Tuesday, May 07, 2024

‘Unlike anything we have studied’: Gaza’s destruction in numbers

– More bombed-out than Dresden –


AFP
May 7, 2024

The devastated area around Gaza's Al-Shifa hospital on April 3, 2024. 
- Copyright AFP OLYMPIA DE MAISMONT


Laurence COUSTAL and Valentin RAKOVSKY

As well as killing more than 34,000 people and causing catastrophic levels of hunger and injury, the seven-month war between Israel and Hamas has also caused massive material destruction in Gaza.

“The rate of damage being registered is unlike anything we have studied before. It is much faster and more extensive than anything we have mapped,” said Corey Scher, a PhD candidate at the City University of New York, who has been researching satellite imagery of Gaza.

As Israel launches an offensive on Rafah, the last population centre in Gaza yet to be entered by its ground troops, AFP looks at the territory’s shattered landscape seven months into the war sparked by Hamas’s unprecedented October 7 attack.

– Three-quarters of Gaza City destroyed –


Gaza is one of the most densely populated places on the planet, where before the war 2.3 million people had been living on a 365-square-kilometre (140-square-mile) strip of land.

According to satellite analyses by Scher and Jamon Van Den Hoek, an associate professor of geography at Oregon State University, 56.9 percent of Gaza buildings were damaged or destroyed as of April 21, making a total of 160,000.

“The fastest rates of destruction were in the first two to three months of the bombardment”, Scher told AFP.

In Gaza City, home to some 600,000 people before the war, the situation is dire: almost three-quarters (74.3 percent) of its buildings have been damaged or destroyed.

– Five hospitals now rubble –

During the war, Gaza’s hospitals have been repeatedly attacked by Israel, which accuses Hamas of using them for military purposes, a charge the militant group denies.

In the first six weeks of the war sparked by the Hamas attack, which killed more than 1,170 people according to an AFP tally of Israeli official figures, “60 percent of healthcare facilities… were indicated as damaged or destroyed”, Scher said.

The territory’s largest hospital, Al-Shifa in Gaza City, was targeted in two offensives by the Israeli army, the first in November, the second in March.

The World Health Organization said the second operation reduced the hospital to an “empty shell” strewn with human remains.

Five hospitals have been completely destroyed, according to figures compiled by AFP from the OpenStreetMap project, the Hamas health ministry and the United Nations Satellite Centre (UNOSAT). Fewer than one in three hospitals — 28 percent — are partially functioning, according to the UN.

– Over 70% of schools damaged –


The territory’s largely UN-run schools, where many civilians have sought refuge from the fighting, have also paid a heavy price.

As of April 25, UNICEF counted 408 schools damaged, representing at least 72.5 percent of its count of 563 facilities.

Of those, 53 school buildings have been completely destroyed and 274 others have been damaged by direct fire.

The UN estimates that two-thirds of the schools will need total or major reconstruction to be functional again.

Regarding places of worship, combined data from UNOSAT and OpenStreetMap show 61.5 percent of mosques have been damaged or destroyed.

– More bombed-out than Dresden –


The level of destruction in northern Gaza has surpassed that of the German city of Dresden, which was firebombed by Allied forces in 1945 in one of the most controversial Allied acts of World War II.

According to a US military study from 1954, quoted by the Financial Times, the bombing campaign at the end of World War II damaged 59 percent of Dresden’s buildings.

In late April, the head of the UN mine clearance programme in the Palestinian territories, Mungo Birch, said there was more rubble to clear in Gaza than in Ukraine, which was invaded by Russia more than two years ago.

The UN estimated that as of the start of May, the post-war reconstruction of Gaza would cost between 30 billion and 40 billion dollars.

 

Canada: Student encampments for Palestine spread

May 3, 2024
GREEN LEFT 
Mastodon
FacebookXTelegraEmailPrint
Collage of photos
McGill University students launched the first encampment on April 27, demanding that the university divest from all companies with ties to Israel. Photo sources: @WBWCanada/X, @SpringMagCa/X, @Mauro_Cossu/X

Students at universities across Canada have established encampments in solidarity with Palestine, inspired by and in solidarity with university encampments across the United States.

Since the first encampment at McGill University in Montreal was set up on April 27, encampments have spread (at the time of writing) to the University of British Columbia (UBC), University of Ottawa, Western University (Western), University of Victoria (UVic), Vancouver Island University (VIU) and the University of Toronto (U of T).

Appropriately, a number of encampments were launched on May Day (May 1), the international day of celebration of workers’ struggle.

The students are focussed on divestment from Israeli state violence, occupation and genocide.

McGill

About 100 students at McGill in Montreal launched the first encampment on April 27, raising the key demand that the university divest from all companies with ties to Israel.

The encampment was initiated by students at McGill and Concordia University — the city’s other major English-language university. By the end of the week the encampment had grown more than fourfold, as more students, campus workers and community members joined in.

Reactionary opponents of the encampment sought an injunction to have it shut down. That attempt failed as Justice Chantal Masse of Quebec’s Superior Court rejected the injunction. Masse ruled that if students were removed, their “freedom of expression and to gather peacefully would be affected significantly”.

UBC

About 100 people set up tents, food tables and a people’s library on a sports field at the UBC’s Point Grey campus in Vancouver on April 29. This was the first encampment in Western Canada, followed days later by two encampments on Vancouver Island.

Students at UBC were aware of the police violence inflicted on students at US encampments. They issued camp guidelines, including “do not talk to cops or campus security” and “do not engage with agitators or counter-protesters”. The latter message was prescient as a group of Zionists showed up to confront the encampment on the first night, before leaving when it started to rain.

The UBC students’ statement said: “We commit to grounding ourselves in the cause of this encampment: solidarity with Gaza and the Palestinian people who are facing genocide. We reject co-optations and centring of anyone but the people of Palestine.”

Western

On May Day, around 100 students at Western in London, Ontario set up tents on the lawn in front of the University Community Centre, demanding that Western divest from companies arming and/or profiting from Israeli occupation and aggression.

According to the university’s September 2023 financial records, it owns “approximately $300,000 worth of equity” in weapons technology company Lockheed Martin.

Lockheed Martin says it has “strengthened the IDF’s [Israel Defense Forces] ground forces” and “supplied the Israel Air Force with fifth-generation fighter jets”.

The temporary encampment was packed up by the students at midnight, as pre-arranged. Students were disappointed that they received no response from university administrators to their demands and were only granted a meeting with the campus’ equity, diversity, and inclusion office.

They signalled that future encampments were likely if their demands were not met. Western is a fairly conservative university and some students noted that this protest was a step forward, given the university’s history.

UVic and VIU

Encampments were also launched at Vancouver Island’s two major universities on May Day. Students at the UVic and VIU in Nanaimo set up Palestine solidarity encampments almost simultaneously, calling on their respective administrations to demand an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, and divest from all companies involved in funding the Israeli military.

They are calling on the universities to publicly condemn Israel’s ongoing attacks and express support for “Palestinians’ right to resist and right of return”.

UVic and VIU students are demanding that their universities affirm that they will take no disciplinary action against any students involved in or supporting the encampments. UVic students raised the additional demand that no police be allowed on campus.

University of Ottawa

Students from the University of Ottawa and nearby Carleton University set up two dozen tents on the lawn in front of Tabaret Hall — a popular student gathering area — on the University of Ottawa campus on May Day. Protesters are calling on the university to end its investment in entities with ties to Israel and to publicly disclose all its investments.

The students were met with threats by the administration. Associate vice-president of student affairs Eric Bercier put out a widely criticised statement that said: “While peaceful protest is permitted in appropriate public spaces on campus according to our policies and regulations, encampments and occupations will not be tolerated.”

U of T

Students at U of T’s downtown campus set up dozens of tents in the recently renovated King's College Circle, a main gathering space on the campus. The site is the location of the university’s planned convocation ceremonies later this month.

U of T was subject to derision for fencing off the area after encampments were set up at other universities. The university received further scorn for sending out a campus-wide email warning students against trespassing on university property. The email said: “U of T’s lands and buildings are private property, though the University allows wide public access to them for authorized activities. Unauthorized activities such as encampments or the occupation of University buildings are considered trespassing.”

Student protesters are calling on the university to divulge the list of its institutional endowment’s investments and to divest from any and all assets that “sustain Israeli apartheid, occupation and illegal settlement of Palestine”.

Protesters are also calling on the university to cut ties with Israeli academic institutions within the occupied West Bank. Students previously took these demands to the university but have been frustrated by the university’s lack of response.

Participants have pledged to keep the encampment going until their demands are met and the university divests from Israeli apartheid. This commitment was made as the university threatened them with removal. Students were also confronted by Zionists on the first day, including members of the terrorist Jewish Defence League.

Labour solidarity

Several unions offered statements of solidarity with the students.

Unifor, the largest private sector union in Canada tweeted out this short but solid statement of solidarity with the students and against police repression on May 2: “#Students continue to be at the forefront of the anti-war movement. #Unifor stands in full support with students across #Canada and #USA standing up for #peace in #Gaza & denounce all police & other aggression to forcibly remove encampments and silence peaceful protest. #cdnpoli”

Fred Hahn, the President of CUPE Ontario, the province’s largest public sector union, tweeted the union’s support for the student activists: “The response by authorities & government to protests led by students are worker issues @CUPEOntario @CUPEOUWCC members ARE students - this is fundamentally a Labour Issue - @CUPEOntario fully supports these brave actions and calls for #Solidarity from @OFLabour @torontolabour”.

He rightly stressed that this is a labour issue, that campus workers are students, students are workers and repression of movements is a working-class matter.

For their part, the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), representing university faculty across Canada, put out a rather tepid statement: “University and college administrations fail in their duty to uphold the foundational purposes of our institutions when they limit or pre-empt peaceful protests and counter-protests. When administrators threaten or authorize the discipline or arrest of peaceful protesters on campus, they are silencing expression and censoring speech. Academic freedom cannot thrive when freedom of expression is constrained.”

The real test will be unions’ actions beyond just words of solidarity. CUPE did call for its members to turn up to support the students. The encampments and their defence could and should provide a spark for broader labour actions, perhaps even wildcats.

Jewish voices

Zionist opponents of the encampments have tried to accuse them of being anti-Jewish. However, these claims do not hold up to any scrutiny.

Jewish students, faculty, campus workers, and community members have been active in the encampments and in support of them. They have expressed opposition to Israeli state violence and against Zionist ideology justifying occupation and genocide against Palestinians.

A group of U of T faculty, including the campus chapters of the Jewish Faculty Network, Faculty for Palestine and Health Workers Alliance for Palestine, put out a strong statement in support of the student encampments, affirming: “University students must be allowed to protest one of the central humanitarian crises of our time without fear of disciplinary measures.”

It remains to be seen how each university administration will engage the students. McGill has already contacted Montreal police. There is a very real possibility that calls for peace will be met with extreme police violence — as has happened at universities across the US.

Europe student Gaza protests spread, sparking clashes, arrests

Amsterdam (AFP) – Student protests to demand that universities break ties with Israel over the Gaza war spread across Europe on Tuesday, with police breaking up demonstrations in the Netherlands, Germany, and France.


 07/05/2024 - 

Police said the demo was turning violent © Eva Plevier / ANP/AFP

Students at some elite European universities, inspired by ongoing demonstrations at US campuses, have been occupying university halls and facilities, demanding an end to partnerships with Israeli institutions because of Israel's punishing assault on Gaza.

At the University of Amsterdam, images on public broadcaster NOS showed police baton-charging protesters and smashing up tents at around 4:00 am (0200 GMT), after they refused to leave the campus.

"The demonstration took on a violent nature because later in the evening massive stones were removed from the ground," police said in a statement.

At Berlin's Free University, police also cleared a demonstration after up to 80 people set up a protest camp in a courtyard of the campus early Tuesday.


The protesters, some of whom wore the keffiyeh scarf that has long been a symbol of the Palestinian cause, sat in front of tents and waved banners.

They later tried to enter rooms and lecture halls and occupy them, according to the university, which said it then called in the police to clear the protest.

Videos on social media showed officers carrying away some protesters.

The university said property was damaged while classes in some buildings were suspended for the day.

Berlin police said they made some arrests for incitement to hatred and trespassing.
France, Switzerland demos

In Paris, police Tuesday twice intervened at Paris's prestigious Sciences Po university to disperse about 20 students who had barricaded themselves in the university's main hall.

Police moved in to allow other students to take their exams and made two arrests, according to Paris prosecutors. The university said the exams were able to proceed without incident.

Police have intervened several times over the past week at Sciences Po, where protesters are demanding the university reveal its partnerships with Israeli institutions. Some 13 students are on a hunger strike, according to the university.

In Switzerland, protests on Tuesday spread to three universities across the country.

The University of Lausanne (UNIL) was the first to mobilise, with several hundred students occupying a hall Thursday evening to demand an end to partnerships with Israeli universities.

UNIL responded in a statement that it "considers that there is no reason to cease these relations".

On Tuesday, the movement spread to the EPFL university in Lausanne, where a group of students occupied the university's hall before dispersing in the afternoon, and to University of Geneva, where students took over a hall with sofas, chairs and tables around midday.

Tens of students protested in the entrance hall of the ETH Zurich shortly before midday on Tuesday, shouting "Free Palestine" and rolling a poster onto the floor that said "no Tech for Genocide" before being removed by police, according to news agency Keystone-ATS.

In Amsterdam, violence briefly erupted on Monday evening when a small group of counter-protesters wielding flares stormed the main protest.

Demonstrators blocked off some roads to the university, after which police broke up the protest to enable access by emergency services.

Some students hurled stones and fireworks at the officers when they broke up the demo, said police, and more than 120 were arrested.

On Tuesday morning, police began releasing some of those arrested but dozens were still in custody.
University publishes Israel ties

The war in the Gaza Strip was sparked by an unprecedented October 7 attack on Israel by the Palestinian group Hamas, which resulted in the deaths of more than 1,170 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally of Israeli official figures.

Militants also seized around 250 hostages, with an estimated 128 remaining in Gaza, including 35 the Israeli military says are dead.

Vowing to destroy Hamas, Israel launched a retaliatory offensive that has killed at least 34,789 people in Gaza, mostly women and children, according to the Hamas-run territory's health ministry. Israel has also been accused by many groups of blocking humanitarian aid to displaced people in Gaza.
Demonstrators opposed university ties with Israel 
© Nick Gammon / AFP

The University of Amsterdam has published a list of its collaborations with Israel, mainly student exchanges and research projects that involve Israeli academics.

The university "will under no circumstances contribute to warfare in any way, and we also do not intend to participate in exchanges in the field of military-related education", it said on its website.

© 2024 AFP
US campus Gaza protests echo past in crucial election year
DW
MAY  6, 2024

As the US academic year winds down, student protests are heating up. The tense exchanges over Israel-Gaza policy and police crackdowns have had consequences beyond the university campus.

California law enforcement made many arrests while taking down a pro-Palestinian encampment on the UCLA campus last week
Mario Tama/Getty Images


Many people in the United States and observing the scene from abroad over the last several weeks may be asking themselves, "What's going on?"

The title of the 1971 song by soul legend Marvin Gaye spoke to an era of civil unrest sparked by war, racism and political disillusionment when students and young people were putting themselves at the center of demands for major change.

If he were still alive today, Gaye would likely find just as much reason to produce that hit. Once again, US youth are turning their university campuses into stages to spotlight what some have described as "genocide live-streamed on their phones and a Democratic president who is fully in support of that," Leigh Raiford, a professor of African American Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, told DW.

"There is a whole generation of people who will not vote for the Democratic Party, will not vote for Joe Biden," she said, explaining that Israel's treatment of Palestinians would be on the ballot for some voters in November.

That starkly contrasts four years ago, when Biden defeated former US President Donald Trump partly by appealing to young people engaged in nationwide protests linked to the Black Lives Matter movement. The catalyst for that election-year turmoil and this one differ, but the pursuit of social justice overlaps.



Whether the election outcome will also differ in 2024 remains a matter of debate among pollsters and campaign strategists. Biden has tried to show a balance between his unwavering military support for Israel and an interest in alleviating the civilian toll. In recent weeks, he has more vigorously pushed for a cease-fire.


What are the protesting US students demanding?


"Anti-genocide encampments" have popped up on dozens of campuses across the US, with participants calling for an end to Israel's seven-month bombardment of Gaza. Israel's military campaign that began after Hamas, which is recognized as a terrorist organization by the German government, the EU, the US and some Arab states, launched an unprecedented attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, has killed nearly 35,000 people.

Nearly half the dead are children, according to the United Nations, which uses figures from the Hamas-run Health Ministry. Many aid organizations have said the toll is likely an undercount.

Their demands vary, but the protesters on university campuses broadly want the US, as the largest supplier of lethal aid to Israel, to end its "ironclad" commitment to the state, as Biden has often described it.

The president has said the protests will not alter his stance. However, his administration paused a shipment of ammunition to Israel this week, according to a report by Axios, a US news platform. It was not immediately clear why, but this marks the first such hold in the current round of escalation.



Students also want their universities, some of which maintain endowments worth billions of dollars, to divest from financial holdings in the weapons industry and Israel-related business.

With final exams and commencement approaching and under pressure from wealthy donors and politicians allergic to criticism of Israel, many universities have cited safety issues and other violations of campus policies as reasons to bring in police to clear out the protesters. At least 2,000 people have been arrested at universities across the country so far.

Myriad reports, such as from campuses in Georgia, Texas and New York City, appear to show police using excessive force. Yet at University of California, Los Angeles, they were criticized for doing too little as masked pro-Israel counterprotesters attacked the Palestinian encampment there last week. Social media posts captured protesters chanting, "Where were you yesterday?" as law enforcement moved in to dismantle the encampment following the attack.

US has long tradition of trying to discredit activist groups

"This is yet another example of suppression from colleges and universities of students' pro-Palestinian speech," Amr Shabaik, the legal director of the Los Angeles chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said in a statement condemning the escalation.

Mindful of the roughly 1,200 people killed during Hamas' October attacks, many of them civilians, pro-Israel supporters have pointed to incidents of harassment or threats directed at Jewish students. They have presented circumstantial evidence alleging a connection between protest groups and foreign entities, such as Hamas.
Demonstrators watched the dismantling of an anti-war encampment at UW-Madison in Wisconsin
John Hart/AP/picture alliance

Many Jews have expressed solidarity with the protests, joining encampments and hosting traditional seder meals during last month's Passover holiday. The nuanced picture of who falls on what side has further complicated the universities' response.

For example, of the 282 arrests made at Columbia University and City College of New York on April 30, New York City police reported 71% and 40% had campus affiliation, respectively. Unlike Columbia, CCNY is a public college and remains more open to outsiders.

"These kinds of calls of 'outside agitation' are really dangerous, and they're also really disingenuous," said Raiford, currently in Germany as a fellow at the American Academy in Berlin.

She pointed to a long tradition of trying to discredit activist groups in the US, from the Red Scare of the early and mid-20th century to civil rights and anti-war demonstrations of the 1960s and '70s, all of which opponents accused of being influenced by Soviet and communist outsiders. Raiford said that these movements have been seen as falling on the "right side of history."


Martin Luther King, Jr., and his wife Coretta Scott King led a civil rights march from Selma, Alabama, on May 3, 1965
mage: William Lovelace/Express/Getty Images

"They called Martin Luther King an 'outside agitator,'" she added, referring to segregationists dead set against equal rights for all Americans.

There have been plenty of allegations to go around. A coordinated effort between pro-Israel groups in the US and the state of Israel has worked to quash pro-Palestinian voices, especially on campuses, according to reports by the US monthly magazine The Nation and the Qatar-based Al Jazeera news channel.

Freedom of speech vs. order

Universities have found themselves caught between competing pressures when it comes to upholding rights. Freedom of speech enjoys greater constitutional protection in the US than in many other democracies. But safety and access to education are also guaranteed rights.



While they have "legal obligations to combat discrimination and a responsibility to maintain order," Anthony Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, wrote in an open letter to university officials, "it is essential that you not sacrifice principles of academic freedom and free speech that are core to the educational mission of your respected institution."

That mission, of teaching social and moral ideals to students so that they can "go out and change the world," Raiford said, clashes with US higher education, which often serves as "spaces of consolidating the power of the ruling class."

Major institutions such as Columbia and the University of Chicago, which are both currently in the national spotlight, benefit from their student body's reputation for taking part in social and political change, which may be vilified in the moment but lauded in hindsight. When police in riot gear entered Columbia's Hamilton Hall last week, it was hard to miss the uncanny timing: they had done the same thing exactly 56 years earlier during the 1968 anti-war and civil rights protests.

Macklemore supports Palestinians, campus protests with new track

New York (AFP) – Macklemore has released a new song in support of Palestinians that also praises students across the United States protesting against Israel's war in Gaza.


Issued on: 07/05/2024
 -
Macklemore, shown here performing in Paris in 2023, has released socially aware music in the past, supporting LGBTQ+ rights while also criticizing ills including poverty and consumerism 
© Anna KURTH / AFP

University students have been mobilizing for weeks on campuses over Israel's deadly offensive and its US backing, with police forcibly clearing protest camps -- sometimes violently -- and arresting more than 2,000 people nationwide.

"If students in tents posted on the lawn / Occupying the quad is really against the law / And a reason to call in the police and their squad / Where does genocide land in your definition, huh?" Macklemore raps in "Hind's Hall."

The song is named after the building at Columbia University that students recently occupied and renamed after Hind Rajab, a six-year-old Palestinian girl killed in Gaza.

Macklemore admonishes the US government, telling President Joe Biden "blood is on your hands" and that he won't vote for him in the November election.

Pro-Palestinian students and activists protest at an encampment on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles, on May 6, 2024 © Etienne LAURENT / AFP/File

Israel is "a state that's gotta rely on an apartheid system to uphold an occupying violent history, been repeating for the last 75" years, Macklemore says in the song.

"We see the lies in them, claiming it's anti-Semitic to be anti-Zionist / I've seen Jewish brothers and sisters out there and riding in solidarity and screaming 'Free Palestine' with them."

The rapper best known for cult hits like 2012's "Thrift Shop" has released socially aware music in the past, supporting LGBTQ+ rights while also criticizing ills including poverty and consumerism.

In his latest track -- which is currently only out on social media -- Macklemore also criticizes the music industry for being "complicit in their platform of silence" while casting Drake and Kendrick Lamar's ongoing rap beef as trivial in light of actual war.

Pro-Palestinian students and activists face police officers after protesters were evicted from the library on campus earlier in the day at Portland State University in Portland, Oregon, on May 2, 2024 © John Rudoff / AFP/File

"I want a ceasefire, fuck a response from Drake" he raps.

The song samples "Ana La Habibi" from Lebanese superstar singer Fairuz.

Macklemore said that once it's available to stream, all proceeds will go to UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees.

© 2024 AFP
Boeing probed in US over possible falsified records on 787

AFP
May 6, 2024

A Boeing whistleblower and other aviation experts painted a troubling picture of Boeing's safety practices at a Senate hearing in April 2024 -
/AFP/File Kent Nishimura

John BIERS

US air safety authorities are investigating whether embattled aviation giant Boeing completed required inspections on its 787 aircraft and whether employees falsified records, officials said Monday.

The issue centers on whether Boeing undertook required inspections to “confirm adequate bonding and grounding where the wings join the fuselage on certain 787 Dreamliner airplanes,” the Federal Aviation Administration said in an email.

The FAA said it opened the investigation after Boeing notified it that the company may not have completed required inspections, which are needed to ensure a safe and functional electrical flow between aircraft components.

“The FAA is investigating whether Boeing completed the inspections and whether company employees may have falsified aircraft records,” the agency said. “At the same time, Boeing is reinspecting all 787 airplanes still within the production system and must also create a plan to address the in-service fleet.”

The issue surfaced after a Boeing employee observed an “irregularity” and raised the issue with a supervisor who elevated it further.

“We quickly reviewed the matter and learned that several people had been violating company policies by not performing a required test, but recording the work as having been completed,” Scott Stocker, head of the Boeing 787 program, said in an email to staff.

“We promptly informed our regulator about what we learned and are taking swift and serious corrective action with multiple teammates,” said Stocker, adding that engineering staff determined that the issues does not pose an immediate safety of flight risk.

The probe adds to the litany of issues facing Boeing in the aftermath of a near-catastrophic Alaska Airlines flight in January in which a panel on the fuselage blew out.

The FAA has given the company three months to present a plan to address “systemic quality-control issues.”

Boeing’s management of the 787 came under question at an April 17 Senate hearing at which a company whistleblower testified that he was retaliated against after raising questions about manufacturing processes on the 787 that he believed threaten aircraft safety.

An audit by an FAA advisory panel released in February pointed to significant shortcomings in Boeing’s safety culture, describing a “disconnect” between senior company management and other Boeing employees and skepticism that safety complaints by workers would not result in retaliation.

In his message to employees, Stocker praised the employee for coming up, saying the company “will use this moment to celebrate him, and to remind us all about the kind of behavior we will and will not accept as a team.”


– Board under scrutiny –

Safety experts have said the problems at Boeing suggest significant safety culture defects that will not be turned around quickly.

Industry watchers are waiting for more clues about future leadership of Boeing after Chief Executive Dave Calhoun said he will step down at the end of the year.

Glass Lewis, the proxy advisory firm, last week urged investors to vote against Calhoun’s reelection to the board and two other board members who lead the audit and aerospace safety committees.

The move is needed “to strongly signal dissatisfaction with the company’s oversight of its safety culture and its efforts to transform said culture, which, in our view, have not progressed quickly enough to a level that sufficiently mitigates shareholder concern when safety incidents occur, as evidenced by the Alaska accident,” Glass Lewis said in a note.


Vietnam marks 70th anniversary of Dien Bien Phu victory over France

AFP
May 6, 2024

French Dien Bien Phu veterans Jean-Yves Guinard (R), Andre Mayer (C) and William Schilardi (2L) visit the former battleground with the help of Vietnamese soldiers - Copyright AFP Nhac NGUYEN
Alexis HONTANG, Tran Thi Minh Ha

War veterans, soldiers and dignitaries gathered in Vietnam’s Dien Bien Phu on Tuesday to mark the 70th anniversary of the battle that ultimately brought an end to the French empire in Indochina.

Vietnam has invited for the first time a government minister from the former colonial power to attend official celebrations, which involve 12,000 people, a gun salute and howitzer and helicopter displays.

French Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu and Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh are among those attending the two-hour event that has drawn huge attention from tourists and residents of northwestern Dien Bien province, which borders Laos.

As celebrations began before a crowd of 10,000 in Dien Bien Phu city’s stadium, 90-year-old veteran Pham Duc Cu spoke on behalf of his fallen comrades.

“It moves me to remember the people who died to achieve this earth-shaking victory,” he said.

“The war has passed. We are so proud to have contributed to making a heroic and beautiful Dien Bien.”

In his opening speech, Prime Minister Chinh said the battle of Dien Bien Phu represented a “victory for justice”, marking the collapse of colonialism.

“Many martyrs cannot be identified,” he said. “Their blood in this northwestern area was shed for our happiness today.”

The speeches followed 21 rounds of fireworks and the Vietnamese national anthem before a huge military parade got under way.

Eleven helicopters flew over the stadium carrying the flags of Vietnam and the Communist Party.

Outside the stadium, thousands of people wearing ao dai — traditional Vietnamese dress — as well as people wearing clothes typical of local Thai and Hmong ethnic minorities queued in the streets to see the parade.

“I’ve been here since 4 am,” said Nguyen Thi Lan, 55. “It’s a great day that I cannot miss.”

– ‘Deaths were normal’ –

France surrendered to the attacking Viet Minh on May 7, 1954, putting an end to 56 days of shelling and hand-to-hand combat.

Around 13,000 people were reported dead or missing during the conflict, including 10,000 from the Viet Minh side.

“I fired a shot which hit two people, killing one on the spot and the other one with one more shot,” recalled veteran infantry soldier Hoang Van Bay, 93.

“Injuries and deaths were normal on the battlefield, nothing to be scared of. We fought for our independence and freedom,” Bay told AFP, adding he visited his fallen comrades at Dien Bien Phu city’s cemetery every year.

The French force — about 15,000 men of many nationalities — had underestimated the firepower of the communist forces, who managed to install artillery on the hills overlooking the French camp.

In a staggering feat of military logistics, the Viet Minh had transported the heavy weaponry in pieces hundreds of kilometres through the jungle, sometimes by bicycle.

Their victory later led to the Geneva Accords on July 21, 1954, which marked the end of almost a century of French domination in Indochina and the partition of Vietnam, a prelude to future American involvement.

Relations between the two former enemies are now cordial, despite the human rights abuses of which the communist government is regularly accused.

– ‘More openness’ –


The tree-lined streets of Dien Bien Phu were adorned with communist slogans and banners carrying photos of independence hero Ho Chi Minh and General Vo Nguyen Giap, commander in chief of the Dien Bien Phu campaign.

The province’s battle sites are also undergoing a major facelift, with the Vietnamese authorities keen to turn the area into a tourism hotspot.

“Twenty years ago, it (the commemoration) was much more discreet. There was a sort of holding back on the Vietnamese side because May 7 is sacred for them,” said Pierre Journoud, professor of contemporary history at Paul Valery-Montpellier University, who is attending the commemorations.

“We are seeing more openness today.”

He said that Vietnam’s invitation to Lecornu reflects shared political interests, as tensions simmer between Hanoi and Beijing over their competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.

After the United States and China, “France wants to be a third voice in the Asia-Pacific region, and this is in line with the position of Vietnam, which is caught between two strangleholds,” he said.

Prime Minister Chinh said Monday that the visit was an effort to “close the past, overcome differences and head towards the future”, in order to promote a strategic relationship between Vietnam and France.

Ninety-two-year-old Jean-Yves Guinard, one of three French veterans who returned to their former camp for the anniversary, told AFP he “remained very attached to this country”.

The three were surrounded as they arrived at the Dien Bien Phu Victory Museum Monday by locals and tourists trying to take selfies with the former “enemy”.

Major German companies warn against vote for extremism

AFP
May 7, 2024

Germany's far-right AfD party is tied for second place in opinion polls ahead of EU Parliament elections - Copyright AFP Richard A. Brooks

Germany’s biggest companies said Tuesday they have formed an alliance to campaign against extremism ahead of key EU Parliament elections, when the far right is projected to make strong gains.

The alliance of 30 companies includes blue-chip groups like BMW, BASF and Deutsche Bank, a well as family-owned businesses and start-ups.

“Exclusion, extremism and populism pose threats to Germany as a business location and to our prosperity,” said the alliance in a statement.

“In their first joint campaign, the companies are calling on their combined 1.7 million employees to take part in the upcoming European elections and engaging in numerous activities to highlight the importance of European unity for prosperity, growth and jobs,” it added.

The unusual action by the industrial giants came as latest opinion polls show the far-right AfD obtaining about 15 percent of the EU vote next month in Germany, tied in second place with the Greens after the conservative CDU-CSU alliance.

A series of recent scandals, including the arrest of a researcher working for an AfD MEP, have sent the party’s popularity sliding since the turn of the year, even though it remains just ahead of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats.

Already struggling with severe shortages in skilled workers, many German enterprises fear gains by the far right could further erode the attractiveness of Europe’s biggest economy to migrant labour.

The alliance estimates that fast-ageing Germany currently already has 1.73 million unfilled positions, while an additional 200,000 to 400,000 workers would be necessary annually in coming years.

Wolf-Dieter Adlhoch, chief executive of the Dussmann Group, noted that 68,000 people from over 100 nations work in the family business.

“For many of them, their work with us, for example in cleaning buildings or geriatric care, is their entry into the primary labour market and therefore the key to successful integration. Hate and exclusion have no place here,” he said.

Siemens Energy chief executive Christian Bruch warned that “isolationism, extremism, and xenophobia are poison for German exports and jobs here in Germany –- we must therefore not give space to the fearmongers and fall for their supposedly simple solutions”.

The alliance said it is planning a social media campaign to underline the call against extremism and urged other companies to join its initiative.

It added that the campaign will continue after the EU elections, with three eastern German states to vote for regional parliaments in September.

In all three — Brandenburg, Thuringia and Saxony — the far-right AfD party is leading surveys.

Far-right parties wage disinfo war ahead of EU vote


AFP
May 7, 2024

Far-right politicians, such as Jordan Bardella of France's Rassemblement National, are social media stars
Copyright AFP OLYMPIA DE MAISMONT


Simon MORGAN

Far-right populist parties are way ahead of their traditional rivals in the race for voter attention on social media, where disinformation is stirring fear and rage around key issues in June’s European elections, experts say.

Platforms like Facebook, X, Instagram and others have been used by populist parties to spread misleading or false claims on hot topics such as the war in Ukraine, migration and regulations intended to protect the environment, as AFP’s fact-checkers have found.

“Populist parties are masters of a new type of propaganda. Disinformation is at the core of (their) communication strategies,” said consultant Johannes Hillje, who advises parties and politicians in Berlin and Brussels.

And the right-leaning parties have a lead in the quest for views and likes.

According to research by Politico magazine in March, the far-right Identity and Democracy (ID) group in the European parliament — which includes France’s National Rally (RN), AfD in Germany and PVV in the Netherlands — has 1.3 million followers on TikTok.

The centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), the largest and oldest parliamentary grouping, has a paltry 167,000.

– ‘Scapegoating immigrants’ –

A key issue for online misinformation is migration.

With the economy an overriding concern, “opportunistic politicians… are scapegoating immigrants for society’s ills,” said Natalia Banulescu-Bogdan, deputy director of Washington-based think tank Migration Policy Institute.

“Dis/misinformation about migrants and migration has long been used to foment fear and mobilise voters in Europe,” she said.

In March, for example, a false claim on X that immigration cost France 40 billion euros per year was repeated by the lead FN candidate, Jordan Bardella. Economists involved in the research cited as the source for the figure told AFP this was a “misleading interpretation”.

Another battleground for the right is the EU’s Green Deal measures to stem climate change. In April, a number of AfD politicians shared false claims that France had banned the construction and operation of wind power turbines. In fact, a court had merely issued a ruling regarding the noise levels of such turbines.

Social media is “handy for… organised right-wing populist political parties to impose their lies, conspiracies and frames”, said Ayhan Kaya, chair of European Politics of Interculturalism at Istanbul Bilgi University.

Many election issues are complicated, making them easy targets for disinformation. People wanted simple black and white answers “to the complexities of today’s globalised world”, he told AFP.

Far-right politicians such as the AfD’s top candidate Maximilian Krah have become veritable TikTok stars, garnering millions of likes for their videos.

In March, however, Krah was forced to deny allegations he accepted money to spread pro-Russian positions on a Moscow-financed news website. Since then, German prosecutors have launched an investigation against him for suspicious links to Russia and China.

The average number of views for AfD’s TikTok videos in 2022 and 2023 was 435,394, way ahead of Germany’s conservative CDU/CSU parties with an average of 90,583 views, said Hillje.

The gap was also substantial on YouTube, he said.

– ‘Major threat’ –


Already last October, the EU’s Agency for Cybersecurity called for vigilance ahead of the June 6-9 vote for the European Parliament, saying “information manipulation campaigns are considered to be a major threat to election processes”.

In a bid for votes, Bulgarian far-right party leader Kostadin Kostadinov in March falsely claimed on Facebook that an EU report listed his country as having the third most asylum applications from illegal migrants.

In Romania, the lead candidate for the SOS party, Diana Sosoaca, has veered into deep conspiracy, repeatedly spreading material related to the widely rejected chemtrails theory, that condensation trails in the sky from aircraft are actually from biological agents.

In Hungary, “one of the major sources of disinformation is the government itself,” according to EU DisinfoLab.

Nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban was scolded by Brussels last year for a series of misleading claims on Facebook, including that Brussels wanted to establish migrant ghettos in Hungary.

Populist parties are “animating their electoral successes” by painting the migration issue as an existential one, said Banulescu-Bogdan.

They “benefit from multiple crises by exploiting the fear of people,” said Hillje. “The main problem is that disinformation spreads faster and wider than information,” he said.

Extreme rights 2.0: A big global family

Steven Forti
LINKS
2 May, 2024


First published at NACLA.

The victory of Javier Milei in Argentina’s presidential elections last November exploded a veritable atomic bomb, whose shockwaves reach far beyond the Latin American country. The paleolibertarian economist, known for his crude insults against “lefties,” immediately received congratulations from the members of what the Spanish philosopher and politician Clara Ramas has called the new Reactionary International. Although they have never brandished chainsaws at their rallies, for Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Viktor Orbán, Giorgia Meloni, José Antonio Kast, and Santiago Abascal, Milei is one of their own.

The arrival of Milei and his La Libertad Avanza party to the Casa Rosada is just the latest example of a process that has been developing over at least three decades and that has accelerated in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis. Currently, in addition to Argentina, the extreme right governs in four European countries (Italy, Hungary, Finland, and the Czech Republic), externally supports a conservative executive in Sweden, and could soon reach the government in the Netherlands, after the success of Geert Wilders in the November elections. As is known, the far right also ruled in Poland for two terms and in Brazil and the United States for one. In 2024, elections could propel far-right formations into governments in Portugal and Austria, not to mention the political earthquake that would come with electoral gains for the far right in the European Parliament elections in June and, above all, in the United States in November, with the possible return of Trump to the White House.

In short, as the Dutch political scientist Cas Mudde has pointed out, these political forces have become demarginalized. That is, on the one hand, they have become relevant political actors and accessed the government in various countries. On the other hand, their ideas have become normalized, shaping political agendas while being shared within conventional spaces. The radicalization of mainstream right-wing parties is reliable proof of this shift, as is the extreme right’s “conquest of the streets,” which has even included violence against political institutions or party headquarters in the United States, Brazil, and Spain.

In this early 21st century, a new spectre haunts the world. It is not the spectre of communism, as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels explained in the mid-19th century, but the spectre of the extreme right. Although there are still no leading intellectuals nor a manifesto of a worldwide far-right party, this does not mean that it is not a globally organized, albeit heterogeneous, political force. On both sides of the Atlantic, recent events clearly show this is the case.

Fascist, populist, or radical right?

The rise of these political formations has led to a whole series of public and academic debates. The first is related to the definition of this phenomenon. It is often said that fascism has returned. In this regard, the thesis of eternal fascism or Ur-Fascism put forward by the Italian intellectual Umberto Eco has notably circulated in recent years. According to Eco, the creation of a “fascist nebula” requires the presence of only one of the 14 characteristics he detailed in his essay, among which are the cult of tradition, fear of the other, or the appeal to frustrated middle classes. Is this true? The question is not trivial, because the ability to define a political phenomenon is the first essential step to being able to understand and, by extension, combat it.

There is no doubt that these new extreme rights— or, as I will explain later, extreme rights 2.0—are the greatest threat to democratic values and the very survival of pluralist liberal democracies today. That does not mean it is correct to interpret them through the lens of fascism. As the Italian historian Emilio Gentile has pointed out, the thesis of eternal fascism is a consequence of the banalization of fascism. This banalization, on the one hand, has turned the concept into an insult, a synonym for “absolute evil.” On the other, it has led to a kind of ahistoriology “in which the historical past continually adapts to current desires, hopes, and fears.”

In short, what Gentile calls historical fascism was not only an ultranationalist, racist, and xenophobic political movement. Fascism, created in Europe after World War I, also had other core characteristics that we do not find in the extreme right today, such as its militia party organization, totalitarianism as a form of government, imperialism as a project of military expansion, regimenting of the population into large mass organizations, and self-presentation as a revolutionary rebirth and political religion. This does not mean that there are no elements of continuity between those experiences and current ones. However, fascism was a different creature. Today, neofascist and neo-Nazi groups still exist, but they are an ultra-minority.

Along with fascism, there is another obstacle that prevents us from defining and understanding the new extreme rights: populism. The debate on this topic has been endless over the last two decades. A consensus has not yet been reached on what populism is, beyond having become a kind of catch-all into which everything that does not fit within traditional political ideologies can fall. Some consider populism an ideology, albeit a thin one. Others, however, prefer to talk about it as a strategy or a political style. Given the absence of a defining doctrine, I believe that the second interpretation is more accurate. Add to this the fact that we are living in a time when populism permeates everything. If Milei, Gustavo Petro, and even French President Emmanuel Macron are populists, what good is this concept? Rather, this trend is the hallmark of our times, and it would be appropriate to talk, as Marc Lazar and Ilvo Diamanti have proposed, about “peoplecracy.” The extreme right uses the rhetorical and linguistic tools of populism, but populism in and of itself does not help us define and understand it.

That said, what concept should we use to define the political parties or movements led by Trump, Milei, Bolsonaro, Kast, Meloni, Le Pen, Orbán, or Abascal? Some speak of national populism and others opt for post-fascism, neither of which allow us, in the end, to move beyond the conceptual obstacles mentioned above. The term that has perhaps gotten the most traction is radical right. According to Mudde, unlike the extreme right, which rejects the very essence of democracy, the radical right accepts “the essence of democracy but opposes fundamental elements of liberal democracy, most notably minority rights, rule of law, and separation of powers.” In practice, the radical right accepts free, albeit not fair, elections— consider the case of Orbán’s Hungary in the last 12 years—and what ultimately is a simulacrum of democracy as we know it.

However, this proposal is problematic. On the one hand, is it correct to use the same adjective—radical— to define formations of the new extreme right and leftist forces such as Podemos, Syriza, the Broad Front of Chile, or La France Insoumise, as if there were some kind of symmetry? Personally, I think it is a mistake. The radical left criticizes existing liberal systems, focusing above all on the neoliberal model and economic issues, but it does not question the separation of powers, nor the democratic rights and gains guaranteed by these same systems. Rather, the radical left calls for an expansion and deepening of these rights, along with a reduction in inequalities.

On the other hand, as Beatriz Acha Ugarte notes: “Can we conceive of a non-pluralist democracy? Can we describe as democratic—albeit not in its ‘liberal version’—forces that, in their treatment of the ‘other’ (immigrant, foreigner), show their contempt for the democratic principle of equality?” By defending an ideology of exclusion incompatible even with the procedural version of democracy, and by calling into question the very existence of the rule of law, we should be cautious in considering these forces democratic.

Why do people vote for the far right?

The second debate has to do with the causes behind these political forces’ electoral advances. Why do people vote for them? In sum, three major causes have been identified, which are never exclusive, but rather must be considered alongside the peculiarities of each national context. First, the increase in inequalities, as well as the precariousness of work, weakening of the welfare state, and shrinking of the middle class, have pushed some voters who are dissatisfied with neoliberal economic recipes to choose the options on the ballot that criticize the existing order.

The second is what has been called cultural backlash—that is, the cultural reaction to liberal globalization. Our societies have gradually become multicultural, and in recent decades, many demands labeled post-materialist have become rights, from divorce to abortion to marriage equality. This shift has led, according to experts, to a reaction from sectors of the population who see their positions in society and even their identities threatened. They then vote for parties that reject immigration, criticize what they consider progressive excesses, and defend the traditional family.

Third, liberal democracies are experiencing a profound crisis. Our societies have become frayed—they are more liquid and atomized due to the prevailing neoliberal model and technological revolution, political parties no longer serve as an effective conduit between territories and institutions, unions face enormous difficulties in adapting to a fully post-Fordist reality, and citizen distrust continues to increase. In such atomized societies, where trust in institutions seems to have disappeared, it is not unreasonable to imagine that part of the electorate opts for parties that say they want to destroy everything or, at the very least, that oppose the establishment and criticize the functioning of democracies that they consider slow, ineffective, or disconnected from the will of the people.

To these three causes, we could add a fourth that has even more to do with the perceptions of the population. In a world that’s difficult to understand, demand for protection and security has increased. What will happen to my job in 10 years with artificial intelligence? What will happen in our neighborhoods if migrants from other continents keep arriving? What will come of the family model in which many of us have grown up if queer couples are allowed to adopt children or gender fluidity is accepted? What will come of our social relationships in times of virtual reality with projects like the Metaverse? In their own way, the extreme rights 2.0 know they need to offer security and protection to many people who live in fear of what the future may bring, giving simple answers to complex problems.

Understanding the extreme rights 2.0

To recap, there is considerable confusion about what to call these political formations and a series of causes to explain their electoral gains on both sides of the Atlantic. Some of these causes may outweigh others in a specific country, region, or municipality. We must, however, always take them all into account. Is Milei’s victory explained only by the economic crisis and increasing inequalities in Argentina? Without denying the importance of these factors, it would be wrong to relegate to a second or third place the high levels of citizen distrust towards traditional political parties and institutions, as well as the cultural reaction to the so-called “progressive consensus.”

It is often said that the European and Latin American contexts are not comparable. However, I do not believe we should keep the analyses and, consequently, the definitions of these phenomena separate. The fact that there are some differences or national peculiarities among the causes of the far rights’ electoral advances does not invalidate the possibility of conceiving of and using a concept on a global scale. On the contrary, it is useful to forge a macro-category that is elastic enough to include all these political formations. Based on these considerations, I have proposed the perhaps somewhat provocative concept of extreme rights 2.0.

With this concept, in the plural, I seek to highlight not only that the Trumps, Le Pens, Mileis, and Orbáns represent a phenomenon distinct from historical fascism, with radically new elements compared to the past, but also that new technologies have played a crucial role in the rise of these political formations. Likewise, I wish to highlight that, despite some divergences, they share much in common, in terms of both ideological basis and political and communications strategies. Last but not least, all of these figures not only know each other and maintain relationships with some frequency, but they also consider themselves part of the same global family.

Among their common ideological reference points are a marked nationalism, a deep criticism of multilateralism and the liberal order, anti-globalism, defense of conservative values, defense of law and order, criticism of multiculturalism and open societies, anti-progressivism, anti-intellectualism, and a formal distancing from past experiences of fascism, without rejecting so-called dog whistle politics— winks or references to authoritarian regimes of the past. In Europe and the United States, identitarianism, nativism, condemnation of immigration as an “invasion,” xenophobia, and more specifically Islamophobia, certainly play a crucial role. Within Latin America, there is no shortage of cases—consider Chile—where the extreme right also has clearly leveraged rhetoric rejecting immigration, mainly of Venezuelans. That said, those in Latin America who José Antonio Sanahuja and Camilo López Burian have proposed calling the neopatriotic right have most in common with the European far right.

The European extreme rights are not all exactly the same either. Neither were the fascisms of the interwar era, and this does not mean we cannot use a macro-category to talk about the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco. Among these divergences today it is worth first mentioning their economic programs. There are forces, like Vox in Spain or Chega in Portugal, that are ultra-liberal, and those, like Le Pen in France, that defend so-called welfare chauvinism, without calling into question the neoliberal model. Second, when it comes to values, positions are much more ultra-conservative in the south and east of Europe compared to the extreme right of the Netherlands or Scandinavia, which are a bit more open on issues such as LGBTQIA+ rights and abortion. Finally, there are geopolitical differences since there are some Russophile parties and other Atlanticist parties.

At the same time, there are commonalities. One is exacerbated tacticism—that is, the ability to quickly change positions on crucial issues, without having any qualms about appearing incoherent, such as on the question of the European Union or measures to confront Covid-19—with the aim of setting the media agenda. Similarly, they share the ability to use new technologies and social media to make their messages go viral, gather citizen data, and further polarize society with culture wars. Another element, as the Argentine historian Pablo Stefanoni explains, is the willingness to present themselves as transgressors and rebels against a system supposedly dominated by a left that has established a progressive or politically correct dictatorship. The new far rights have not only made themselves more “presentable,” they are also trying to appropriate progressive and left-wing banners—think about the use of the concept of freedom or phenomena such as homonationalism or ecofascism—in a historical moment marked by what the French sociologist Philippe Corcuff has called ideological confusionism.

A big global family

To paraphrase the historian Ricardo Chueca, who studied the Spanish Falange during the Franco regime, each country gives life to the extreme right 2.0 that it needs. We can add that each extreme right is the offspring of the political cultures present in each national context. Thus, their peculiarities do not prevent them from being considered part of a large global family since, in addition, there are transnational networks that work to strengthen existing ties, develop a common agenda, and finance these political parties.

On the one hand, all these political leaders share personal relationships. They know each other, talk often, congratulate each other on social media, and meet and participate in gatherings organized by the other parties. In the European Union, the existence of the political groups Identity and Democracy (ID) and European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), which bring together the continent’s far-right parties, offers space for the right to share ideas and experiences. It is true that the extreme right has not managed, neither in the past nor the present, to unify into a single group in the European Parliament, nor into a single community-wide party. But the parties both in the ID and in the ECR share a considerable understanding of the landscape and can reach compromises, as has been demonstrated by the manifesto in defense of a Christian Europe that the majority of these parties signed in July 2021.

On the other hand, global networks woven by foundations and conservative think tanks are gaining importance. One of these is the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), linked to the U.S. Republican Party, which has tentacles in Australia, Japan, Brazil, Mexico, and Hungary. Likewise, there is the Atlas Network, a promoter of free-market ideas based in DC, and the Edmund Burke Foundation, a conservative research institute founded in the Netherlands in 2019 and linked to ultra-conservative Israeli, U.S., and European sectors. One of its key figures is the Israeli philosopher Yoram Hazony, author of the 2018 book The Virtue of Nationalism and president of the Herzl Institute, a main animator of what is presented as “national conservatism.”

At the same time, many of these parties have created political training schools whose teachers often include members of the extreme right from other countries. Marion Maréchal Le Pen, niece of Marine Le Pen, created in France the Higher Institute of Sociology, Economics, and Politics, which, together with Vox, also opened a headquarters in Madrid. Among the many pro-government organizations created by Orbán in Hungary, it is worth mentioning the Mathias Corvinus Collegium, which currently has more than 20 locations in Hungary, Romania, and Brussels, and around 7,000 students. Among its guest speakers last year was former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. The director of the Collegium’s Center for European Studies is Rodrigo Ballester of Spain, who is linked to Vox and its think tank, the Disenso Foundation. Meanwhile, in Poland, the far-right Law and Justice party has promoted its university, the Collegium Intermarium, which is linked to the ultra-Catholic think tank Ordo Iuris. In addition, the ECR organizes courses for “future leaders” throughout Europe through its foundation, New Direction.

Connections are increasingly transatlantic. These connections are not only thanks to CPAC or the activism of Orbán’s Hungary, which organizes forums such as the Budapest Demographic Summit, but also because of the role that Vox, headed by Santiago Abascal, is playing in relation to Latin America. Through the Disenso Foundation, the party has developed the notion of Iberosphere, which promotes ties between right-wing parties on both sides of the Atlantic, in the Iberian Peninsula and Latin America. In 2020, Vox launched the Madrid Charter, a programmatic manifesto that made the Iberosphere concept official and enabled the creation of the Madrid Forum. This organization, which presents itself as a counterweight to the São Paulo Forum and the Puebla Group, has organized several meetings in the region, including in Bogotá in 2022 and Lima in 2023, in addition to the Iberosphere summits. In this way, Vox has strengthened relations with the Latin American far right, from Brazil to Chile, passing through Argentina, Peru, Colombia, and Mexico, offering meeting spaces to share a common agenda. One of the main links has been Vox European Parliament member Hermann Tertsch, third vice chair of the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (EuroLat), which shows once again the importance of the networks being woven from Brussels.

To all this activity we must add the networks created in Christian fundamentalist orbits, which have been very active since at least the late 1990s. One of the best-known examples is the World Congress of Families, an organization founded between the United States and Russia in 1997 that now has branches throughout the globe. Among its participants is HazteOír, an organization founded in 2001 by Spanish lawyer Ignacio Arsuaga, who went on in 2013 to launch the international lobby group CitizenGo. Likewise, the Political Network for Values, headed by José Antonio Kast, has been organizing transatlantic meetings for a decade. Among its leading members is Jaime Mayor Oreja, former minister in the Spanish government under the Popular Party’s José María Aznar and founder of the “cultural platform” One of Us, a Catholic think tank that defends the prohibition of abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage, and “gender ideology.” This brief overview offers just a small sample of a very well-organized and dense network.

Electoral autocracies

Taking all this into account, it is difficult not to consider these political formations as part of the same political family. They defend largely the same ideas, promote similar policies, and share the same forums internationally. They also have the same objectives. First, they seek to shift the public debate to the far right—that is, to move the Overton window, making acceptable rhetoric and narratives that up until a few years ago were unacceptable. Second, they seek to radicalize the traditional right either by conquering them from within or by forcing them to become allies. Third, they seek to come to power to establish an illiberal democracy following the Orbán model. Today’s Hungary is not a full democracy, but a “hybrid regime of electoral autocracy,” as the European Parliament defined it in September 2022.

And Hungary is a model. It is no coincidence that Orbán traveled to Buenos Aires on December 10 for Milei’s inauguration and met with the new Argentine president. Likewise, far-right European, U.S., and Latin American politicians have often traveled to Budapest to learn how to hollow out democracy from within. When they fail to do so, they call the elections fraudulent and promote violent actions against institutions, as we saw in Washington in January 2021 and, two years later, in Brasília. The extreme rights 2.0 are not historical fascism, but they are, without a doubt, the greatest existing threat to democratic values.

Just look at the policies approved by Milei after his inauguration. In the first weeks of his administration, he introduced measures aimed at deregulating the economy, along with brutal cuts to social assistance, indiscriminate attacks on civil rights, and the criminalization of unions and protests to the point of eliminating freedom of assembly and demonstration. In this context, it is not unreasonable to draw a parallel between the Decree of Necessity and Urgency signed by Milei to implement his “shock therapy,” and especially his proposed omnibus “Law of bases and starting points for the freedom of Argentines,” and the “Enabling Law” approved by the German parliament in March 1933. In practice, the overturning of Congress that Milei seeks to impose in his omnibus bill would mean the end of the separation of powers and the rule of law itself. In other words, the death of democracy—exactly what happened in Germany with Hitler’s arrival to power.


Steven Forti is a professor of Contemporary History at the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Among other works, he is the author of Extrema derecha 2.0 (2021) and editor of Mitos y cuentos de la extrema derecha (2023). He is a member of the editorial boards of Spagna Contemporanea, CTXT, and Política & Prosa.