioth Ahronoth titled “Let’s not be intimidated by the world,” Eiland clarified that the whole Gazan civilian population was a legitimate target and that even “severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer.” His bottom line leaves no doubt as to his view:


“They are not only Hamas fighters with weapons, but also all the ‘civilian’ officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population that enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7th.”

Eiland speaks against humanitarian concern and the whole principle of distinction:

“Israel is not fighting a terrorist organization but against the State of Gaza.”

Therefore, per Eiland, “Israel must not provide the other side with any capability that prolongs its life.”

Eiland mocks the idea of “poor women” as the representation of uninvolved civilians:

“Who are the ‘poor’ women of Gaza? They are all the mothers, sisters or wives of Hamas murderers”.

The formulation is reminiscent of the far-right former Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, who, during the 2014 onslaught, suggested that Israel’s enemy was the entire Palestinian people:

“Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”

Eiland speaks against surrendering to American sensibilities. Humanitarian pressure (that is, cutting off all basic life necessities) is a legitimate means of war, he claims:

“The Israeli cabinet must take a harder line with the Americans, and at least have the ability to say the following: as long as all the hostages are not returned to Israel, do not talk to us about the humanitarian aspects”.

Also, the rest of the international community, with its humanitarian concern, must be resisted – even the spread of severe epidemics is a legitimate means of warfare:


“The international community warns us of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and of severe epidemics. We must not shy away from this, as difficult as that may be. After all, severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer and reduce casualties among IDF soldiers”

But no, Eiland is not a sadist nor a genocidaire — all of this is but a means towards a supposedly good end:

“And no, this is not about cruelty for cruelty’s sake, since we don’t support the suffering of the other side as an end but as a means.”

Eiland’s outrageously genocidal piece was endorsed by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who tweeted the full article and said he “agreed with every word.” Smotrich is known for, among other things, calling to “wipe out Huwwara” in the West Bank, so it should come as no surprise that he would now endorse Eiland’s call to do the same in Gaza.

A concentration camp

Eiland has a long history of being surprisingly forthright about his view on the state of the Gaza Strip. In 2004, then as head of the National Security Council, he regarded the Gaza Strip as “a huge concentration camp” as he advocated for the U.S. to force Palestinians into the Sinai desert as part of a “two-state solution.”

As per a U.S. diplomatic cable leaked to Wikileaks here:

Repeating a personal view that he had previously expressed to other USG visitors, NSC Director Eiland laid out for Ambassador Djerejian a different end-game solution than that which is commonly envisioned as the two-state solution. Eiland’s view, he said, was prefaced on the assumption that demographic and other considerations make the prospect for a two-state solution between the Jordan and the Mediterranean unviable. Currently, he said, there are 11 million people in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip, and that number will increase to 36 million in 50 years. The area between Beer Sheva and the northern tip of Israel (including the West Bank and Gaza) has the highest population density in the world. Gaza alone, he said, is already “a huge concentration camp” with 1.3 million Palestinians. Moreover, the land is surrounded on three sides by deserts. Palestinians need more land and Israel can ill-afford to cede it. The solution, he argued, lies in the Sinai desert.

It is interesting to see Eiland recognizing such a reality even before the Gaza “disengagement” of 2005, before the election of Hamas in 2006, and before the genocidal siege of 2007, which has only been upped in its severity since October 7. At this point, regarding Gaza, as a concentration camp appears perhaps too weak a term — it has become an extermination camp.

Here is the full translated* text of Eiland’s piece:

Let’s Not be Intimidated by the World

Giora Eiland, Yedioth Ahronoth, November 19, 2023

Heading Towards the Collapsing of Hamas

The debate over Israel’s compliance with international demands to allow entry of fuel into Gaza reflects a fundamental conflict between Israel and the U.S. regarding the correct narrative.

According to the American narrative, there are two groups of people in Gaza. One is the Hamas fighters, who are brutal terrorists and must, therefore, die. Most of the people in Gaza belong to a second group, innocent civilians who suffer for no fault of their own. Therefore Israel must not only avoid harming them as much as possible but also act to make their lives easier.

The other, and more correct, narrative is as follows: Israel is not fighting a terrorist organization but against the State of Gaza. The State of Gaza is indeed under Hamas leadership, and this organization managed to mobilize all the resources of its state, the support of the majority of its citizens, and the absolute loyalty of its civil administration around Sinwar’s leadership while fully supporting his ideology. In this sense, Gaza is very similar to Nazi Germany, where a similar process also took place. Being that this is the accurate description of the situation, so it is also correct to wage the war accordingly.

A war between states is not only won by military combat but also by the ability of one side to break the opposing side’s system, and the economic ability, first and foremost the ability to provide energy, is of the utmost importance. The collapse of Germany at the beginning of 1945 was mainly due to the loss of Romania’s oil fields, and once Germany didn’t have enough fuel for its planes and tanks — the war was won.

Israel must, therefore, not provide the other side with any capability that prolongs its life. Moreover, we tell ourselves that Sinwar is so evil that he does not care if all the residents of Gaza die. Such a presentation is inaccurate since who are the “poor” women of Gaza? They are all the mothers, sisters, or wives of Hamas murderers. On the one hand, they are part of the infrastructure that supports the organization, and on the other hand, if they experience a humanitarian disaster, then it can be assumed that some of the Hamas fighters and the more junior commanders will begin to understand that the war is futile and that it is better to prevent irreversible harm to their families.

The way to win the war faster and at a lower cost for us requires a system collapse on the other side and not the mere killing of more Hamas fighters. The international community warns us of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and of severe epidemics. We must not shy away from this, as difficult as that may be. After all, severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer and reduce casualties among IDF soldiers. And no, this is not about cruelty for cruelty’s sake since we don’t support the suffering of the other side as an end but as a means.

The other side is given the option to end the suffering if they surrender. Sinwar will not surrender, but there is no reason for the Hamas militia commanders in the southern Gaza Strip not to surrender when they have no fuel and no water, and when the epidemics reach them as well, and when the danger to the lives of their women increases. The Israeli cabinet must take a harder line with the Americans and at least have the ability to say the following: as long as all the hostages are not returned to Israel, do not talk to us about the humanitarian aspects.

And yes, we believe that humanitarian pressure is also a legitimate means of increasing the chance of seeing the hostages alive. But we must not, absolutely must not adopt the American narrative that “permits” us to fight only against Hamas fighters instead of doing the right thing — to fight against the entire opposing system because it is precisely its civil collapse that will bring the end of the war closer. When senior Israeli figures tell the media, “It’s either us or them,” we should clarify the question of who is “them.” “They” are not only Hamas fighters with weapons but also all the “civilian” officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population that enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7.

*Many thanks to Tali

A Call to Action to Anti-Zionist Jews: We must do the work to defeat Jewish Zionist institutions

The genocide in Gaza is being committed in our name as Jews. Thus have a duty to organize as Jews against the Jewish Zionist institutions aiding and perpetuating the annihilation of the Palestinian people.

BY JEWS AGAINST WHITE SUPREMACY 

NOVEMBER 22, 2023 

ISRAELI TANKS CARVE A STAR OF DAVID INTO A FIELD IN GAZA DURING ISRAEL’S ONGOING GROUND INVASION OF GAZA. THIS PHOTO WAS SHARED BY DANIEL HAGARI ON THE @IDFSPOKESPERSON X/TWITTER ACCOUNT ON NOVEMBER 17, 2023.


At a time when the Israeli settler state has murdered over 12,000 Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, with thousands more missing, and millions displaced, it cannot be stated enough the importance of how we orient ourselves in organizing against the Zionist settler colonial genocide.

We must be explicitly, unabashedly anti-Zionist, and make clear that our organizing does not stop after a ceasefire, it does not stop at the end of the siege on Gaza, it must not stop until Palestine is free from the river to the sea.

It is imperative that Jews understand that while Zionism and Judaism are different, this is a genocide that is being actively committed in our name as Jews, just as the entire Zionist settler colonial project has been committed in our name. While Jewish voices absolutely must not be made the priority, Jews have a duty to organize against Zionism.

The Good Shepherd Collective and writer Em Cohen recently released a Guide for Jewish Anti- Zionist Allyship where they specifically made it a point to mention that Zionism’s international infrastructure is made up of “many Jewish communal organizations and institutions. From organizations that host propaganda trips or directly fund zionist settlement to organizations that spread zionist propaganda, the Jewish organizations that structurally support zionism are many. This is a form of direct zionist harm that exists around us that anti-zionist Jews can and should struggle against.”

For decades, Palestinians have been demanding that Jewish anti-Zionists organize around fighting Zionism within their own communities, and the Jewish left has not made it a priority.

This has been made especially clear with how in this moment the ways that the Jewish left has failed completely in giving support and solidarity to the Palestinian people.

There has still not been a reckoning with how so many among us acted in the wake of October 7th, centering Jewish or Israeli grief, and actively condemning an act of anticolonial resistance in Operation Al Aqsa Flood against the Zionist settler entity which has systematically massacred, displaced, and dehumanized Palestinians for over 75 years. Organizations which claimed to support the Palestinian struggle completely abandoned them when they dared to resist colonial oppression.

This is reflected in the messaging and action of so many “liberal Zionist” and non-Zionist organizations like IfNotNow in the United States, Independent Jewish Voices in Canada, and Na’amod in the United Kingdom, and even organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace which call themselves anti-Zionist, but who have refused to identify as such in any of their messaging as of late.

All of these organizations actively cater to and enable Zionists within their spaces. There is a steadfast refusal to call for the end of the Zionist settler colonial project, the very root of the genocide in Palestine. There is also a failure to support the Palestinian resistance by any means necessary.

This is a genocide that is actively being facilitated by a high majority of the Jewish institutions which claim to represent us, ones which are actively Zionist and have aided and perpetuated this settler colonial genocide.

From our very start Jews Against White Supremacy (JAWS) was founded on the notion that we must be explicitly anti-Zionist and approach anti-Zionism from an anti-colonial perspective, we must support Palestinian resistance by any means necessary, and it is imperative that we organize as Jews against the Jewish Zionist institutions that have been aiding and perpetuating atrocities and now an annihilation of the Palestinian people.

When mainstream Jewish leaders, leaders of Jewish Zionist organizations and institutions, and rabbis, have been openly calling for genocide and the annihilation of Palestinian people, there is no greater evidence that we must organise as Jews to defeat Jewish Zionist institutions.

While we absolutely give organizers within INN and JVP credit for putting their bodies on the line and getting arrested, we reject the liberal framework of the crux of their organizing. Direct action is needed not just against Jewish Zionist institutions but also secular Zionist institutions, especially arms manufacturers.

Ultimately, JAWS believes Palestinians must always be in the forefront of anti-Zionist organizing, and their voices prioritized. We as Jews however, not only have a duty to speak out and be overt in our anti-Zionism, but we have a responsibility to do the work within our own communities to fight to abolish Jewish Zionist institutions. This fight is a global fight and JAWS is uniting anti-Zionist Jews around the world to get involved in the anti-Zionist solidarity struggle and challenge the Zionist institutions in our own communities.

From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!!!

“Jews Against White Supremacy” invites all individuals who share our values and commitment to fighting for a more just world to join us in organizing as revolutionary socialist anti-Zionists to fight Jewish Zionist institutions. Together we can fight against settler-colonialism and the institutions which perpetuate it, and for a revolutionary transformation of Jewish community life.

JAWS currently has branches in Philadelphia, the Bay Area, Brazil, the Philippines, New York City and UC Santa Cruz with many more to come.

For more information about “Jews Against White Supremacy” and how you can get involved please visit our website (jewsagainstwhitesupremacy.org) and follow us on social media

Facebook
Instagram
Twitter:

For further inquiries, please reach out to jewsagainstwhitesupremacy2023@gmail.com

Jews Against White Supremacy

Jews Against White Supremacy (JAWS) is a newly established anti-Zionist Jewish organization that aims to challenge and abolish Zionist Jewish institutions through mobilizing anti-Zionist Jews, direct action, educational campaigns, and building community. Committed to internationalism, equality, and liberation, JAWS seeks to educate and radically transform Jewish communities around the world, while challenging settler colonialism and fighting for a free Palestine. To learn more and support our mission, please visit (jewsagainstwhitesupremacy.org)

Gaza workers stranded in Israel were tortured, interrogated

Workers from Gaza who were stranded in Israel after October 7 were summarily arrested, interrogated, beaten, and tortured, before being declared illegal by Israeli authorities.

BY ASEEL MOUSA 

 MONDOWEISS

NOVEMBER 23, 2023 

PALESTINIAN WORKERS, WHO WERE STRANDED IN ISRAEL SINCE THE OCTOBER 7 ATTACKS, WALK NEAR THE RAFAH BORDER CROSSING WITH EGYPT AS THEY MAKE THEIR WAY BACK INTO GAZA STRIP FROM THE KEREM SHALOM COMMERCIAL BORDER CROSSING, NOVEMBER 3, 2023. (PHOTO: STR/APA IMAGES)


Ahmad, 58, has been working in Israel as a mechanic since he was 24 years old. He worked in Israel for nearly 20 years until Hamas seized power in the Gaza Strip in 2007. Then, after nearly 17 years of a brutal Israeli siege on the Gaza Strip, he returned a year and a half ago to work in Ashdod as a mechanic.

The moment the Palestinian resistance began its attack on October 7, Israel declared war, and Palestinian workers who had been working in Israel were stranded.

“I have been working in Israel for two and a half months,” Ahmad told Mondoweiss. “I visited my family in Gaza only once, and when Israel declared war, I immediately decided to return home, but Israel bombed the Erez crossing, so I had no way to return to my family.”

To check in on the status of the validity of their work permit, Palestinian workers sign in to an app run by the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), an organ of the Israeli Ministry of Defense. If the work permit is revoked, they get notified with a text message.

After the launch of ongoing Israeli aggression on Gaza, the Israeli authorities revoked all work permits without informing the workers. Israel then conducted a large-scale detention campaign against the stranded workers, nearly doubling the Palestinian prison population overnight.

Ahmad stayed in the car shop with his colleague Waseem, also from Gaza, for nearly two weeks after the Israeli authorities suspended work permits. This meant that the presence of Ahmad and all Gazan workers in Israel became illegal.

“I felt like I was someone sitting on hot coals,” Ahmad said. “I was terrified for my family and loved ones in the Gaza Strip, [because] I know the brutality of the Israeli onslaught on the Gaza Strip. I have lived through five Israeli invasions, and this is now the sixth.”

Two weeks into Ahmad’s time spent staying in the car shop, Israeli authorities raided the garage and arrested Ahmad and his colleague.

“Upon arrest, the occupation forces assaulted me by beating and abusing me,” he told Mondoweiss. “Waseem disappeared from that moment, and I have not recieved any news of him since.”

Ahmad was taken to Ashdod Police station and interrogated.

“We were 11 people in a cell no larger than 4 square meters,” he said. “The police interrogated us for long hours, asking me about so many people. But I don’t know anyone but my relatives and some friends, as I spend most of my time at work.”

They asked him where he lives in Gaza, and after he answered them, they pulled up a computer screen and showed him a picture of his house to indicate that they already know exactly where he lived.

“He then asked me about Hamas and other Palestinian factions,” Ahmad said. “He tried to pressure me, but I honestly have nothing to do with them, so I could not answer. I know nothing.”

During the investigation, the Israeli authorities took saliva samples, fingerprints, and mug shots. “I told the policeman investigating me that I am an old man, and am about to turn 60,” Ahmad said. “And I have never entered a police station in my entire life.”

“After that, they blindfolded us, and the occupation forces put chains on our feet and beat us. They then took us to an unknown area.”


“I felt like I would die of hunger and fatigue.”Ahmad

Some workers believed that they were in Ofer Prison outside Ramallah since they could hear the call to prayer in the distance. Some of the workers used to visit Ramallah and could recognize its buildings, and they said that the buildings they saw from afar looked like Ramallah buildings.

“We didn’t eat for two days,” Ahmad said. “I felt like I would die of hunger and fatigue.”

They then transferred the detained Gaza workers to a training site for the Israeli army, which lacked even the bare minimum requirements for humane conditions.

“The occupation forces put us in wards,” Ahmad recounted. “We were approximately 250 people packed in an area not exceeding half a dunam [about 500 square meters].”

“We slept on the ground on pebbles,” he continued. “We only had a small piece of bread and some jam for breakfast. They weren’t giving enough food to anyone.”

Ahmad asserts that the condition of the bathrooms was miserable, and they were left exposed to the elements. “It was very cold. We were in an almost empty area, and the rain fell on our heads,” he said. “We did not sleep at night, as Israeli intelligence was summoning us all the time, either to transfer us to another ward without the slightest reason or to interrogate us.”

Ahmad waited for his turn to be interrogated from ten in the evening until two in the morning, sitting on the gravel with his eyes closed. After investigating Ahmad, the Israeli intelligence accused him of being a liar and told him that it had not issued him a permit to work in Israel again.

“After being violently investigated and searched, the occupation forces told me: Run, run!” Ahmad recounted. “And I ran for approximately 300 meters, and they returned me to a ward other than the one I was in just to distract me and disorient me by putting me in a new war with strangers.”


“An old man told me that his back was stained with blood.”Ahmad

According to Ahmad, many of the workers were subjected to interrogation by the Shin Bet and Israeli intelligence several times, and some of them set upon by police dogs.

“An old man, a Gaza worker in Israel, told me that his back was stained with blood,” Ahmad said. “And that the Israeli occupation forces stripped him completely, put him in a transparent nylon bag, put him on the ground, turned on air conditioners on him, and beat him severely until he almost died.”

“It’s been said that three people were killed by such torture because they could not bear it.” Ahmad said. “Their bodies are being tortured.”

Return to Gaza after tortue

On November 3, at approximately 11 p.m., the Israeli occupation put Israeli workers on a bus, blindfolded them, handcuffed them, and tied their legs to chains. They did not tell them where they would be transported. They did not know whether they would be going back to their homes in Gaza or the West Bank.

“I stayed on the bus from approximately 11 p.m. until 11 a.m. on the second day. The person whose feet were tied to my feet was diabetic and kept vomiting the whole way. We begged the Israeli soldier to untie his feet and hands, but she refused. This is the true face of the occupation. They do not have the slightest bit of humanity.”

The workers arrived at the Kerem Shalom crossing and walked a distance of one and a half kilometers to reach the nearest car that would take them home.

Ahmad mentions that the occupation forces confiscated his identity, permit, and 11,000 shekels and told him that he would find them in Gaza, but he arrived in Gaza and did not find any of them!

Ahmad says that Israel claims humanity and conveys it to the world through pictures that falsify the truth. “Only once did they offer us tea while we were out in the open, and they photographed us when they did!” Ahmad said bitterly. “When we arrived in the Gaza Strip, they distributed water to us and took pictures of us, but we refused to drink the water that was offered to us.”

“When I arrived at the neighborhood where I live, I could not easily enter my house to fetch money to pay the driver who gave me a ride. The occupation confiscated all my money. I found that many of the houses adjacent to my house had been bombed, and rubble was filling the streets,” he added.

OPINION

Israel wants to pull the U.S. into a regional confrontation, but Biden remains reluctant

Israel has larger war aims than Hamas, and is deliberately provoking a regional war to draw the U.S. into the fray. Biden has made halfhearted efforts to cool the situation, but he needs to be bolder in reining Israel in before it's too late.

BY MITCHELL PLITNICK 

MONDOWEISS

NOVEMBER 24, 2023 

U.S. PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN (SECOND LEFT) AND ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (RIGHT) WITH US SECRETARY OF STATE ANTONY BLINKEN (LEFT) DURING A JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE IN TEL AVIV, OCTOBER 18, 2023.

 (PHOTO: © MIRIAM ALSTER/EFE VIA ZUMA PRESS/APA IMAGES)


Earlier this week, U.S. President Joe Biden dispatched one of his top security advisers, the Israeli-American Amos Hochstein, to Israel. According to a U.S. official, the purpose of the trip was to “emphasize that restoring calm along Israel’s northern border is of utmost importance to the United States and it should be a top priority for both Israel and Lebanon.”

The wording there is important. The Biden administration clearly does not believe that Israel considers “restoring calm” along its northern border a “top priority.” The mention of Lebanon is pro forma; the U.S. can’t point the finger only at Israel, lest there be a political backlash. Hezbollah’s intentions are clear: they are standing with the Palestinians and, in tit-for-tat fashion with Israel, slowly pushing the envelope, seeing how far they can go before Israel really unleashes on them. Southern Lebanon can’t afford an all-out Israeli assault, given the dire circumstances in that country. They may get one anyway.

Biden has reason to worry. Despite public denials that are increasingly absurd, Israel is obviously doing a lot more than trying to strike Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Not only have they declared a war aim that simply isn’t achievable — totally eliminating Hamas — Israel has also gone out of its way to target civilian sites. Even if the President remains willfully blind, it cannot have escaped most of Biden’s staff that Israel has larger war aims than Hamas.

As clear as that may be, the boundaries of those aims are less obvious. Some in the Biden administration are concerned that Israel is deliberately trying to provoke a wider war to draw the United States into the fray. From the outside, it appears that while some in Israel would very much like to do just that, others are merely counting on the U.S. presence to deter Iran’s direct involvement if Israel and Hezbollah do engage in an escalated fight. Still, others seem to be wholly focused on the Palestinians and would prefer to avoid any confrontation with Hezbollah. For now, that is the view that holds in Israel, but clearly, the Biden administration is uneasy about how long that will last.

The last chance for the far right

One key aspect that bears more thorough examination is the fact that this Israeli government’s life is almost certainly no longer than the current fighting, and possibly even shorter. Many have observed that Benjamin Netanyahu, who is facing calls to resign as prime minister and seems to have finally reached the end of his ability to survive politically, wants to prolong the war so that he can prolong his time in office, and perhaps even find a way out of his current, apparently hopeless, political position. But these concerns are not limited to Netanyahu.

The far right, represented by Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, also faces an uncertain future. Hamas’s criminal attack on October 7 gave them the opportunity to significantly escalate an ethnic cleansing program in both Gaza and the West Bank, and they have taken advantage of it. Though they need to proceed carefully on the West Bank, the massive escalation of completely unprovoked Israeli violence there, including both settler and military attacks, is a clear sign of their agenda at work. It’s hardly confined to Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, of course. They are simply more blunt and less cautious about it.

Yet many Israelis place some of the blame for their losses on the far right, its adherence to ideology over strategy, and its inexperience at governance. As a result, it seems more likely than not that the next government will not include them, although depending on how elections and coalition talks go, necessity may give them another opportunity.

In any case, both the extreme right and the more mainstream right in the current Israeli government recognize that they have a unique opportunity right now to change the entire playing field in Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon. For Netanyahu, too, such a project means a longer conflict as he works hard to buy himself more time.

This is a key reason that Israel delayed the hostage exchange deal for so long, risking the wrath of the families with whose loved ones’ lives the Netanyahu government was playing so callously. But we’ve all seen the result of Israel’s assault: the condensation of what’s left of the Gazan population into the south, the escalating attacks and emptying of Palestinian villages in the West Bank, and the gradual introduction into the discourse of the idea of spiriting the surviving Palestinians away to other countries.
Escalation with Hezbollah

The real danger of escalation is with Hezbollah at the Lebanese border with Israel. While neither side seems to want an escalation, there are certainly forces within the Netanyahu government that do, and that is what worries the Biden administration.

Israel and Hezbollah have been launching small escalatory attacks for weeks, inching just a bit closer to a potentially explosive confrontation. Hezbollah wants to show its support for the Palestinians, but the simple fact is that if it brings the kind of destruction to Lebanon that Israel can unleash, given the already terrible strife in the politically and economically crippled country, it risks losing most of its support in Lebanon.

Many in the Israeli leadership are not eager to open a second front either. Its forces are already divided between defending the north and destroying Gaza. Diverting even more of its resources to the Lebanese border opens up a number of grim possibilities, particularly if the West Bank should erupt in violence, as the settlers so desperately desire.

But others may want to seize the opportunity to smash Hezbollah. They may believe that the presence of the American warships in the eastern Mediterranean Sea will continue to deter Iran from directly confronting Israel, that Israel could effectively block at least a good deal of Iran’s attempts to resupply their Lebanese ally, and Hezbollah could thus be decimated by Israel alone.

More likely, though, the calculus involves drawing the U.S. into the fighting. While Iran would probably want to avoid direct involvement, an all-out battle between Israel and Hezbollah would almost certainly draw in Iran’s allies in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. That could well be enough to escalate U.S. involvement. From that point, Iran might be forced into more direct participation, and almost any grim, even apocalyptic scenario, is possible.

Wiser minds in Israel might realize that drawing the U.S. into direct conflict at the cost of American lives risks throwing U.S. lockstep support of Israel into even greater question. The Gaza campaign has already brought unprecedented protests of Israel out into the streets. The fact that they are being led by young people — Jews and Muslims, together and in their own demonstrations — and are backed by expert opinions calling Israeli actions war crimes and even close to actual genocide has brought the limits of American and European support for Israel into view. That’s prompted harsh crackdowns on any support of Palestinians, an escalation of the fear for careers and opportunities that have long been a part of Palestine solidarity activism.

But that uptick in the crackdown is indicative of the challenge to the entrenched power of pro-Israel supporters. It is an unsubtle tactic, one that is certain to provoke a backlash in the long term. The backlash will also be magnified hundreds of times over if American soldiers’ lives are lost to the support for Israeli war crimes, and would bridge the progressive anti-war forces with the Realist foreign policy minds and mainstream Americans who have made it clear that they are tired of seeing American blood spilled in the Middle East.

Israeli divisions

The more fanatical forces in the Israeli government, however, as well as some of the more cynical, are trying to grasp this rare opportunity. It is not often that an American president is foolhardy enough to put the United States in a position to so easily be drawn into a war it does not want. Joe Biden gambled that putting U.S. forces in harm’s way would deter Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and other Iranian-allied militias from attacking Israel. Biden was certain that none of these actors would dare interfere while the U.S. is so visibly and forcefully present.

That has proven to be correct so far, but Biden failed to take into account the temptation he was putting before Israel. With his typical hubristic lack of foresight, Biden put the United States into a position where a slight misstep or an unexpected attack on Israel (or even American forces) could force a response from the U.S. That risk is multiplied now that Israel is in a position to take steps to draw the U.S. into a war much more easily than if the American military had to mobilize and send forces over into the region.

That’s the scenario that Biden was clearly worried about when he sent Hochstein, an IDF veteran and a man who is widely respected in the Israeli establishment, to communicate with Lebanon and Israel. He could not, of course, talk directly to Hezbollah, but the Lebanese government could convey to Hezbollah’s leadership the threats that were surely Hochstein’s message to them. They’re not meant to have much effect on Hezbollah, and they don’t need to. The incremental escalations we’ve seen despite the atrocities in Gaza are a clear sign that Hezbollah is trying to avoid all-out war. Hochstein just had to make a show of talking to both sides.

At this moment, Israel is also still trying to avoid escalation, but some of its recent attacks have pushed the tension needle upward — as has Hezbollah’s. Netanyahu dreads a quick end to the war that will bring forward his day of reckoning in front of the Israeli public. He is certainly not above drawing the United States into a war, regardless of the long-term effects on the U.S.-Israel relationship as well as on Israel itself, which is likely to suffer both major damage and significant global blowback in the event it is seen as willfully widening this war.

For Biden’s part, he has already had to relent to pressure, both globally and domestically, and back a brief pause in the slaughter in Gaza. He and his spokespeople have veered gradually more toward admitting that Israel has caused “too many” civilian casualties in its operations. As little as that sounds like it, it is a significant step forward from the Biden administration’s rhetoric in the first few weeks of Israel’s onslaught, and it is all due to the pressure that the White House is feeling from activists, from other countries, and even from government employees.

Implicit in that shift is the unspoken reality that Israel is after much more than Hamas. This realization is what accounts for the Biden administration’s repeated statements of opposition to relocating any of Gaza’s population. Biden has created an expectation that he will, at least, not help Israel in forcing Gazans elsewhere, although this is far from guaranteed.

What pressure this has not resulted in yet is real and material steps to stop Israel from pursuing its more dangerous goals — both regarding the forced relocation of Palestinians and an escalation in Lebanon. That’s certainly a position Joe Biden does not want to find himself in. Any action he would take to deter Israel in that circumstance would certainly result in backlash from the pro-Israel forces, for whom he has already sacrificed some Muslim, Arab, and progressive support for him.

Biden has put himself in this position, and now he has to depend on Netanyahu to acquiesce to his requests, especially on escalation. Recent events are not promising. The escalation may be gradual, but it is proceeding. And, while right now Netanyahu does not seem to be inclined to take steps to provoke U.S. involvement, that could change if Hezbollah manages too big a strike. Biden is right to try to cool the situation, but he needs to be bolder and let Netanyahu know that the United States will not go beyond its deterrent role. The chances that Biden is ready to take such a firm stance seem questionable based on his behavior to date.

Mitchell Plitnick

Mitchell Plitnick is the president of ReThinking Foreign Policy. He is the co-author, with Marc Lamont Hill, of Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics. Mitchell's previous positions include vice president at the Foundation for Middle East Peace, Director of the US Office of B'Tselem, and Co-Director of Jewish Voice for Peace.

You can find him on Twitter @MJPlitnick.

Marion McKeone: Bumper year for unions gives US workers plenty to be thankful for

Despite the country’s ongoing culture wars making Thanksgiving awkward for many, union members and families had quite a lot to celebrate

MARION MCKEONE

Striking United Auto Workers in Ontario earlier this year. Picture: Getty Images


Over the past four days, some 56 million Americans took to the roads, train stations and airports to be with friends and family for the annual Thanksgiving holiday. Tradition dictates that they celebrate what they’re grateful for, as opposed to moaning about what they haven’t got.

Right now, it seems as though the entire United States is in a prolonged funk – not especially inclined towards feeling or expressing gratitude for anything much at all.

Much of this ennui has to do with the cultural wars that have festered and escalated in recent years to the point where navigating a family gathering can feel like a sprint through alien territory strewn with landmines.

Conversational booby traps lie in wait, ready to detonate at the mere mention of Trump or the 2024 election.

A just published USA Today/Blueprint survey reveals 45 per cent of those surveyed feigned illness while 40 per cent went on holidays to avoid spending Thanksgiving and/or Christmas with family.

Anecdotally, the number of friends who eschew family Thanksgiving gatherings for ‘Friendsgiving’ celebrations, where they gather with like-minded friends rather going ten rounds with Uncle Bill over transgender rights or Trump’s innocence of all charges, seems to increase every year.

But it’s not all gloom and trepidation. America’s union leaders and members had plenty to celebrate this Thanksgiving weekend, having enjoyed a banner year in 2023.

Almost a million union members and their families are considerably better off than they were last year. They secured double-digit pay increases and a slew of concessions related to working conditions as a result of threatened or actual strikes.

For the 370,000 UPS drivers, 160,000 actors, 11,500 writers, 77,000 pilots, 75,000 healthcare workers,150,000 auto workers and 35,000 Las Vegas hotel workers, as well as 32,000 Disney workers and 35,000 California schoolteachers, there’s plenty to be grateful for this Thanksgiving.

Everything they sought

Last weekend, two-thirds of the UAW (Union of Auto Workers) members employed by the ‘Big Three’ US auto manufacturers voted in favour of accepting a settlement that didn’t give them everything they sought but came pretty darned close: a 150 per cent increase in pay for temporary workers with a permanent contract after three years instead of eight.

For permanent workers there are more generous retirement provisions, a 25 per cent base rate increase and cost of living adjustments that guarantee a top rate of $42 an hour.

Earlier in the year, the pilots’ union secured a 40 per cent pay increase, while the Teamsters victory means UPS drivers can now make up to $172,000 a year – and have air conditioning in their vans, no small concession when much of America now experiences sustained periods of intense heat during the summer months.

Part-time UPS workers also shared the spoils: their wages increased by $21 an hour – a hike of around 40 per cent.

America’s 11,500 writers for screen and TV will divvy up an additional $233 million a year between them as well as securing hikes in residuals and minimum staffing guarantees, while actors can celebrate a $1 billion dollar deal with the studios that translates into a 15.3 per cent pay hike for jobbing actors, significant concessions on residuals and AI protections.

Health workers secured double-digit pay increases and more importantly, guarantees that vacant positions would be filled. And on Tuesday, Las Vegas hotel workers, among the lowest paid in the hospitality sector, voted to ratify an a 32 per cent pay hike over five years – including an immediate 10 per cent increase.

This string of successes was achieved against a backdrop of historically low unemployment rates, an estimated 10 million job openings, and the most pro-union US President since Franklin D Roosevelt.

Convergence of elements

It’s arguable that but for the convergence of these three elements, America’s unions wouldn’t be celebrating their most significant winning streak in 70 years.

The most recent Bureau of Labour Statistics data, which was compiled and released ahead of major concessions won by unions over the past six months, suggests that being in a union is good for your wallet.

In 2022, non-union workers’ median weekly earnings were $1,029, compared with $1,216 for union workers. And that was before the multi-billion dollar gains secured by 2023’s summer of strikes.

Still, just over 10 per cent of American workers belong to unions compared with 20 per cent in 1983 and close to 40 per cent in the 1950s and 1960s.

Union membership is heavily skewed towards federal workers rather than private sector employees. Thirty-three per cent of federal employees belong to a union compared with just 6 per cent of private workers.

Will the gains of the past year encourage some of the 94 per cent of non-union private sector workers to sign up to their local Teamsters or Unite chapter? It’s certainly what union bosses are hoping.

Shortly after the UAW ratified the agreement on Monday, non-US car manufacturers with assembly plants in Georgia and Alabama announced big pay increases for their workers.

Hyundai, Nissan and Toyota, long determined to prevent their US workers from unionising, have added a carrot to the anti-union stick, announcing they intend to increase wages for their workers by between 9 and 25 per cent.

"We call that the UAW bump, and that stands for 'U Are Welcome,' UAW boss Shawn Fain quipped in response.

The decision to voluntarily increase pay in non-union plants is widely seen as a pre-emptive strike against planned union expansion by Fain, who has notched up the UAW’s biggest victory in decades during his first eight months in the job and has signalled his determination to expand the UAW’s membership to non-US manufacturing plants in the southern states. Fain also has Tesla in his crosshairs; Elon Musk is an avatar of union resistance.

If the UAW victory is a rising tide that has lifted the non-union auto workers’ ships, President Joe Biden must be hoping that it will have a similar effect on his dismal poll ratings.

A champion of union and worker rights throughout his political career, he was the first US President to join a picket line, when he stood alongside UAW workers in September.

Double-digit increases for a million workers in a period of six months goes a long way towards fulfilling his pledge of building America from the “bottom up and the middle out”. It’s a manifestation of Bidenomics at a visceral level.

The UAW has more than a million active and retired members in the US and some 380,000 of its members live in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

It was this trifecta of states that handed Trump his victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016. Biden won all three in 2020 and they’re essential to his bid for a second term. If they repay his support in kind, Biden may have a lot more to be grateful for next Thanksgiving.

 

Effective management of disagreements reduces risk of conflict, confrontation in China-U.S. relations

By Zhong Sheng (People's Daily) 13:20, November 24, 2023

China and the United States are different in history, culture, social system and development path. They have encountered, are currently encountering, and will continue to encounter differences and disagreements. How to view these differences and responsibly manage the disagreements tests the wisdom of both countries.

During the summit meeting with U.S. President Joe Biden in San Francisco, Chinese President Xi Jinping pointed out that China and the U.S. should manage disagreements effectively, and put forward it as one of the five pillars for China-U.S. relations.

Disagreements should not be a chasm that keeps the two countries apart. Instead, the two sides should look for ways to build bridges to help them walk toward each other, Xi said.

It is important that they appreciate each other's principles and red lines, and refrain from flip-flopping, being provocative, and crossing the lines. They should have more communications, more dialogues and more consultations, and calmly handle their differences as well as accidents, said Xi.

Xi's remarks provide crucial guidance for China and the U.S. to efficiently manage disagreements.

Difference and disagreement in itself is no cause for alarm; the key is to have the vision and layout to seek common ground and resolve differences.

For 22 years, there were estrangement and antagonism between China and the U.S. Converging interests enabled the two countries to rise above differences and make the handshake across the Pacific Ocean.

The Shanghai Communique released in 1972 ended the long-standing isolation between China and the U.S. and launched the process of normalizing the China-U.S. relations. It showed that the two major countries with different social systems were willing to coexist peacefully.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once praised the Shanghai Communique as a new example of diplomatic document that respects the different views of both countries, and this preservation of divergent opinions adds greater significance to the document.

Over 50 years ago, both sides were able to correctly view their differences and responsibly manage their disagreements. Today, it is imperative to show similar wisdom and courage.

Difference and disagreement in itself is no cause for alarm; the key is not to let them overshadow the relationship between China and the U.S.

Although the two countries are different in history, culture and social system and have embarked on different development paths, they have made many achievements－$760 billion of annual bilateral trade and over $260 billion of two-way investment, 284 pairs of sister provinces/states and sister cities, and over 300 scheduled flights every week and over five million travels every year at peak time.

Despite the differences, the two peoples are both kind, friendly, hardworking and down-to-earth. They both love their countries, their families and their lives, and they both are friendly toward each other and are interested in each other.

It is the convergence of many streams of goodwill and friendship that has created a strong current surging across the vast Pacific Ocean, it is the reaching out to each other by the peoples that has time and again brought China-U.S. relations from a low ebb back onto the right track. History has repeatedly proved that China and the U.S. are capable of rising above differences and managing disagreements.

In recent years, some people in the U.S. have been viewing China through a biased lens, magnifying the differences and disagreements between China and the U.S., and defining their relationship solely in terms of competition. Such practices are irresponsible to history, to the people, and to the world.

China remains undeterred by any containment or suppression, and is resolute in defending its legitimate interests, upholding its principles, and safeguarding its bottom line.

China consistently engages in planning for the China-U.S. relationship with a focus on the future of humanity and Planet Earth. The country is firmly committed to managing differences and addressing sensitive issues in a constructive manner, striving to foster a stable, healthy and sustainable relationship with the U.S.

Mutual respect and equal treatment provide an important foundation for China and the U.S. to effectively manage disagreements. In an atmosphere of mutual respect, the two heads of state had a candid and in-depth exchange of views on strategic and overarching issues critical to the direction of China-U.S. relations and on major issues affecting world peace and development in San Francisco.

Xi elaborated on the essential features of Chinese modernization and its significance, China's development prospects, and its strategic intention. He also elaborated on China's principled position on the Taiwan question, and made clear China's position on issues related to economy, trade, and technology.

The summit meeting in San Francisco reached more than 20 deliverables in such areas as political affairs and foreign policy, people-to-people exchange, global governance, and military and security. These achievements demonstrate the significance of Xi's proposal for "more communications, more dialogues and more consultations" between China and the U.S.

Observing the basic norms of international relations and the three China-U.S. joint communiques is vital for managing differences and preventing conflict. It serves as the most important guardrail and safety net for China-U.S. relations. Seventy-eight years ago, China and the U.S. initiated together with others the San Francisco Conference, which helped found the United Nations. Starting from San Francisco, the postwar international order was established.

During the San Francisco meeting, the two presidents endorsed the efforts of their respective diplomatic teams to discuss principles related to China-U.S. relations since the Bali meeting and the common understandings arising from those discussions. They stressed the importance of all countries treating each other with respect and finding a way to live alongside each other peacefully, and of maintaining open lines of communication, preventing conflict, upholding the United Nations Charter, cooperating in areas of shared interest, and responsibly managing competitive aspects of the relationship. These seven points of common understanding are very important in that they provide a solid foundation for deeper discussions going forward.

The San Francisco meeting between the two presidents showcased the willingness of the two countries to manage differences in a constructive way. It is crucial for stabilizing the China-U.S. relationship.

Moving forward, both countries should uphold mutual respect, seek common ground while resolving differences, and remain unperturbed by individual incidents or particular comments, thus jointly ensuring that the giant ship of China-U.S. relations stays on the right course.

(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People's Daily to express its views on foreign policy and international affairs.)

(Web editor: Chang Sha, Liang Jun)