Monday, December 04, 2023

UPDATED

RED TORY
Starmer heaps praise on Thatcher as he woos Conservative voters

Edward Malnick
Sat, 2 December 2023 

Sir Keir Starmer used his article to pitch himself as the heir to Thatcher, Clement Attlee and Sir Tony Blair - Andrew Matthews/PA

Sir Keir Starmer heaped praise on Margaret Thatcher for effecting “meaningful change” in Britain as he launched an explicit appeal to Conservative voters to switch to Labour.

In his most audacious bid yet to woo centre-Right support, reminiscent of the New Labour years, the Labour leader accused the Tories of a “betrayal” of their promises to control migration.

In a shift from his staunch opposition to Britain’s departure from the EU before becoming leader, Sir Keir added that the Conservatives have “failed to realise the possibilities of Brexit”.

Writing for The Telegraph, he praised Thatcher for “setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism” and warned that public was again fed up with politicians “hectoring”.

His intervention is likely to fuel Tory MPs’ concerns about disillusionment among many 2019 Conservative voters with the Government’s approach to key areas such as immigration, inflation and crime.

It comes as Rishi Sunak prepares to decide how radical an approach to take with a new law to secure deportation flights to Rwanda before the next election.

A plan – a radical version of which would allow ministers to ignore the European Convention on Human Rights with regard to asylum – could be finalised within 24 hours and put to the Cabinet as soon as Tuesday.

In a separate Telegraph article, Sir Bill Cash, a veteran Conservative Brexiteer, warned that voters “will not excuse failure on the illegal migration issue in yet another Bill”.

On Saturday, Labour said it expected that a surge in illegal Channel crossings this weekend would make 2023 the second highest year for crossings on record despite Mr Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats”.

A second senior Tory warned that Mr Sunak faced the genuine prospect of a leadership challenge from the Right of the party if he was seen to deliver weak legislation unlikely to fix the problem after the Supreme Court ruled the Rwanda deportation policy unlawful.

Sir Keir used his article to pitch himself as the heir to Thatcher, Clement Attlee and Sir Tony Blair, saying they all realised “that politics must act in service of the British people rather than dictating to them”.

It comes almost four years on from the Tories’ 2019 landslide, as Labour ramps up its preparations for an election campaign. In an email to supporters last week, the party said: “All signals are pointing to polling day in May. The Tories are about to pull a series of stunts to try to make people forget about their failures and save their plummeting poll numbers.”

Sir Keir said he had administered “shock therapy” to Labour over the last three years after taking over from Jeremy Corbyn. Appealing directly to Conservative voters, he added: “Across Britain, there are people who feel disillusioned, frustrated, angry, worried. Many of them have always voted Conservative but feel that their party has left them.

“I understand that. I saw that with my own party and acted to fix it. But I also understand that many will still be uncertain about Labour. I ask them to take a look at us again.”


Sir Keir said the public “sees a politics too large in its hectoring and interfering, too small in its ambition and ability” and adds: “Every moment of meaningful change in modern British politics begins with the realisation that politics must act in service of the British people rather than dictating to them.

“Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism. Tony Blair reimagined a stale, outdated Labour Party into one that could seize the optimism of the late 90s.

“A century ago, Clement Attlee wrote that Labour must be a party of duty and patriotism, not abstract theory. To build a ‘New Jerusalem’ meant first casting off the mind-forged manacles. That lesson is as true today as it was then.”

Sir Keir said it was “in this sense of public service” that he had overseen dramatic change in the Labour Party. “The course of shock therapy we gave our party had one purpose: to ensure that we were once again rooted in the priorities, the concerns and the dreams of ordinary British people. To put country before party,” he added.

The Labour leader claimed his party was “moving back towards voters” while “the Tory party has been steadily drifting away”.


“Years of sowing empty promises, cynical falsehoods and false dawns is now reaping inevitable consequence,” he wrote. “The Tories have talked the talk on fiscal prudence while wasting untold billions, weighing the country down with debt and raising the tax burden to a record high.

“They have squandered economic opportunities and failed to realise the possibilities of Brexit. They will bequeath public finances more akin to a minefield than a solid foundation.”

The Labour leader said his party’s “iron-clad fiscal rules will set this straight – but it will not be quick or easy”, adding: “There will be many on my own side who will feel frustrated by the difficult choices we will have to make.

“This is non-negotiable: every penny must be accounted for. The public finances must be fixed so we can get Britain growing and make people feel better off.”

On migration, Sir Keir said: “This is a government that was elected on a promise that immigration would ‘come down’ and the British people would ‘always be in control’. For immigration to then triple is more than just yet another failure – it is a betrayal of their promises.”

Sir Keir’s praise for Thatcher is likely to rile the Left of his party, which reacted with fury when he said in March that the former Conservative prime minister was “right” to describe the rule of law as the first duty of government.


In 2013, Sir Tony Blair described Thatcher as “a towering political figure”, adding: “I always thought my job was to build on some of the things she had done rather than reverse them. Many of the things she said, even though they pained people like me on the Left... had a certain creditability.”

Keir Starmer more receptive to my ideas than Sunak’s party, says Tory donor

Patrick Daly
Sat, 2 December 2023 at 3:39 am GMT-7·3-min read

A major Tory donor has said Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer is “more receptive” to his proposals than Rishi Sunak.

John Caudwell, founder of the now defunct mobile phone retailer Phones4U, donated £500,000 to the Conservative Party before the 2019 election when Boris Johnson was at its helm.

But the billionaire has been disillusioned with the party in recent months, slamming the prime minister’s move this autumn to water down net zero comments.

And on Friday the businessman heaped praise on Sir Keir, refusing to rule out providing money towards Labour’s war chest ahead of a likely general election next year.

I’ve met with Keir Starmer and he is more receptive to my ideas than the Tory party
Businessman John Caudwell

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions? programme, Mr Caudwell said: “I’ve put so many policies to the Conservative Party to make Britain great again, to put the great back into Great Britain, drive the GDP, drive the wealth for people again.

“I’ve met with Keir Starmer and he is more receptive to my ideas than the Tory Party.

“Will that mean I donate? I can’t answer that.

“But what I can tell you is that any party that makes Britain great by having the right policies… any party that does what I think will make Britain great again … I’ll donate to.”

Mr Caudwell told The Sunday Times in September that he would no longer financially back the Tories if Mr Sunak kept with his changed stance on environmental policies.

“If Rishi sticks to this, would I donate to the Conservative Party? Absolutely not. No chance whatsoever with the decisions they are making at the moment,” he said.

“Would I switch to Labour? The answer to that is very simple: I will support any party that I believe will do the right thing for Britain going forward.”

Labour leader Sir Keir is on course to be the next prime minister, according to current polling.

His party have been consistently ahead in opinion polls, with some surveys putting them as much as 20 points ahead of the Tories, who have been in power since 2010.

Mr Caudwell’s praise for Sir Keir follows a string of high-profile figures from the business world coming out in favour of Labour.

In a major intervention this month, revealed by The Independent, the advertising giant that helped Margaret Thatcher win power attacked the “cruelty” of the Conservatives and predicted a Labour victory at the general election.

The strategy chief at Saatchi & Saatchi – the agency behind the iconic “Labour isn’t working” ads prior to the 1979 landslide – said Britain needs saving from “five more years of stagnation, cruelty and despair”.

That came just weeks after the former governor of the Bank of England endorsed the Labour Party in a major coup for Sir Keir Starmer and his shadow chancellor. Mark Carney said it was “beyond time” for Ms Reeves to run the economy in a Labour government.

Frozen food chain Iceland’s executive chair, Richard Walker, has also withdrawn his support and said he was “open” to supporting Sir Keir. Meanwhile another Tory donor, Philip Harris, founder of Carpetright, said the Conservative Party did not “deserve” to win the 2024 general elect

‘End Thatcherism for good’ – Corbyn rips in to Starmer for praising Thatcher

The difference between the two most recent Labour leaders couldn't be much greater - as these comments prove.

 by Tom Head
2023-12-03 
in Politics


Jeremy Corbyn has issued a personal response to Keir Starmer’s praise for Margaret Thatcher on Sunday, just hours after his Peace and Justice Project slammed the Labour leader for his controversial stance.

What did Keir Starmer say about Margaret Thatcher?

The piece, published on Sunday, paid tribute to the former Prime Minister for ‘dragging Britain out of its stupor’. Thatcher still remains a bitterly detested figure amongst many Labour supporters, and her legacy is one of the most divisive in UK politics.

Alas, Starmer has thrown caution to the wind, imploring disillusioned Tories to ‘take another look at Labour’. His attempt to court these potential floating voters is likely to leave a sour taste among long-term Labour backers.

“Across Britain, there are people who feel disillusioned, frustrated, angry, worried. I also understand that many will still be uncertain about Labour. I ask them to take a look at us again.”

“Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism… effecting meaningful change.”

“The course of shock therapy we gave our party had one purpose: to ensure that we were once again rooted in the priorities, the concerns and the dreams of ordinary British people. To put country before party.” | Keir Starmer

Sir Keir faces wrath of Corbyn

Posting on Twitter/X, Corbyn lashed at out at the ‘legacy of Thatcherism’, blaming her tumultuous time as Prime Minister for making life harder for vulnerable citizens decades after she left office. He also took a swipe at Starmer for saying that Thatcher ‘effected meaningful change’.

“Every week, I speak to renters threatened with eviction. Homeless people struggling to survive. Parents using foodbanks. Elderly people who can’t afford heating. That is the legacy of Thatcherism. We will never achieve meaningful change until it ends for good.” | Jeremy Corbyn

Richard Murphy, a political campaigner and Professor of Accounting Practice at the University of Sheffield, also took offence to Starmer’s position. He vehemently contests the notion that the ‘Iron Lady’ was responsible for releasing entrepreneurialism across the country

“Margaret Thatcher did not release entrepreneurialism in the UK. She released monopolistic exploitation. As someone who knows the true meaning of being an entrepreneur, I can tell you that neither is in any way similar to entrepreneurialism.”| Professor Richard Murphy


Starmer's ‘embarrassing’ Thatcher love-in slammed


Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer

MORNINGSTAR
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2023

LABOUR leader Sir Keir Starmer has been condemned for his praise of Margaret Thatcher.

In an article for the Sunday Telegraph — regarded as a barometer of Tory opinion — Sir Keir named Labour predecessors Clement Attlee and Tony Blair alongside the former Tory prime minister as people who had delivered “meaningful change” in Britain.

Already under fire for his refusal to back a ceasefire in Gaza, the Labour leader went on to eulogise Ms Thatcher for her work to “drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism.”

His comments, aimed at reaching out to Tory-voting readers, have infuriated grassroots Labour party members and trade unionists alike, while the SNP went on the attack.

Writing on Twitter, Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf said: “What Thatcher did to mining and industrial communities was not ‘entrepreneurialism,’ it was vandalism.”

SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn challenged Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar to disown Sir Keir’s remarks.

He said: “The question is now whether Labour in Scotland will stand by these despicable comments and stand shoulder to shoulder with Starmer just as they did on Gaza — or will they finally speak up for Scotland."

UCU union general secretary Jo Grady also took to Twitter to say: “Thatcher brought meaningful change?

“Destroying whole communities, privatising our major assets, creating a culture of individualism, blacklisting workers, targeting trade unionists, vilifying football supporters, starting the wealth divide. Embarrassing from Starmer.”

Momentum branded Sir Keir’s remarks “a shift to the right and a failure of Labour values.”

The grassroots group tweeted: “Margaret Thatcher laid waste to working-class communities, privatised our public service, and set in train the destruction of the post-war settlement founded by Labour.

“Starmer’s praise of her isn’t smart politics.”

Former Scottish Labour MSP and leadership contender Neil Findlay was damning of Sir Keir’s return to the Blairite strategy of tacking right and assuming the left had nowhere to go.

He told the Star: “Keir Starmer has just given working-class voters another reason to stay at home instead of voting Labour on polling day.

“In areas like mine, Thatcher’s legacy was 26 per cent unemployment, mass redundancy, industrial closures and a feeling that there was no future for my generation.

“For him to eulogise someone who inflicted so much pain on our communities sickens me to the pit of my stomach. He is an impostor and a fraud.”


Fury at 'embarrassing' Keir Starmer for praising Margaret Thatcher to woo Tory voters


As Rishi Sunak’s party continues to languish in the polls, Keir Starmer appealed to disaffected Conservatives, saying Labour would “extend the hand of friendship to you, no matter where you are or who you have voted for in the past”.
Deputy Political Editor
THE MIRROR
3 Dec 2023

Keir Starmer was hit by a furious backlash tonight after he lavished praise on Margaret Thatcher to woo Conservative voters.

In comments that enraged parts of his party, the Labour leader hailed the divisive Tory PM for bringing about “meaningful change” and “setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism”.

Writing in The Sunday Telegraph, he said: “Every moment of meaningful change in modern British politics begins with the realisation that politics must act in service of the British people, rather than dictating to them. Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism.”

He also pointed to past Labour PMs Sir Tony Blair and Clement Atlee for understanding that politicians “must act in service of the British people, rather than dictating to them”.

As Rishi Sunak’s party continues to languish in the polls, Mr Starmer appealed to disaffected Conservatives, saying Labour would “extend the hand of friendship to you, no matter where you are or who you have voted for in the past”.


Keir Starmer hailed the divisive Tory PM for bringing about “meaningful change” 
(Image: PA)

The Labour leader sought to park his tanks on Mr Sunak’s lawn by criticising the Conservatives’ handling of Brexit and its “betrayal” of its manifesto promise to curb immigration. He later told the BBC that he wanted to compare the “drift” of recent years with the “sense of mission” under previous leaders.

“It doesn’t mean I agree with what she (Thatcher) did, but I don’t think anybody could suggest she didn’t have a driving sense of purpose.”

But his comments about Mrs Thatcher will spark anger in Mirror heartlands decimated by her policies in the 1980s, where the impact of those job losses are still felt today.

Chris Kitchen, General Secretary of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), told the Mirror: “I can understand that some people think Thatcher was great. If I was a multi-millionaire who got rich off her policies maybe I would. I’m a former coal miner living in a mining community. I don’t see anything Thatcher did that helped anyone in my community.”

Fire Brigades Union General Secretary Matt Wrack said her Government “deliberately inflicted mass unemployment and poverty on communities through a vindictive pit closures programme and the decimation of the manufacturing industry”.

Mr Wrack, whose union is affiliated to the Labour Party, said: “Working people and entire regions of Britain are still living with the dire consequences of Thatcherism to this day. That’s why so many families are struggling to put food on the table and pay the bills this Christmas. Obscene wealth inequality, a surge in food bank use, as well as low-paid and insecure work are the reality of Thatcherism.”

Jo Grady, UCU General Secretary, said the comments were “embarrassing” for Mr Starmer as she pointed to the ex-Tory PM’s record of privatisation, trade union crackdowns and blacklisting workers.

Beth Winter, the Labour MP for Cynon Valley, said Mrs Thatcher devastated mining communities and presided over policies that caused “poverty and deprivation not seen since the Dickensian era”.

“Most of those forced to rely on foodbanks today are from communities that have never recovered from the Thatcher government’s assault on working class communities,” she said. “Her government’s attacks on the working class and trade unions is well remembered in my constituency.”

Wansbeck MP Ian Lavery, a former NUM President and ally of Jeremy Corbyn, took aim at the Labour leader. He said: “I can assure you my constituents do not in any way share this view. Thatcher brutalised the miners and their families.”

Labour MP Ian Byrne tweeted: “Inequality, hunger, destitution & misery. That’s the real legacy left by Thatcher.” And Kim Johnson, Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside, said: “Margaret Thatcher did nothing for working class communities in Liverpool and across the country: destroyed industries, attacked trade unionists, privatised our core industries.”

She said no one in Labour should look up to Mrs Thatcher, adding: “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

North of Tyne metro mayor Jamie Driscoll, who quit Labour after being barred from standing for the party as North East Mayor, accused Mr Starmer of “abandoning the Red Wall”. He said: “The North East lost 100,000 manufacturing jobs under Margaret Thatcher, my Dad’s job at ICI included. This is adding insult to injury.”

Momentum, the left-wing activist network, said: “Margaret Thatcher laid waste to working-class communities, privatised our public services, and set in train the destruction of the post-war settlement founded by Labour. Starmer’s praise of her isn’t smart politics. It’s a shift to the Right, and a failure of Labour values.”

Scotland’s First Minister Humza Yousaf also piled into the row as he battles with a resurgent Scottish Labour party. He said: “What Thatcher did to mining and industrial communities was not ‘entrepreneurialism’, it was vandalism. Starmer praising Thatcher is an insult to those communities in Scotland, and across the UK, who still bear the scars of her disastrous policies.”

Shadow Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said he was not a fan of Mrs Thatcher but said she had a significant impact on the country.

Asked if he was a fan, Mr Reynolds, who represents Stalybridge and Hyde, a former mining community in Greater Manchester, said: “No, I’m not, but I can recognise that she was a formidable opponent and if I were to list the significant prime ministers who have really changed the country, many people like Tony Blair.”

Sunday, December 03, 2023

Loss and damage: Who pays for climate change?
DW
12/01/2023December 1, 2023

An array of climate funds promise to help poorer countries either stop climate change or adapt to its consequences. But what do they actually cover, and why is it all so contentious?


Who will pay for loss and damage caused by climate change?
Image: Erik McGregor/Pacific Press/picture alliance


Fossil fuels powered the industrial revolution and the economic success of many countries. But burning oil, gas and coal produces greenhouse gases that warm the atmosphere and warp the climate.

Advanced industrialized nations have historically contributed most to the human-induced climate crisis because they've burned fossil fuels for so long to grow their economies.

And many analysts, activists and heads of state in low-income countries argue big historical emitters like the United States and Europe should largely foot the bill for climate change.

But what does that mean exactly?

What is climate finance?


One of the ideas behind climate financing is to support developing countries in steering their economies clear of climate-wrecking fossil fuels. Another is that wealthy nations should help poorer ones hit hardest by global heating to adapt to the changing climate.

These ideas have been central to global climate negotiations in some form or another since the 1992 World Climate Summit in Rio de Janeiro.



But climate financing is perhaps most commonly associated with the pledge made by industrialized countries at the 2009 Copenhagen UN Climate Summit to raise $100 billion (€95 billion) a year by 2020. In 2015 in Paris, delegates agreed to keep paying this amount annually until 2025 and then set a new figure.
How climate financing will be implemented

To implement the $100 billion pledge, industrialized countries are primarily committing public funds. But increasingly they want to raise cash through private investment.

Public funds from donor countries account for the largest share of climate financing. About half of this flows bilaterally from donor to recipient state, largely in the form of development aid. The other portion is multilateral money, meaning that multiple states give money to multiple other states.

This money either comes from climate programs run via multilateral banks, like the World Bank and the African and Asian Development Banks. Or the money is allocated through multilateral climate funds.

Green Climate Fund


The most prominent of the multilateral money pots is the Green Climate Fund (GCF). Its resources are intended both for measures to slow climate change, such as the expansion of renewable energy, and for adapting to extreme weather and other impacts of planetary heating.

To date, donor countries have pledged about $20 billion. So far, $12.8 billion of has been approved for projects and $3.6 billion has already been spent on specific programs.

Much climate financing comes through multilateral funds like the Green Climate Fund 
Salvatore Di Nolfi/KEYSTONE/picture alliance

Most of the projects are in Africa and Asia, but there are also some in Latin America, the Caribbean and Eastern Europe. Every four years, donor countries are expected to replenish the fund.

Just under half of the money is given in the form of favorable loans, and the second half as direct grants that recipient states do not have to repay.
Adaptation Fund

Another fund that receives money from the $100 billion pledge is the Adaptation Fund. It's a relatively small pot of money with no fixed replenishment cycles — donor countries pay whenever they can or wish to.

Its goal is to support projects that help countries adapt to the consequences of the climate crisis. These could be measures against flooding, for example, or planting heat-resistant crops.

Developing countries receive the money as a subsidy, rather than a loan. This is advantageous as action on adaptation doesn't usually generate any profit, unlike climate protection measures, such as building wind turbines or solar panels which generate electricity that can be sold.

Least Developed Countries Fund


This Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) covers the world's 46 poorest nations. Operating solely on grants, which do not have to be repaid, it is intended to finance emergency climate adaptation.

So far, the LDCF has financed more than 360 projects, totaling about $1.7 billion.
Is the $100 billion climate finance promise being met?

No. Figures from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development show that only around $83 billion flowed into international climate financing in 2020.

"At first, $83 billion sounds like an enormous sum of money, but the needs of poorer countries in the Global South go well beyond that," said Jan Kowalzig, climate change and climate policy officer at Oxfam Germany.

"We know from studies that the cost of just adapting to climate change in these countries will exceed $300 billion a year by 2030. And that doesn't include the costs of climate mitigation in those countries," he said.

Major flooding in Pakistan caused billions of dollars in damage and losses
Fida Hussain/AFP

Even this $83 billion figure has been embellished, according to international development organizations. Oxfam calculates that a maximum of about $24.5 billion in real climate aid was provided in 2020.

This is because many officially listed projects would have had little climate impact, Oxfam said.

"Moreover, industrialized countries have credited many loans to their $100-billion promise," said Sabine Minninger from German aid organization Bread for the World. Developing countries would have to repay these loans.

"That's a sham," she said.

The repayments increase the debt burden of poorer countries in the Global South, added Oxfam's Kowalzig — "all for a crisis to which they have contributed little or nothing."
Loss and damage: A sticking point in climate financing

For decades, developing, newly industrializing and industrialized countries have argued about who should pay for loss and damage caused by the climate crisis — including the heat waves and droughts destroying crops or making areas of land uninhabitable. Developing countries want additional funds for this purpose.

Donor countries fear they could be sued for damages beyond the scope of international climate financing, said Kowalzig. They want economically strong emerging economies, such as world's biggest CO2 polluter China, to pay up as well.

COP27 in Egypt produced what was deemed a "historic agreement" to establish a fund for loss and damage. Since then, a transitional committee has produced recommendations to be presented to delegates at the climate conference in Dubai.

But many ques
tions remain unanswered when it comes to loss and damage, added Kowalzig.

Global Shield against Climate Risks

The Global Shield against Climate Risks was launched in 2022 at COP27 by the G7 industrialized nations and the V20, a group of around 70 countries particularly at risk from climate change.

The shield allocates a predetermined sum of money to be disbursed quickly in the wake of a climate catastrophe. So far, more than €210 million ($228 million) has flowed into the fund, with Germany providing around €170 million.

Climate financing partly goes to expanding renewable energy as an alternative to fossil fuels
Delil Souleiman/AFP/Getty Images

The shield can step in when there is no other help, said Kowalzig. It also finances climate risk insurance, which small farmers can use to insure themselves against crop failure, for example.

However, development organizations have argued that climate-risk insurance is not always the right tool for tackling climate disaster. That's because insurance policies generally cover relatively unlikely events that cause major damage. But such damage is not unlikely in a warming world. It will definitely occur, said Kowalzig.

"For example, the slow drying up of an entire area of land, which can be predicted, or the rise in sea level," he said, adding that no regular insurance would cover such foreseeable damage.

This article was originally written in German.
Lula visits Berlin to reset Germany-Brazil relationship

Oliver Pieper
DW

In his meeting with the Brazilian president, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will welcome a man whose importance as a mouthpiece for the Global South continues to grow.

Olaf Scholz is known as someone who has a plan for everything and everyone. But if the chancellor had one when he traveled to Brazil ten months ago to meet the country's new President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, it didn't work out very well.

A memorable press conference in Brasilia on January 30 was seen by many in the German media as a rebuff to Scholz, after da Silva flatly turned down any military help for Ukraine in the war with Russia.

Before that, Lula had made it abundantly clear that following the years under right-wing populist Jair Bolsonaro, he was indeed the man that German politicians had long been looking for, someone they could see eye to eye with. But as a leader of the Global South, a member of the BRICS states, and also set to chair the G20 in 2024, it was also obvious that Lula had a self-assured agenda of his own.

His position unambiguous: No economic sanctions against Russia, no arms supplies to Ukraine, a reform of the UN Security Council to allow one seat each for Brazil and the African continent, and a free trade agreement between the South American trade block Mercosur and the EU, which would first require compromises from the European Union.

Lula met his BRICS partners Xi, Ramaphosa, Modi and Lavrov (left to right) at a summit in Johannesburg in August
 GIANLUIGI GUERCIA/AFP


First intergovernmental consultations in eight years


At least this time, Scholz knows what to expect when the Brazilian president arrives in the German capital with Cabinet ministers in tow. In addition to a meeting with the chancellor, Lula's visit to Berlin will also include a visit to the parliament representing the German states, or Bundesrat, and an appearance at a German-Brazilian economic forum. But the first government-level talks between the two countries since 2015 (they were put on ice during the Bolsonaro years) are above all a sign that Germany and Brazil hoping to realigning their relations in the coming days.

"The difficult partner in Brasilia" was the title of an article by Brazil expert Oliver Stuenkel in the magazine "Internationale Politik" shortly after the chancellor's visit to Brazil at the beginning of the year. But the political scientist and professor of international politics at the School of International Relations in São Paulo said he would choose a different title to describe this upcoming meeting.

"Lula continues to be a difficult partner, but with an emphasis on partner rather than on difficult," he told DW. "There are certainly points of divergence with the war in Ukraine, and it will not be possible to resolve them entirely. But in the areas of climate, energy, and multilateral institutions, the intergovernmental consultations will be an important step towards closer cooperation."

Brazil and Germany share common interests

Regarding the climate, this means help from Germany to further strengthen the Amazon Fund, which Lula revived to protect the rainforest and promote global climate protection.

On energy, Brazil can hope to entice German companies and their technology with its natural renewable energy resources, such as green hydrogen, rare earths, lithium, wind, and sun. And when it comes to multilateral institutions, Germany and Brazil intend to reform the UN Security Council together with the other two G4 nations, India and Japan.

But according to Latin America expert Claudia Zilla, of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), Brazil's vision of a reformed international order involves more than just gaining a permanent seat on the Security Council.

"While Germany is taking an approach that aims to restore the liberal, rules-based international order, Brazil is advocating for reform, stressing the fact that the international order was, strictly speaking, never entirely liberal or rules-based, for example with the war in Iraq, the war on terror, or the regime change in Libya," she told DW.

A competitor in China


According to a statement on the German Foreign Ministry website, "Brazil is the only country in Latin America with which Germany has had a strategic partnership since 2008. Brazil is Germany's most important trading partner in South America." But there is no such statement on the Brazilian government website, because in recent decades a different country has been investing much bigger sums in Latin America: China.

Today, a quarter of all Brazil's imports and exports are with China, and transactions between the two countries are no longer conducted in US dollars, but in the local currencies, the real and the yuan. "China is buying in incredible quantities and investing a lot," said Zilla. "It is therefore necessary for Germany to offer something of real significance, not in terms of quantity, because that is unfeasible, but in terms of quality. For example, as part of the EU's Global Gateway Initiative (which aims to help developing countries build sustainable infrastructure), or by sharing technology and developing common social and environmental standards."

Fresh start for EU-Mercosur trade agreement?


Both Lula and Scholz were alarmed by the recent victory of Javier Milei in the Argentinian presidential elections, who sharply criticized the free trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur — which comprises Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, and Paraguay and represents a market of 715 million people — and even threatened to withdraw from the South American alliance.

As Lula and Scholz meet in Berlin, this will likely serve as an urgent wake-up call for them to finalize the political deal reached in 2019. For Brazil expert Oliver Stuenkel, the agreement would be a classic win-win situation.

"The environmental movements in Europe that oppose the agreement overlook the fact that the EU, unlike China, prioritizes the fight against deforestation," he said. "It would immensely strengthen Germany's and Europe's presence in Brazil. It would also guarantee the future of Mercosur. And it would be a very important signal for free trade, globalization, and geopolitical integration."
COP28: Brazil proposes global scheme to fund intact forests

Alistair Walsh
DW
December 1, 2023

People in scores of rainforest nations could be paid to preserve forest areas under a concept announced by the Brazilian president. However, it's unclear if the plan will get off the ground.


Brazil's proposal would mean protecting some of the world's most biodiverse places, which are home to unusual species such as this dart poison frog
Al Carrera/Zoonar/picture alliance


Brazil proposed a new global fund to pay countries to keep their tropical forests intact, at the COP28 climate talks in Dubai on Friday.

The proposal called for the creation of a massive global scheme to help preserve rainforests in scores of countries, called the "Tropical Forests Forever" fund.

The concept would pay residents and landowners who help preserve forested areas like the Amazon. According to the proposal, financing would initially be raised from sovereign wealth funds, as well as other investors such as the oil industry.

Rather than calculating their value in terms of carbon, biodiversity or environmental services, the proposed fund would assess forests based on their area, making it much easier to implement.

"For each hectare preserved for a year, an amount would be paid. And for each hectare cleared, there would be a deduction of 100 times that amount," said Tasso Azevedo, who helped draw up the idea, when explaining how it could work.

"It's not just about carbon. Tropical forests provide essential services, such as cooling the planet by 1 degree Celsius," said Azevedo, who also founded MapBiomas, which monitors land use to promote conservation.
 
'A very creative proposal'


Brazilian officials said current funding mechanisms do not protect forests that are not deemed to be at risk. Brazilian Environment Minister Marina Silva said current policies only dissuade loggers from continued deforestation, but don't reward those who protect the forest.

"It's a very creative proposal. We want to create conditions for developed countries to protect the forest without it being charity. They will get a return," said Silva at COP28.



Mauricio Bianco, vice president of Conservation International Brazil, welcomed the possibility of a new funding mechanism for rainforests, especially one driven by forest nations.

"It's tackling the climate crisis, it's tackling the major loss of biodiversity, and it's also tackling the social and economic development of the people that live there," Bianco told DW.

"It sends a clear message to the world that these countries are concerned about protecting the forest." He warned that such a fund would have to support Indigenous populations and grassroots organizations that are key to protecting forests.

But it's still uncertain how much support Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva can muster from wealthier nations to fund such a project.
Brazil presents new image

The launch was part of a new image Brazil was showing at climate talks, positioning itself as a global leader on climate change and conservation as well as a multilateral powerbroker.

The move comes after years of climate inaction from Lula's predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, who opened the door to major deforestationin the Amazon.



In an address at one of the opening events of the COP28 talks, Lula said people were sick of countries not living up to their previous climate pledges.

"The failure to fulfill the commitments made has eroded the system's credibility. We need to restore faith in multilateralism," Lula said.

"No country will solve their problems alone. We are all obliged to act together beyond our borders. Brazil is willing to lead as a role model," he added.

Figures from Brazil show a 22% reduction in Amazon deforestation this year under the Lula administration.


Financing forests

Brazil is home to 60% of the Amazon rainforest, the conservation of which is vital to limiting global warming, as well as ensuring the existence of important plants and animals.

Huge forests, such as the Amazon and the Congo in Africa, help slow climate change by absorbing and storing vast quantities of the planet-heating greenhouse gas CO2. But they are largely located in poorer countries and are frequently cut down for their valuable timber or to make way for grazing land or mining.

In 2021, more than 100 countries pledged to end deforestation by 2030, promising to invest $19 billion (€17.5 billion) in public and private funds to protect and restore forests.

Earlier this year, leaders from the Amazon, Congo Basin and Southeast Asia signed a communique in Brazil calling for a new financial mechanism for the international community to pay for critical forest services.

Across the planet, deforestation increased 4% in 2022 compared to 2021, according to the Forest Declaration Assessment, an independent group that tracks progress on global forest goals. However, it said major rainforest countries such as Brazil, Indonesia, and Malaysia had shown drastic reductions in forest loss.

The group said current financing to stop deforestation efforts fall well short of the required levels, with just $2.2 billion in public funds channeled to forests every year, compared to the $460 billion required.

Brazil already has a track record with financing the preservation of forests. The country's Amazon Fund, backed by Germany and Norway, was revived earlier this year. Brazil also helps to monitor forests outside its borders.

Agriculture without deforestation


Ahead of COP28, Brazil also announced plans to increase Brazil's available agricultural lands by 60% over the next decade without cutting down more forest. Authorities would encourage farmers to restore degraded grazing areas into productive farmland for crops, with backing from domestic financial institutions.

According to the Agriculture Ministry, Brazil has 40 million hectares (99 million acres) of degraded grazing areas that are suitable for crops.

A commitment to oil


But Lula's administration has come under fire for its commitment to producing climate-wrecking fossil fuels.

In January, it is expected to join the OPEC Plus, a group of oil-producing countries that manipulate global oil prices by coordinating reductions or increases in production.

"Joining OPEC and leading the climate agenda are two things that don't fit in the same sentence. Brazil will have to decide," said Marcio Astrini, executive secretary of the Brazil-based network of civil society groups Climate Observatory, in an interview with DW.

And Brazil's state-run oil company Petroleo Brasileiro SA is pushing for oil projects in the ecologically sensitive Foz do Amazonas, just one block of which is estimated to contain 5.6 billion barrels of oil. This has caused internal government division and brought criticism from environmental groups.


Brazil suffers from heat, fires ― and floods


Brazil is suffering in extreme weather conditions. While the north and center are experiencing persistent drought and a heat wave unprecedented for this time of year, heavy rainfall in the south has caused severe floods.Image: 

TERCIO TEIXEIRA/AFP/Getty Images


Colorfully cool

It's not even summer yet in the Southern Hemisphere, but large parts of Latin America are already experiencing a severe heat wave. In Brazil, temperatures climbed to over 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) last week. Large crowds have crowded Rio de Janeiro's Praia Vermelha beach, trying to cool off.Image: Buda Mendes/Getty Images



Lula has previously defended his country's continued oil exploration, saying it was in sovereign interests.

But Tzeporah Berman, international program director at Stand.earth and chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, said Lula's "claims to be an international climate leader" didn't chime with plans for oil and gas expansion.

"There is still much to be done at home in terms of national public policies to prove his commitment to climate action. This should include a clear indication to stop the expansion of fossil fuel projects, especially in key ecosystems like the Amazon," Berman told DW.

Additional reporting from Nadia Pontes at COP28 in Dubai.

Edited by: Jennifer Collins
COP28: Germany praises efforts to curb methane emissions

Germany said there was a major opportunity to "very quickly" cut down on methane emissions with limited financial means. Meanwhile, Al Gore took aim at COP28 hosts UAE.


Germany welcomed initiatives to reduce methane emissions that have emerged at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, saying on Sunday that they could quickly make an impact.

Methane is a particularly damaging greenhouse gas, and its effect is 30 times stronger than carbon dioxide.

Unlike carbon dioxide, however, methane gas remains in the Earth's atmosphere for a few decades, rather than several centuries.

This factor makes it a key factor in negotiations, as quickly curbing methane emissions could help in the shorter-term fight against climate change until carbon dioxide emissions can be significantly reduced.
What did Germany say?

Germany has voiced support for initiatives that would curb methane emissions, urging more countries and companies to act.

When it comes to methane, there's a major opportunity to "achieve a great deal very quickly with limited financial resources," Stefan Wenzel, a state secretary in the German Climate Ministry, said at the summit on Sunday.

He praised recent methane measures announced by the United States, as well as a major deal announced by oil and gas sector giants

For Germany, Wenzel said the government's focus is on clamping emissions in the energy sector.

"We are first concentrating on the production of gas and oil," the climate official said, while acknowledging that work needs to be done in the agricultural sector as well, which accounts for the largest portion of methane emissions.
What has been announced on methane?

On Saturday, US President Joe Biden's administration announced final rules that aim to crack down on methane releases in the oil and gas industry.

Separately, 50 oil companies pledged on Saturday to hit near-zero methane emissions and stop flaring — which is the burning of excess methane — by 2030. The companies, which make up nearly half of global oil production, included Saudi Arabia's Aramco, Brazil's Petrobras, as well as Shell, TotalEnergies and BP.

Methane is emitted in the process of extracting oil, coal and gas, with the energy sector coming in as the second-largest source of human-caused methane emissions. The in the energy sector, methane leaks, as well as flaring and venting contribute to worsening climate change.

Technological and operational solutions are already available to largely address the emissions issues, but energy firms have not yet largely implemented them.

Two years ago, the European Union and the United States launched an international commitment to slash methane emissions, called the Global Methane Pledge (GMP). The alliance is set to meet this week during the summit in Dubai.

COP28 launches climate 'loss and damage' fund

A total of 150 countries have joined the GMP, making up over half the methane generated by human activity. Major methane players such as China, India and Russia have not yet joined.



Al Gore takes aim at UAE emissions

Also on Sunday, former US vice president and climate campaigner Al Gore praised the agreement by oil and gas companies to slash methane emissions — but urged for close monitoring to ensure compliance.

"This was a wonderful pledge," Gore said. "But we're going to be measuring whether they comply with this or not."

Gore delivered his message along with independent emissions tracker Climate TRACE, which uses hundreds of satellites and artificial intelligence to monitor emissions around the globe.

In his speech, Gore also took aim at the emissions of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) who are hosting the COP28. He pointed to data showing that the oil-rich kingdom's greenhouse gas emissions rose by 7.5% last year, compared the 1.5% increase for the entire globe.

"The Abu Dhabi National Oil Company still claims to have no emissions from methane or anything else from the transport of oil and gas," Gore said.

"Well, actually, they do. We can see them from space," he said, pointing to massive monitors depicting satellite images.

The UAE is facing increased scrutiny over its contribution to climate change, amid intensified efforts at the COP28 to limit global warming and curb the devastating effects of climate change.

rs/kb (dpa, AFP, AP)
Vietnam reels from historic €11.4 billion corruption scandal

David Hutt
DW
12/01/2023

The largest corruption scandal in Southeast Asia's history has shaken Vietnam's anti-graft drive. Experts have warned that the country's economic stability may be at stake.


















The Vietnamese government has been clamping down on widespread corruption
Image: Pascal Deloche/Godong/picture alliance

Vietnam has been rocked by its largest corruption scandal to date after authorities last month arrested a prominent real estate developer over allegedly embezzling nearly €11.4 billion ($12.4 billion), the equivalent of more than 3% of the country's GDP.

In 2016, Vietnam's governing Communist Party began conducting a sweeping anti-corruption campaign. Since then, it has brought down a national president and senior government ministers, but the scale of the alleged graft involved in the latest scandal it uncovered raised questions about the true state of Vietnam's banking and property sectors.
The biggest corruption scandal in Southeast Asian history

On November 17, the Ministry of Public Security alleged that Truong My Lan, the chairperson of real estate developer Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group, had embezzled 304 trillion dong (€11.4 billion) from Saigon Commercial Bank, of which she was a majority stakeholder, over several years.

According to the ministry's statements, My Lan, who was first arrested last year, operated a vast network of more than 1,000 domestic and foreign subsidiaries as well as further shell companies that took out more than €40 billion in loans from the Saigon Commercial Bank, appropriating about a third of it through "ghost companies" she and her family and associates created.

In mid-November, the Ministry of Public Security also recommended the prosecution of a further 85 people, including 24 government officials and associates of Van Thinh Phat Holdings Group and Saigon Commercial Bank.

Days later, the Internal Affairs Commission of the Communist Party's Central Committee recommended opening investigations into another 23 state officials, including 12 from the State Bank of Vietnam, the country's central bank.

It is arguably the largest corruption scandal in recent Southeast Asian history. By comparison, the well-documented 1MDB scandal in Malaysia in the 2010s, which led to Malaysia's dominant party losing power for the first time ever, involved the theft of €4.1 billion from the country's sovereign wealth fund.
Hanoi's anti-corruption campaign

The Communist Party of Vietnam embarked on its "blazing furnace" anti-graft campaign when Nguyen Phu Trong, the party's general secretary, defeated rival Nguyen Tan Dung — Dung was prime minister at the time and seen by many as allowing corruption to thrive.

Ex-Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Do Anh Dung was taken to court in July 2023
Image: Anh Tuc/AFP/Getty Images

The anti-corruption campaign has resulted in hundreds, if not thousands of party and government officials being dismissed in recent years.

In January, Nguyen Xuan Phuc resigned as state president and two deputy prime ministers were sacked over alleged corruption in the government procurement of coronavirus testing kits and the repatriation of Vietnamese nationals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Speaking this month, after the revelations about the latest scandal, Prime Minister Trong said Communist authorities, "need to conduct the anti-corruption fight faster and in a more efficient manner." He added, "We won't stop here but will continue for the long term."

Officials under the graft spotlight

Tuong Vu, a political science professor at the University of Oregon in the US, said Prime Minister Trong could now have his sights set on some more big-name targets, including the former party boss of Ho Chi Minh City, Le Thanh Hai, who is known as "the most corrupt official in Vietnam."

Hai was the political boss of the southern business hub for decades, and although he was given a wrap on the knuckles in 2020, when the corruption-busters found his committee had engaged in improprieties, he has so far avoided any real punishment for his alleged wrongdoings.

"It is possible that Hai is next. He's also known to be close to former Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung, who may still be a target," said Tuong Vu, referring to the political heavyweight whom Trong defeated in 2016.

Indeed, it had been suggested by analysts that Hai and Dung may have been the two richest people in Vietnam at some point in the 2010s thanks to their alleged oversight of vast graft networks in southern Vietnam.

"There is no doubt that more major scandals and arrests are forthcoming," said Michael Tatarski, a journalist living in Ho Chi Minh City who writes about Vietnamese politics in his Vietnam Weekly blog.

"A significant investigation into sand mining is underway," and it appears police are looking closely at the renewable energy sector and Vietnam Electricity, the country's largest power company, he added.

However, there are concerns that the scale of graft now being uncovered is denting economic stability.


Private sector feels the heat


When a number of private sector companies were hit with corruption allegations last year, it was suggested the anti-graft campaign was starting to affect business confidence. Reports leaked in the media claimed local government officials and civil servants were refusing to sign off on much-needed infrastructure investment deals for fear they would later be accused of corruption if the development projects didn't go according to plan.



Nguyen Khac Giang, a visiting fellow at the Vietnam Studies Programme at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, pointed out that this is not the first significant investigation into a private company, but it is by far the largest.

He says that in 2022, Trinh Van Quyet, chairman of property and leisure company FLC Group and its subsidiary Bamboo Airlines, was arrested on charges of stock market manipulation; while months later, Do Anh Dung, chairman of the Tan Hoang Minh property development group, was detained on suspicion of fraudulent appropriation of assets.

Tran Qui Thanh, chairman of Tan Hiep Phat Group, the country's largest private-sector beverage producer, was arrested in April over alleged misappropriation of assets.

Given what has transpired so far, the latest corruption scandal "might not further deteriorate business confidence in Vietnam, nor instill fear of being investigated," Giang said.

Indeed, other sources have made similar arguments, saying business confidence was more shaken by the first investigations into private sector corruption and that the business community in Vietnam has now become somewhat accustomed to the idea that the Communist Party might be staring over its shoulder.

'Total regulatory failure'

Among the many allegations against Truong My Lan and her associates were accusations that they had bribed investigators for years to get them to overlook Saigon Commercial Bank's financial discrepancies. This includes bribes reportedly paid to the then-chief of the State Bank of Vietnam's Inspectorate and Supervision Department.

"This was a total regulatory failure," said Zachary Abuza, a professor of national security strategy at the US National War College in Washington, who added that it should raise questions about the business practices of other banks, too.

"If Lan could bribe regulators with $5.2 million to overlook non-performing loans and other criminal behavior at [the Saigon Commercial Bank], why not other banks?" Abuza queried.



The latest corruption scandal also raises questions about political stability. Trong, the party chief, has torn up informal agreements on term limits and retirement ages that the Communist Party agreed to in the 1990s.

Trong, 79, is now in his third term in office and seemingly cannot step down as he's unable to find a trusted successor — the reason why he took on a third term in 2021, most pundits say. It remains unclear if he will try to run for a fourth term at the next National Congress in early 2026.

"Anti-corruption has evolved from a means, to an end in itself. Combating corruption is seen as a way to uphold the party's legitimacy," said Giang. "This is the new normal of Vietnamese politics."

Edited by: Alex Berry
'No Thanks' app calls for boycott of Israel-related products

Kathrin Wesolowski
DW


The "No Thanks" app calls on people not to buy products from companies that "support" Israel. Is it a legitimate form of protest — or even antisemitism?

The app appears to work very simply: users can scan the barcode of a product or enter its name, and within seconds they are told to what extent the manufacturer "supports Israel." Then "No Thanks" is displayed — an appeal not to buy certain products. Videos on TikTok and X show that companies such as Coca-Cola and Nescafé are among those listed.

The app was launched on November 13, and has been downloaded over 100,000 times so far, and social media comments suggest people around the world from India to Belgium are interested in the app.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas has escalated drastically since the militant Islamist group Hamas, which is classified as a terrorist organization by the European Union, the USA, Germany and other countries, attacked Israel on October 7, killing 1,200 people and taking around 240 hostages.

According to the Hamas-led Health Ministry, almost 15,000 people have been killed on the Palestinian side since October 7 as a result of the Israeli bombardment of targets in the Gaza Strip. Since then, many people around the world have positioned themselves as either pro-Israeli or pro-Palestinian or even pro-Hamas. According to social media comments, the "No Thanks" boycott app was mainly downloaded by pro-Palestinian supporters.

The app can no longer be downloaded from the Google Playstore and, as of December 1, there is no version for iOS, i.e. Apple devices. However, the app can still be downloaded in indirect ways.

But who is behind "No Thanks" and what exactly is the aim? And why is the app no longer available in the Playstore?

'I have lost my brother'

According to the app itself, "No Thanks" was developed by Ahmed Bashbash, currently living in Hungary. Contacted by DW, he said he was a Palestinian from Gaza. Bashbash said he lost his brother "in this massacre" and that his sister died in 2020 because she did not receive medical support from Israel in time. "I made it in behalf of my brother and my sister who I lost because of this brutal occupation, and my goal is to try to prevent what happened to me to happen to another Palestinian," Bashbash told DW by email.

He compiled the list of companies that allegedly support Israel with the help of the websites "Boycotzionism" and "Ulastempat." The Boycotzionism website advertises with the slogan "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free," which is sometimes interpreted as antisemitic. Some see the phrase as a slogan that denies Israel's right to exist.

The lists of brands that should be boycotted, according to the website operators, include world-famous companies such as Adidas, McDonald's, Chanel, Netflix and Apple, and also represent all kinds of industries, from food to cosmetics to streaming providers. Some companies are on the list because they jointly launched a campaign after October 7 in which they condemned Hamas' terrorist attack on Israel. According to the websites, other companies invest in Israeli start-ups, for example, or finance "the theft of Palestinian territory."


The app tells users whether a particular product is on a boycott listImage: NoThanks
Criticism of Israel's policies or antisemitism?

Bashbash said that he was told the app was banned by Google for including the sentence:

"You can see if the product in your hand supports killing children in Palestine," which was displayed on the home screen of the app.

Experts say this sentence can be interpreted as either critical of Israel or antisemitic. Meron Mendel, director of the Anne Frank Educational Center, told DW that the phrase recalled an antisemitic belief in the Middle Ages that Jews murdered children in order to produce Passover bread from their blood.

Uffa Jensen, deputy director of the Center for Research on Antisemitism, also says that this expression could come close to being accused of antisemitism because it uses the image of Israel as a child murderer.

The other interpretation of the sentence is the fact that children are indeed being killed by Israeli air strikes in Gaza during the current war, said Mendel. Since they are not being murdered intentionally, but are dying in the course of the war, the sentence about a product supporting the killing of children in Palestine can also be seen as a polemical exaggeration — "as a means of emotionalizing," as Mendel put it.

Jensen adds that Hamas also killed Israeli children on October 7. "A sentence like that escapes this context and is then highly polemical," he continues.

The list of boycotted companies spans a wide variety of industriesImage: NoThanks
What is the aim of the boycott?

According to Mendel, the important question is what the exact aim of the boycott is. Since October 7, it has been clear that not everyone is pursuing the same goals: "There are those who want a Palestinian state alongside the Israeli state, and there are those who want the destruction of the state of Israel. The point here is to distinguish between these two groups."

"The means of economic boycott, the individual decision not to buy products, is initially legitimate," Mendel continues. Moreover, the Arab boycott against Israel is not new; it began in the early 1970s. According to Jensen, there is also a minority of left-wing Jews who are critical of Israel and support such campaigns. The boycott is also propaganda against Israel. Overall, it is therefore necessary to differentiate whether it is a call critical of Israel or whether it is antisemitism, says Mendel.

But quite a few social media users in Germany think of the National Socialist call of 1933 "Don't buy from Jews" when they hear such calls for a boycott. But such a comparison could also be seen as historically inaccurate and problematic in itself, as it runs the risk of trivializing National Socialism. "This implies that there was a specific cause for the Nazi boycott of Jews and that non-Jewish Germans and Jewish Germans were two conflicting parties before 1933. That is, of course, historically completely wrong," explains Mendel.

Jensen also finds the connection to National Socialism difficult: "Internationally, there are dozens of other examples of boycott measures." He mentions, for example, the decades-long boycott of South Africa up until the 1990s because of the racial segregation at the time. On the one hand, these calls can be compared, but on the other, sometimes antisemitic ideas are also mixed into calls for a boycott of Israel

Economic damage unlikely

Furthermore, the problem that would arise for Israel as a result of such a boycott would not be economic damage. It is the cultural and scientific boycott that goes hand in hand with it, explains Mendel. "Progressive forces in Israel, in science, in art, in the peace movement, also in Europe and North America, are being marginalized and excluded," he said.

This escalation has also been achieved in part through such measures. On the contrary, the overall aim should be to support peaceful progressive forces on both sides.

In the meantime, Ahmed Bashbash's first goal is to make the app available again in the popular app stores. The app is free and all the profits he makes with it are sent to Palestinian organizations that help the people in Gaza, Bashbash said in his app.

This article was originally written in German.
'Ink me up': Iran tattoo artists aim to leave mark

Tehran (AFP) – Within a flat in northern Tehran, concealed from the public eye, Sean proudly showcases the tattoo motifs crafted by his students, each meticulously etched onto silicon canvases.

Issued on: 03/12/2023 
In the past, said Sean, the owner of the tattoo studio, 'people wanted something small, simple, that no one can see... But now they're saying 'Ink me up''

The 34-year-old opened the studio only eight months ago, aspiring to share the art of tattooing that over the years has largely thrived underground in the Islamic republic.

"All tattoo artists in Iran usually work at home," Sean, using his artistic nickname, told AFP in his studio.

"We risked a lot this year by opening this place and turning it into an academy."

While Iran has not explicitly banned tattooing, conservatives still view the practice as linked with immorality, delinquency and Westernisation.

Yet tattoos have gained popularity in recent years in the country, with many young people proudly displaying their ink in public.

Some have faced arrest for tattoos, including in 2016, when authorities rounded up a "tattoo gang" for allegedly tattooing 'satanic and obscene symbols' on people, as reported by the Tasnim news agency 

Seeing the growing trend, Sean opened other studios in the southeastern city of Kerman and the resort island of Kish.

Now, he has more than 30 students eager to learn the craft, which he describes as a "bottomless art".

"All sorts of people now are doing tattoos," said Sean, who has been a tattoo artist for 17 years.

In the past, he said, "people wanted something small, simple, that no one can see."

"But now they're saying 'Ink me up'."
'Satanic and obscene symbols'

In recent years, some Shiite scholars in Iran have declared that tattoos are not forbidden under Islamic law.

A tattoo artist traces a design on a customer at a tattoo studio in Iran's capital Tehran 

"Tattooing is not forbidden, provided that it does not promote non-Islamic culture," according to the website of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Despite the growing acceptance, there are still some in Iran who frown upon the practice.

In September last year, Iran's volleyball federation said players must cover any tattoos or risk being barred from taking part in the 2022-2023 season.

Several prominent football players faced summons to Iran's sports morality committee in recent years for displaying their tattoos.

In 2019, a Tehran police official said having "visible and unconventional tattoos" may require individuals to undergo a "psychological examination" before obtaining a driver's licence.

Others faced arrest, including in 2016, when authorities rounded up a "tattoo gang" for allegedly tattooing "satanic and obscene symbols" on people, as reported by the Tasnim news agency.

Sean, the owner of a tattoo studio in Tehran, opened the studio only eight months ago, aspiring to share the art of tattooing that over the years has largely thrived underground in the Islamic republic 

Benyamin, a 27-year-old cafe owner, says some people often perceive him as a criminal because of the tattoos covering his torso and back.

"Tattoos are not a crime on their own, but you will be stigmatised as a thug, should something happen," like being arrested, he added.

Sean says he is aware of the conservative societal and cultural perceptions in Iran, aspects he has conscientiously addressed within his studios.

"Women (artists) do tattoos for women, men (artists) do tattoos for men," he said.
'Woman, life, freedom'

In Iran, women with tattoos face more intense scrutiny than their male counterparts, compelled to adhere to a stringent dress code that mandates covering their heads and necks.
In Tehran, numerous tattoo studios showcased designs featuring the slogan 'Woman, life, freedom' -- a rallying cry during nationwide protests sparked by the death in custody last year of Mahsa Amini 

Some even see it as an act of defiance.

In Tehran, numerous tattoo studios showcased designs featuring the slogan "Woman, life, freedom" -- a rallying cry during nationwide protests sparked by the death in custody last year of Mahsa Amini.

A 22-year-old Iranian Kurd, Amini had been arrested in September 2022 for allegedly violating the Islamic republic's strict dress code for women.

Others only see it as a form of self-expression.

"I like tattoos a lot and I wanted to express my thoughts that way," says Sahar, a 26-year-old nurse who has a tattoo on her arm reading "do not be afraid of anything" in Arabic.

But she acknowledges that having tattoos "is likely (to cause problems), especially if you want to work in the public sector".
Sean says he is aware of the conservative societal and cultural perceptions in Iran, saying 'Women (artists) do tattoos for women, men (artists) do tattoos for men' 

Undeterred by the challenges, Kuro, a 24-year-old student at the studio, remains steadfast in her determination to practice her craft.

"Now people are generally more supportive," she said after touching up a Koi fish design etched on a silicon sheet.

She hopes that "as a woman tattoo artist, I will be able to work without restrictions".


PHOTOS © ATTA KENARE / AFP

© 2023 AFP