Opinion

It's Not Just David Chang. Celebrity Chefs Are Sellouts.

It’s good that he apologized for trying to take ownership of “chili crunch,” but we still have to tackle the wacky concept of a celebrity chef.

April 19, 2024 

Raj Tawney,

Guest Columnist

A celebrity chef.

Photographer: Greg Doherty/Getty Images North America

David Chang’s public apology and the announcement that his company Momofuku would back off of an attempt to trademark the term “chili crunch” feel like standard damage control for a popular chef and the empire he’s built.

Like any sensible leader, politician, or public figure serving as a hood ornament to an operation, it’s easier to say you’re sorry and retreat than stand by your convictions unless you want to be ousted, too.

While the debacle has left a sour taste in many mouths, Chang isn’t the main problem. The issue is the wacky concept of a “celebrity chef.”

It’s come to mean a professionally-trained or even amateur cook who happens to have a bubbly or colorful personality for TV and is willing to ham it up for the camera while holding a chef’s knife in their hand. If they’re excessively charismatic (or irritating), they may find themselves with their own shows, cookbooks, podcasts, cookware lines, condiments and restaurants.

Before you know it, they’re sitting on top of a conglomerate. While it makes sense to want to make a profit off your name, image and likeness, the food industry has become a branding wasteland. The commercialized influence has caused what used to be the star — the food — to take a backseat. And any chef that is OK with that is a sellout.

About 30 years ago, when I used to sit with my mom and watch cooking shows on TV, the biggest personality on the Food Network was David Rosengarten. Have you heard of him? Probably not. He was a warm, welcoming character who put viewers at ease while also educating them about the meals he was preparing. There was a refinement about him. Then, somewhere in the misty haze of the ’90s, Emeril Lagasse BAM-ed his way to stardom and the entire channel began to shift from a Saveur Magazine vibe, where the art of cooking was intellectually explored, to a WWE-meets-QVC-meets-Survivor-meets-talk show format where viewers could overindulge on vivacious TV personalities and the food was secondary.

It seems like overnight, the public’s idea of a chef shifted from a wise, worldly, unglamorous presenter like Rosengarten or Julia Child. And we, the general public, bought in hard. Today, by one estimate, the net worth of the wealthiest chefs range from Ina Garten at about $50 million to Jamie Oliver at around $300 million.

It’s a stunning contrast to what the average chef in the United States takes home: around $51,000 annually, according to Salary.com.

In an increasingly homogenous culinary landscape, how will authenticity and originality thrive? Certainly not at Bobby Flay’s Mesa Grill or David Chang’s Momofuku or Gordon Ramsay’s Fish & Chips, offering watered-down, overpriced versions of the cultural cuisines they’re claiming to spotlight.

Social media’s domination in producing content has exacerbated the industry’s shift. In a sea of aspirational chefs and home cooks looking to be the next Fieri, Chang, Rachael Ray or Martha Stewart on YouTube, Instagram and TikTok, the ones with the fanciest video edits, marketable personalities and viral recipes tend to secure monetization, sponsorships or land a book deal.

And for many who aspire to launch a brick-and-mortar restaurant, securing a loan or finding investors is nearly impossible without an existing media presence because banks consider it a high-risk venture. The reality is that being a working chef is not glamorous, but I want to believe that most people who cook for a living, whether famous or not, start a career in the field because they love it.

That’s what made Anthony Bourdain so special. He worked in kitchens for 28 years before he became known. He saw where the industry was headed and used his newfound fame to put the focus back on food. He loved and respected how it had the power to teach and bring people together, rebelling against the salesman-like construct of a celebrity chef and even turning down endorsement and product line offers.

We need more chefs with influence to think like him, but it can’t stop there. Consumers need to be on the same page. If you value authenticity, quality and innovation in cuisine, consider who you’re giving most of your time and money to. Is it to working chefs who spend hours toiling in high-pressure and demanding restaurants, often in poor conditions and for little pay? Or to multi-millionaires trying to make you believe that you absolutely need whatever they’re selling?

By Raj Tawney an essayist and journalist who writes about family, food and culture, is the author of "Colorful Palate: A Flavorful Journey Through a Mixed American Experience" and "All Mixed Up," which will be released in fall 2024.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Which scientists get mentioned in the news? Mostly ones with Anglo names, says study

DR. LIVINGSTONE, I PRESUME

APRIL 19, 2024
By Hao Peng

THE CONVERSATION


When the media covers scientific research, not all scientists are equally likely to be mentioned. A new study finds scientists with Asian or African names were 15% less likely to be named in a story.shironosov/Getty Images

When one Chinese national recently petitioned the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to become a permanent resident, he thought his chances were pretty good. As an accomplished biologist, he figured that news articles in top media outlets, including The New York Times, covering his research would demonstrate his "extraordinary ability" in the sciences, as called for by the EB-1A visa.

But when the immigration officers rejected his petition, they noted that his name did not appear anywhere in the news articles. News coverage of a paper he co-authored did not directly demonstrate his major contribution to the work.

As this biologist's close friend, I felt bad for him because I knew how much he had dedicated to the project. He even started the idea as one of his Ph.D. dissertation chapters. But as a scientist who studies topics related to scientific innovation, I understand the immigration officers' perspective: Research is increasingly done through teamwork, so it's hard to know individual contributions if a news article reports only the study findings.

This anecdote made me and my colleagues Misha Teplitskiy and David Jurgens curious about what affects journalists' decisions about which researchers to feature in their news stories.

There's a lot at stake for a scientist whose name is or isn't mentioned in journalistic coverage of their work. News media play a key role in disseminating new scientific findings to the public. The coverage of a particular study brings prestige to its research team and their institutions. The depth and quality of coverage then shapes public perception of who is doing good science. In some cases, as my friend's story suggests, the coverage can affect individual careers.

Do scientists' social identities, such as ethnicity or race, play a role in who gets named?

This question is not straightforward to answer. On the one hand, racial bias may exist, given the profound underrepresentation of minorities in U.S. mainstream media. On the other, science journalism is known for its high standard of objective reporting. We decided to investigate this question in a systematic fashion using large-scale observational data.

The least coverage? Chinese and African names

My colleagues and I analyzed 223,587 news stories from 288 U.S. media outlets, sourced from Altmetric.com, a website that monitors online posts about research papers. The news stories, published from 2011-2019, covered 100,486 scientific papers. For each paper, we focused on authors with the highest chance of being mentioned: the first author, last author and other designated corresponding authors. We calculated how often the authors were mentioned in the news articles reporting their research.

We used an algorithm to infer perceived ethnicity from authors' names. We figured that journalists may rely on such cues in the absence of scientists' self-reported information. We considered authors with Anglo names – like John Brown or Emily Taylor – as the majority group and then compared the average mention rates across nine broad ethnic groups.

Our methodology does not distinguish Black from white names because many African Americans have Anglo names, such as Michael Jackson. But since we focus on perceived identity across nine different groups based on names, the study's design is still meaningful.

We found that for the subset of first, last and corresponding authors on research papers, the overall chance of being credited by name in a news story was 40%. Authors with minority ethnicity names, however, were significantly less likely to be mentioned compared with authors with Anglo names. The disparity was most pronounced for authors with East Asian and African names; they were on average mentioned or quoted about 15% less in U.S. science media relative to those with Anglo names.

This association is consistent even after accounting for factors such as geographical location, corresponding author status, authorship position, affiliation rank, author prestige, research topics, journal impact and story length.

And the disparity held across different types of outlets, including publishers of press releases, general interest news and those with content focused on science and technology.

Pragmatic factors and language choices

Our results don't directly imply media bias. So what's going on?

First and foremost, the underrepresentation of scientists with East Asian and African names may be due to pragmatic challenges faced by U.S.-based journalists in interviewing them. Factors like time zone differences for researchers based overseas and actual or perceived English fluency could be at play as a journalist works under deadline to produce the story.

We isolated these factors by focusing on researchers affiliated with American institutions. Among U.S.-based researchers, pragmatic difficulties should be minimized because they're in the same geographic region as the journalists and they're likely to be proficient in English, at least in writing. In addition, these scientists would presumably be equally likely to respond to journalists' interview requests, given that media attention is increasingly valued by U.S. institutions.

Even when we looked just at U.S. institutions, we found significant disparities in mentions and quotations for non-Anglo-named authors, albeit slightly reduced. In particular, East Asian- and African-named authors experience a 4 to 5 percentage-point drop in mention rates compared with their Anglo-named counterparts. This result suggests that while pragmatic considerations can explain some disparities, they don't account for all of them.

We found that journalists were also more likely to substitute institutional affiliations for scientists with African and East Asian names – for instance, writing about "researchers from the University of Michigan." This institution-substitution effect underscores a potential bias in media representation, where scholars with minority ethnicity names may be perceived as less authoritative or deserving of formal recognition.
Why equity matters in the discourse on science

Part of the depth of science news coverage depends on how thoroughly and accurately researchers are portrayed in stories, including whether scientists are mentioned by name and the extent to which their contributions are highlighted via quotes. As science becomes increasingly globalized, with English as its primary language, our study highlights the importance of equitable representation in shaping public discourse and fostering diversity in the scientific community.

We suspect that disparities are even larger at an earlier point in science dissemination, when journalists are selecting which research papers to report. Understanding these disparities is complicated by decades or even centuries of bias ingrained in the whole science production pipeline, including whose research gets funded, who gets to publish in top journals and who is represented in the scientific workforce itself.

Journalists are picking from a later stage of a process that has a number of inequities built in. Thus, addressing disparities in scientists' media representation is only one way to foster inclusivity and equality in science. But it's a step toward sharing scientific knowledge with the public in a more equitable way.


Hao Peng is a postdoctoral fellow at the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University.

This story comes from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization dedicated to unlocking the knowledge of experts for the public good.

ANALYSIS

Why Arab States Haven’t Broken With Israel

Arabs across the region are angry, but regimes can’t afford to sever ties.

Jordanian soldiers stand guard near the “Gate of Peace” at the Jordan Valley site of Baqura, east of the Jordan River, with the Israeli flag flying over the Israeli side of the border.
Jordanian soldiers stand guard near the “Gate of Peace” at the Jordan Valley site of Baqura, east of the Jordan River, with the Israeli flag flying over the Israeli side of the border

KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

By David E. Rosenberg, 

the economics editor and a columnist for the English edition of Haaretz and the author of Israel’s Technology Economy.

APRIL 19, 2024, 


For many, the news that Jordanian fighter pilots came to the defense of Israel during Iran’s missile and drone attack last weekend must have come as a surprise. While Israel and Jordan have had diplomatic relations for 30 years, the peace between them has been cold even in the best of times and since the outbreak of the war in Gaza has gone into a deep freeze.

Yet Jordan was not the only Arab country contributing to Israel’s defense that night. The Royal Saudi Air Force also shot down Iranian projectiles flying in its airspace and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates reportedly provided critical intelligence before the attack.

There are any number of reasons why moderate Arab powers chose to play a role that night. One is that had the Iranian operation ended with significant loss of life or destruction, Israel would have struck back hard, raising the risk of a regional war. Indeed, an apparent Israeli retaliation early Friday against Iran appears to have been limited.

Another is that many Arab countries are no less anxious than Israel about Iran’s meddling—in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen and the instability it has created.

But no less important is that, for moderate Arab powers, Israel has become a key economic partner—indeed, for Jordan and Egypt, Israel is an economic lifeline. That goes a long way toward explaining why six months into the war in Gaza, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have taken almost no concrete steps against Israel. When Turkey finally did something, announcing on April 9 that it was banning a wide range of exports to Israel, no Arab country followed suit.

Of these countries, Jordan is the most reliant on Israel—not for the ordinary stuff of cross-border trade or for investment (both of which are negligible) but for essential water and energy.

Jordan is one of the world’s most water-scarce countries, with just 950 million cubic meters available annually to meet demand of about 1.4 billion cubic meters. Under the 1994 peace agreement, Jordan was entitled to buy 50 million cubic meters of water a year from Israel. That number has since doubled as Jordan’s population has grown, and Israel has developed so much desalination capacity that it has fresh water to spare. And the dependence is likely to grow: If a deal to swap more Israeli water for solar energy from Jordan goes through, Amman will begin importing an additional 200 million cubic meters.

The kingdom also lacks domestic energy resources and relies on imports of Israeli natural gas for electric power and its chemical industry. Gas accounts for more than 70 percent of electricity production in Jordan, and nearly all that comes from Israel’s Leviathan field. Egypt also needs Israeli gas because domestic reserves are depleting faster than new sources are being found, and its giant Zohr field is plagued by technical problems. When Israel briefly slashed exports after the outbreak of the war in Gaza, Egypt had to double rolling blackouts to two hours a day and import liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Egypt’s demand for Israeli gas goes beyond domestic needs. With its own supplies so tight, it can no longer export its own gas as LNG to Europe and instead re-exports Israeli gas. That has not only earned Egypt badly needed hard currency but ensures its role as the center of an emerging east Mediterranean gas hub that includes Israel and will likely include Cyprus one day.

The UAE’s economic interests in maintaining ties with Israel are about something entirely different: trade and investment, enhancing the Emirates’ role as a global logistics hub, leveraging Israel’s high-tech prowess to build its own tech industry, and partnering to solve the threat of climate change to the region. Since the 2020 Abraham Accords, the UAE has also emerged as a major buyer of Israeli arms. The export of Israeli weapons to countries that signed the Abraham Accords grew from nil that year to $2.9 billion in 2022.

In dollar terms, the Israel-UAE economic relationship remains comparatively small for both countries. But it represents something larger and more aspirational, namely part of an effort to reshape the Middle East—or at least as much of the Middle East as is possible—from a place chronically in the grip of war and extremist politics to one focused on economic development. The UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain have taken the route of prioritizing economics over all else, and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is following their lead with his Vision 2030 plan to turn his kingdom from an oil economy into a center of technology, finance, tourism, and entertainment.

That said, the Saudis appear less convinced than the Emiratis that Israel has an important role to play in the new Middle East. But as the normalization talks that got underway last year demonstrated, Riyadh is willing to recognize Israel as part of a wider deal with the United States, something that would have been unimaginable a decade ago. While the war in Gaza has disrupted the talks and raised the price the Saudis are demanding from Israel on the Palestinian issue, Riyadh has signaled it is still willing to move forward.

The economic imperatives that have driven these relations face powerful headwinds. Even before the war in Gaza, public opinion even among Israel’s peace partners was overwhelmingly hostile to Israel. A year ago, just 15 percent of Jordanians said they would support business deals with Israel if they would help their country’s economy, according to a poll conducted by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Even though their country would struggle without Israeli gas and water, ordinary Jordanians frequently call to sever ties with Israel and rescind the import agreements. Under immense public pressure after the war in Gaza erupted, Jordan last November canceled a water-for-energy deal with Israel (although it has since sought quietly to resurrect it).

In Egypt and Saudi Arabia, about 38 percent of respondents in the poll a year ago accepted the idea of doing business with Israel. When the Washington Institute asked Saudis more recently whether they should be allowed to “have business or sports contacts with Israelis,” just 17 percent said yes, down from 42 percent in the summer of 2022.

Under the circumstances, it should be no surprise that the business Arab countries do with Israel is an elite affair confined to government-to-government deals and big state-affiliated enterprises. The ordinary ways of doing business, with executives attending industry conferences and exhibits or making sales calls, don’t exist. Tourism is a one-way affair—with Israelis visiting Arab countries but little reciprocation.

The UAE has been somewhat of an exception to this rule, certainly in the honeymoon period after the Abraham Accords were signed in 2020. Israeli executives and tourists flocked to the Gulf, and companies were signing investment and partnership deals. Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala Petroleum took a 22 percent stake in Israel’s Tamar gas field, and many other investment deals were under discussion. A Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement went into effect a year ago and in 2023, two-way trade reached $3 billion, up from $190 million in 2020. Even then, however, the people-to-people warmth exhibited on the Emirati side was tepid: The Washington Institute poll found only a 45 percent minority of Emiratis thought doing business with Israel was “acceptable.” Emiratis didn’t visit Israel, except for business.

Even though Emirati leaders say they remain committed to the economic and political partnership with Israel, there has been a perceptible chill since the onset of the war in Gaza. Last month, Abu Dhabi’s national oil company, ADNOC, put on hold a deal to buy, together with BP, a 50 percent stake in Israeli energy company NewMed. They cited the “external environment,” presumably the war, for the decision.

Fortunately for the future of these relationships, it appears that the war in Gaza is winding down. It is by no means certain that it won’t re-ignite with an assault on Rafah, as Israel has threatened, or that the low-intensity conflict between Israel and Hezbollah won’t spiral into a full-fledged war. But for now, as a testament to the prioritizing of realpolitik and economic interest by Arab leaders, these ties have stood the test.

READ MORE

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Jordan's King Abdullah II, and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi talk to delegates during the Arab League's Summit for Jerusalem in Cairo, on Feb. 12, 2023.

Arab Countries Have Israel’s Back—for Their Own Sake


Last weekend’s security cooperation in the Middle East doesn’t indicate a new future for the region.
ARGUMENT
| STEVEN A. COOK

Gilad Erdan, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, shows a video of Iranian missiles being intercepted over Al-Aqsa Mosque during an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council.
Can Israel Harness Its Rare Moment of Regional Support?


Israel has launched a diplomatic offensive to further isolate Iran after its attack.
ANALYSIS
| AMY MACKINNON

Israel's Iron Dome air defense system launches to intercept missiles fired from Iran.

3 Ways Israel Could Respond to Iran
Israeli leaders have vowed to counterattack, but how they do so could jeopardize international support.
ANALYSIS
| JACK DETSCH

Nigeria: Nestle Reacts to Allegation of Adding Sugar to Infant Formulas in Nigeria

Nestle Nigeria, a subsidiary of Nestle, a global food and beverage company, has denied adding sugar to its products sold in Nigeria (file photo)

19 APRIL 2024
Premium Times (Abuja)

By Beloved John

The reaction is contained in a statement issued on Thursday and shared with PREMIUM TIMES by the company's Head of Corporate Communications, Victoria Uwadoka.

Nestle Nigeria, a subsidiary of Nestle, a global food and beverage company, has denied adding sugar to its products sold in Nigeria, insisting it is not violating the global guidelines for infant formulas.

This was contained in a statement issued on Thursday and shared with PREMIUM TIMES by the company's Head of Corporate Communications, Victoria Uwadoka.

Nestle Nigeria, a subsidiary of the Swiss-based multinational company, said it complies with the global requirements on the usage of sugar and supplies quality products to every part of the world.

The company's statement is in response to an earlier inquiry by PREMIUM TIMES on the development. Ms Uwadoka had requested that a mail be sent by our reporter and pledged a response as soon as possible, saying she was far away from the office.

Denial

The statement counters the findings of a recent investigation, which revealed that Nestle had been selling substandard infant food products to Nigeria and other low and middle-income countries.

The investigation, carried out by the Public Eye, a Swiss investigative organisation, in collaboration with the International Baby Food Action Network, revealed that Nestle provides its best quality to Europe and other developed nations but supplies substandard products to low- and middle-income countries across the world.

"For Nestlé, not all babies are equal when it comes to added sugar," the report said.

Samples of Nestle's baby food products sold in Asia, Africa, and Latin America were sent to Belgium for laboratory testing.

PREMIUM TIMES had reported some of the findings which significantly involved Nigeria.

Sugar in Nigeria Cerelac

Traces of sugar, such as sucrose or honey, were found in samples of Cerelac, a cereal for children between six months and two years old, and Nido, a follow-up milk formula brand intended for infants at least one year old.

Reacting to these claims, Nestle Nigeria said the multinational company provided the same nutrition, health, and wellness principles everywhere in the world.

According to the company, Cerelac may have slight variations in recipes worldwide.

It also said, "In Europe, Nestlé's range of cereals comes with and without added sugars.

" Like everywhere in the world, in Nigeria, we do not add sugars (sucrose and glucose) to Infant formula for children aged 0-12 months

It said, "These principles are aligned with both international and local guidelines, noting that baby formulas in Nigeria for children 0-12 do not add sugar contents. Nigeria, our Growing Up Milk have no added sugars.

"Our milk and cereals for young children are fortified with vitamins and minerals such as iron to help tackle malnutrition."

High sugar in Nigeria's Cerelac

Cerelac from Nigeria had the second-highest sugar content, with 6.8g per serving. The country closely follows the Philippines, which has 7.3g.

The report said, "On average, our analysis found almost 4 grams per serving or about one sugar cube."

Nigeria was ranked 7th out of 10 countries with high sugar content in Nido. According to the report, samples from Nigeria and Senegal, ranked 8th, had 0.6g.

The highest sugar content was found in Panama samples, at 5.3g per serving. Then came Nicaragua 4.7g; Mexico 1.8g; Costa Rica 1.6g; South Africa 0.9g; and Indonesia 0.7g.

Boycat: The app driving change for Palestine with every barcode scan

The Boycat app helps users help Palestinians by scanning barcodes and finding products and companies that do not fuel Israeli attacks and occupation

Servet Gunerigok |19.04.2024  AA



- 'We created Boycat as an app, one, because we want to obviously help the Palestinian cause,' creator Adil Abbuthalha tells Anadolu

- 'As Palestine is our biggest cause, we want people to only spend money in a certain way that promotes pro-Palestinian (businesses) and ... doesn't allow for the Israeli government and Israeli corporations to see any sort of benefit,' explains Abbuthalha

WASHINGTON (AA)

Amid ongoing Israeli attacks and a soaring death toll nearing 34,000 in under seven months, the repercussions of the conflict in Gaza are felt deeply across the US Muslim community.

Many have been looking for ways to help the Palestinian cause from afar, including via rising calls and action to boycott Israeli goods as well as companies that invest in the country or provide services that support Palestine's occupation.

Adil Abbuthalha is one of those. The creator of an app called Boycat, he is offering a straightforward yet powerful tool for those who want to align their purchasing decisions with their support for Palestine.

Boycat's functionality is simple yet effective.

By scanning product barcodes, users can quickly find out whether the item is associated with companies supporting Israel. If so, the app suggests alternative products from other brands.

The motivation is clear for 26-year-old Abbuthalha, who wants to give users worldwide a way to contribute to the Palestinian cause at an individual level.

"We created Boycat as an app, one, because we want to obviously help the Palestinian cause. That was our biggest opportunity here. We wanted to help do something at an individual level, across the globe," the app founder told Anadolu in an interview.

"Because oftentimes our governments and large corporations, they don't allow us to express ourselves the way we want to and they don't always align with our values. And so we created this application in order to give purchasing power back to the individual, because we noticed that governments and large corporations have one common language, and that was money," he said.

According to Abbuthalha, users must be allowed to choose where they want to spend the money in an ethical way and support the causes they care about.

"Especially right now as Palestine is our biggest cause, we want people to only spend money in a certain way that promotes pro-Palestinian (businesses) and ... doesn't allow for the Israeli government and Israeli corporations to see any sort of benefit," he explained.

Community is at the heart of Boycat's impact. With over 200,000 users in just three months, it has diverted over $4.5 million away from businesses supporting Israel, Abbuthalha said.

"I think touching on community is very important because we want to bring together the community," he added.

In a feature, called Zoomies, that supports local communities, the app connects users with local businesses such as restaurants, cafes, grocery stores, that offer alternatives to boycotted brands.

"For example, we want to boycott Starbucks, McDonald's, and other chains similar to them. And we don't even allow you to direct to those places.

"We just show you that ... these are the alternatives, places that you can go instead. So, maybe there's a Starbucks down the road. But if you walk 20 feet more to the left, there's a local coffee shop you can support instead," he said.

Abbuthalha's inspiration for Boycat came during a moment of despair at the devastation in the Gaza Strip.

"It was in November, Nov. 14 ... We witnessed one month of atrocities in Gaza itself. We saw Israeli bombing like crazy, destroying the cities and everything. And we felt so helpless at that time. That one night on Nov. 14, I had a dream. It's very cheesy, but I had a dream where I was arguing with someone, why they are buying Starbucks. And they basically just said 'there's no alternative and I don't know' that's all they said.

"And I woke up and I just had everything clicked. I just texted the right people and I was like, we need to make a BDS application, make it easy. So we started building in December and then from there we launched in January," he said, referring to the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement.

While Boycat is not a cure-all solution, Abbuthalha sees it as a crucial first step.

In essence, Boycat is not about destroying brands but about promoting informed choices and community engagement. As Abbuthalha puts it, "Our goal is to keep expanding ... but ultimately, we don't want to like completely eradicate a brand."

Israel has waged a deadly military offensive on Gaza since an Oct. 7, 2023 cross-border attack by Hamas in which nearly 1,200 people were killed.

More than 33,800 Palestinians, mostly women and children, have since been killed in Gaza, and over 76,600 others injured amid mass destruction and shortages of necessities.

The Israeli war has pushed 85% of Gaza’s population into internal displacement amid acute shortages of food, clean water and medicine, while 60% of the enclave's infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed, according to the UN.

Israel stands accused of genocide at the International Court of Justice. An interim ruling in January ordered Tel Aviv to stop genocidal acts and take measures to guarantee that humanitarian assistance is provided to civilians in Gaza.

Ally of Pakistan’s Prime Minister Demands End to Ban on Social Media Platform X

Farhatullah Babar, seen here during a news conference in Islamabad, Pakistan, in January 2024, has called for the government to lift a two-month-old ban on the social media platform X.

Anjum Naveed—AP

BY MUNIR AHMED / AP

APRIL 19, 2024 


ISLAMABAD — An important ally of Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif demanded the government lift a two-month-old ban on the social media platform X, saying on Friday that it violates citizens' right to speech and expression.

The ban on X has been in place since February, when the party of imprisoned former Prime Minister Imran Khan announced a nationwide protest against alleged election rigging ahead of the Feb. 8 vote that allowed Sharif to come to power.

“We demand that the ban on X, which is known as Twitter, should immediately be lifted by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to stop any further violation of human rights,” said Farhatullah Babar, a senior leader of the Pakistan People's Party. The PPP is an important member of the coalition that allowed Sharif to form a government in March.

Babar is known as a defender of human rights who's taken stands on civil rights and the protection of minorities during a three-decade career in politics.

Sharif's government offered conflicting justifications for the ban in public statements before telling an Islamabad court that the decision to impose it had been made “in the interest of upholding national security, maintaining public order and preserving the integrity of the nation.”

Another court in Karachi asked the government to reverse the ban on Wednesday after petitions from human rights defenders.


Millions of people use X in Pakistan, and Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party relies on it especially heavily. The PTI says the restrictions were meant to suppress its voice on social media.

Many people have been using VPN software to bypass the government's block on X, and access to the platform has been intermittently restored, but human rights activists want a total end to the ban.

Babar made his comments a day after X said that it was in contact with Pakistan to understand its concerns.

Pakistan has said the social media is being used to defame the country’s institutions, a phrase which is often used to refer to the military and judiciary. Both have come under criticism from Khan, who was ousted in a no-confidence vote in April 2022.

Babar said there was a perception that such institutions were behind the ban.

“There are certain powerful forces in Pakistan, and you know there is a perception here that these forces are sitting in the driving seat and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif is in the back seat, and we request the prime minister to dispel this impression by lifting the ban on X with whatever power he has now,” Babar told the Associated Press

Washington has also urged Pakistan to lift restrictions on X.

The murky role of military contractors in war

A civil case against US company has revived debate over the increasing use of private security firms in military operations



A Wagner Group soldier visits a makeshift memorial in Moscow for the group's leader Yevgeny Prigozhin after his death in a plane crash in August 2023
(Image credit: Natalia Kolesnikova / AFP via Getty Images)

BY RICHARD WINDSOR, THE WEEK UK
PUBLISHED 2 DAYS AGO

A US military contractor is in court this week over allegations of prisoner torture during the Iraq War.


Three former inmates at the "infamous" Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad have brought a civil case against CACI, accusing the Virginia-based firm of conspiracy to torture prisoners, said The Independent. CACI has denied wrongdoing and said the claimants have not been able to "sufficiently prove" that its workers directed abuse at the prison.

But, according to evidence given by retired US army general Antonio Taguba, who led a 2004 investigation into the abuses, a civilian contractor working for CACI instructed guards to "soften up" inmates for interrogation.

The case could have "ramifications beyond remedies for victims", said Time, which pointed to the US military's "dependence on contractors". The global private military contractors (PMCs) sector has continued to grow as governments seek cost-effective, expert and discreet resources to supplement their own militaries.

What exactly do military contractors do?

Escalating global conflicts have driven military spending across the world to "levels not seen since the Cold War", said the Financial Times. And that has been a boon for weapons, ammunition and defence technology manufacturers.

The role of PMCs is "multifaceted", said Federica Saini Fasanotti at GIS Reports. They might act as "supplements to traditional armies" or be "employed by multinational corporations".

Most contractors are former members of the armed forces who can use that training to "provide external and internal security, engage in warfare, secure local leadership and even become an extension of that leadership's armed forces", as well as train local soldiers.

Although individual contractors are usually hired for the duration of a specific mission, many PMCs have had long-term engagements with governments.
Who is using them?

The most well-known PMC is the Wagner Group, a long-time contractor for the Russian government that has conducted controversial operations on behalf of Moscow in Ukraine, Syria, and several African countries.

But the most prolific employers of privatised armed forces are the UK, China, South Africa and, in particular, the US. And reliance on contractors such as CACI has grown hugely since the Iraq War, to the point where the US military "can't move, communicate, fight, or sustain itself without contractor support", Steven Schooner, a professor at George Washington University Law School, told Time.

PMCs are also being used to alleviate "growing demand on the UK's official intelligence resource", said the i news site. Prevail Partners, a risk management contractor "commonly used by the UK government", was reported this week to have been tasked with tackling the small boats crisis by using open-source software and artificial intelligence to vet arrivals and combat people smugglers.
Why are they so controversial?

The biggest issue around PMCs remains accountability. There is little regulation surrounding their actions, and while the "international community has sought to set standards", said The Guardian, legal ramifications for contractors have been "rare".

Some PMCs are known to have used "illegal warfare activities" to complete missions, acting as a "scapegoat" for governments wishing to bypass domestic and international laws to achieve their aims, said Martha Garcia at Modern Diplomacy.

There is also a blurred line between contractors and mercenaries. The biggest difference "is who they agree to work for", but even that has "no clear line", given the lack of regulation, said Garcia. The "rapid xpansion and normalisation" of PMCs has created a "dangerous gap" in the international community's understanding of the potential dangers posed by this "evolving threat".

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for MERCENARIES 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PRIVATIZED WAR 

Arnott: Abdulah Öcalan is the key to peace

The Scottish Trade Union Confederation, representing more than half a million workers in Britain, decided to expand the fight for the freedom of Kurdish People's Leader Abdulah Öcalan at its 2024 general congress.


ANF
NEWS DESK
Saturday, 20 April 2024, 12:02

Mike Arnott, President of the Scottish Trade Union Confederation, spoke about the decisions taken at the congress to put pressure on both the British and Turkish states on the issue of Britain's arms sales to Turkey and a political solution to the Kurdish problem.

Arnott said that they called on the Turkish state and the British government to ensure the freedom of Kurdish People's Leader Abdullah Öcalan and to take some steps, and added: "In addition, they called on the British government to initiate diplomatic initiatives in NATO, to stop their arms sales to Turkey, and also to protect the Kurdish people. We also demanded that they take action to immediately stop the bombing of their regions. We have prioritized our decisions to stop the attacks on Kurdish regions in Northern and Eastern Syria and to ensure that the British government puts pressure on Turkey to release Abdullah Öcalan."

Arnott said that they will write a special letter to the British Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Turkish Embassy regarding the release of Abdullah Öcalan, and added: "Abdullah Öcalan, who has been held captive for 25 years and has not heard from him for the last 3 years, became the main topic for 300 delegates representing more than half a million workers. We also discussed the issue of the repeated denial of lawyers and family visits by the Turkish authorities. While making our final declaration and decisions, none of the delegates opposed the motion and voted for it."

Arnott said: "We are already working for Öcalan's freedom, because he is the person who can bring about peace, but these important congress decisions will enable us to put even heavier pressure on the states."

The Scottish Trade Unions Congress passed a motion calling for Öcalan's freedom.

ANF
DUNDEE
Saturday, 20 April 2024

A motion calling for Kurdish people's leader Abdullah Öcalan's freedom was passed by the Scottish Trade Unions Congress at their Annual Congress in Dundee.

The mover of the motion was Dundee Trades Union Council, while the seconder was East Kilbride & South Lanarkshire Trades Union Council.

The motion reads as follows:

"That this Congress notes that the Kurdish question in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey is one of the major unresolved problems of the Middle East. The conflict between the Turkish state and the Kurdish freedom movement has cost tens of thousands of lives while millions of Kurds have become refugees across the world.

Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan has endured 26 years in prison after being illegally kidnapped from Kenya and handed over to Turkey. He has had no contact with the outside world, in violation of both Turkish and international law, for 3 years. His last meeting with his lawyers was in August 2019 and his last communication with anyone outside prison, a phone call with his brother, was in March 2021.

Meanwhile, Turkey, as a NATO country, continues to bomb Kurdish settlements in North and East Syria and in Iraq as well as oppressing and imprisoning Kurdish politicians and citizens at home.

Congress reiterates its view that his release is essential to starting a political dialogue to resolve the ongoing issue of Kurdish self-determination. Öcalan’s principle of Democratic Confederalism, put into practice in Rojava and inspiring many, including the CUB Trade Union in Italy, offers solutions to many of the problems of the Middle East and beyond, with its methodology of women’s liberation and democratic, autonomous organising.

Congress regrets the invitation offered to Turkey’s President Erdoğan to visit Scotland by the First Minister. President Erdoğan’s government has continued the war on the Kurds, refused to hold peace talks, sanctioned the use of violence and legal action against political opposition and attacked independent media/journalists.

Congress demands that;

The UK Governmentstops its arms sales to Turkey;
through diplomatic and NATO channels, pressurises Turkey to stop the bombing of Kurds in North and East Syria and Iraq;
pressurises Turkey to release Abdullah Ocalan;

The Turkish Governmentreleases Abdullah Öcalan;
ends its oppression and imprisonment of Kurdish political and cultural organisations and individuals; and
enters into negotiations to resolve its conflict with the Kurdish freedom movement."

‘Palestinian Nazi state’ can’t be allowed into UN Security Council, says Israel

Israel's permanent representative to the UN suggested that a vote in favour of Palestine becoming a permanent member of the UN Security Council would mean supporting a 'Palestinian Nazi state'. The disturbing claim that Palestinians fighting for liberation equates to a regime that slaughtered 6 million Jews, came at the end of a long speech criticising the UN and all Security Council members for never supporting Israel, and claiming the UN has focused too much on Israel's genocidal actions in Gaza.


April 19, 2024 

What a Climate-Aligned IMF Would Look Like

Apr 19, 2024MOHAMED NASHEED and RAKESH MOHAN

MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images
During her first five-year term as managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Kristalina Georgieva won the argument that climate change is central to the institution’s mandate. Now, she will have to show that she can align all its operations with the broader sustainable development agenda.


MALÉ – Last week, the board of the International Monetary Fund approved current Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva for another five-year term. It is a welcome development that comes at a critical moment. Her second term will finish just before the end of this “make-or-break” decade for reining in climate change and delivering on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Georgieva has made significant progress in aligning the IMF with these goals. She was instrumental in the IMF’s decision to acknowledge climate change as a critical macro issue under its institutional mandate. Under her leadership, the IMF launched its first-ever climate-change strategy; created the Resilience and Sustainability Trust (RST), its primary climate-finance instrument; and fostered global dialogue on the issue through its flagship publications and research.

But now even bolder leadership is needed. As the only multilateral institution charged with maintaining global financial and fiscal stability, the IMF’s role is critical for addressing climate change. Georgieva can build on the progress made in her first term by doing four things: committing the IMF to align with the Paris agreement; ensuring that it has ample financial firepower; elevating the voices of climate-vulnerable emerging-market and developing economies (EMDEs); and mobilizing international support for climate mitigation and adaptation efforts.

The first task is the most important. All the IMF’s programs – not just those that are explicitly climate focused, like the RST – need to start promoting low-carbon development. Critically, that means avoiding scenarios that lock in fossil-fuel-intensive growth paths that will leave countries stranded in a net-zero future. All the IMF’s work must be consistent with models of inclusive growth and development, including those where value is generated from natural capital and biodiversity. Equally, the IMF’s surveillance efforts (which involve all countries, not just borrowers) should help governments identify how best to achieve their development and climate goals.

But aligning IMF financing and operations with the Paris goals will not be enough. With governments negotiating a new climate-finance goal this year, the IMF should help policymakers identify potential sources of financing and better understand the macroeconomic dimensions of the issue. This will require fresh thinking, because the evidence shows that carbon pricing will not be enough to generate the resources needed to support the net-zero transition. Robust analytics from the IMF can help to foster a global consensus on how best to generate international and domestic public finance – whether through taxation, revenue from carbon border adjustment mechanisms, or other channels.

Second, Georgieva must ensure that the IMF itself has ample financing firepower. As she has previously warned, the world is increasingly prone to a wide range of shocks, many of which would have profound macroeconomic consequences. In this fraught new setting, the IMF’s operations and balance sheet must be calibrated against what member states need to remain resilient. While the IMF Board approved a 50% increase in member states quotas (contributions) last December, that is far below the 267% increase required to meet the gross external financing needs of the most vulnerable members.

Similarly, the transition to net-zero will radically alter the economic terrain for many countries, especially those that have long relied on exporting or taxing fossil fuels. The IMF should track these trends and prepare to support countries that need help pursuing an orderly, low-carbon transition.

Third, Georgieva has a special responsibility to ensure that climate-vulnerable economies are involved in the IMF’s decision-making. These economies are more likely to seek IMF help, so it is all the more important that they have a say in how the IMF works. Yet, as of October 2022, the Vulnerable Group of 20 (V20) commands only around 5% of the voting power at the IMF, despite being home to 17% of the world’s population.

One major V20 demand is to “make debt work for the climate.” That means revising the IMF’s debt-sustainability model to incorporate urgent investment and spending needs, and to determine what it will take for each country to meet them. Implicit in this approach is a move away from conventional austerity-based measures, and toward strategies focused more on resource mobilization.

To be sure, the recent addition of a third African chair on the IMF Executive Board was a welcome development. But at the end of the day, last year’s 16th General Review of Quotas was a missed opportunity to rebalance voting power. Given that the IMF has never had a non-European managing director, it will take fundamental governance reforms to convince climate-vulnerable economies that it truly represents their interests. To that end, Georgieva should offer her support for ongoing efforts to recognize the V20 as an official inter-governmental group at the IMF.

Finally, since Georgieva cannot undertake these efforts alone, the IMF Board must support her in hiring and funding additional staff from diverse disciplines and backgrounds. Additional resources would allow the IMF to scale up its direct country engagement and ensure that national policies are tailored to local contexts. Coordination with other international institutions is also essential. The World Bank, for example, can help leverage the RST’s limited resources to mobilize more money, especially toward resiliency programs like Climate Prosperity Plans.

In her first term, Georgieva won the argument that climate change is central to the IMF’s mandate. Now, she will have to show that the institution can rise to the challenge posed by the climate crisis at this “now or never” juncture.



MOHAMED NASHEED
Writing for PS since 2020
Mohamed Nasheed, a former president of the Maldives, is Founder and Secretary-General of the Climate Vulnerable Forum.


RAKESH MOHAN
Writing for PS since 2014
Rakesh Mohan, a former deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of India, is a member of the Economic Advisory Panel to the World Bank President Ajay Banga, President Emeritus of the Centre for Social and Economic Progress, and a member of the Task Force on Climate, Development, and the International Monetary Fund.