Wednesday, October 23, 2024

 

GAO: Maintenance Issues Have Cut U.S. Army Fleet's Readiness in Half

LSVs
Two Army LSVs and one LCU in the Persian Gulf, 2012. The middle vessel is USAV Major General Robert Smalls (LSV-8), which was laid up and damaged by neglect in 2018-2020 (U.S Army)

Published Oct 22, 2024 10:29 PM by The Maritime Executive

 


The U.S. military's heavy landing craft fleet does not live under the Navy or the Marine Corps, but under the U.S. Army's Watercraft Systems division - and it is in trouble, according to the Government Accountability Office. 

The Army operates a little-known fleet of bow-ramp landing ships and watercraft, from mini-tugs up to the 275-foot Besson-class logistics support ships. With enough deadweight for up to two dozen Abrams battle tanks, and enough range to cross the Pacific, the Besson-class ships are by far the biggest active U.S. military vessels that can land troops directly onto a beach.

The Army began downsizing its watercraft fleet in 2018, when it had more than 130 vessels. The initiative proceeded in fits and starts, but by 2023, the service had reduced the division's size to 70 active vessels. This fleet count includes the Modular Causeway System, the heart of the Joint Logistics Over the Shore (JLOTS) temporary pier capability, which encountered severe operational difficulties off Gaza this year.

According to GAO, the capability of the Army's remaining watercraft force is eroding because of persistent maintenance challenges. The Army watercraft fleet's average fully mission capable availability rate should ideally be 90 percent, and in 2020 it sat at 75 percent. It has dropped every year since, and over the course of 2024, the average availability rate was 35 percent. 

Low availability reduces the fleet's ability to meet mission requirements, even as demand for Army landing craft increases in Indo-Pacific Command. Two-thirds of the Army fleet will be transferred to the Indo-Pacific by 2030, reflecting the new focus on geostrategic competition in this region.  

Part of the problem is the advancing age of the fleet. The most in-demand vessels, the LSV and LCU landing ships, are mostly in their 30s and are showing signs of age. Supply shortages, unexpected repairs and obsolete parts for these 1990s-era vessels are making normal shipyard periods run longer - in some cases, years longer.

GAO found that the Army's newest and largest landing ship, USAV Major General Robert Smalls (LSV-8), was "left unattended" in Baltimore for two years from 2018-2020. The layup period occurred after the Army's decision to deactivate all its Army Reserve watercraft units, and the neglected ship required 2,100 days of shipyard time because of "cumulative effect of unaddressed issues and complex repair contracts," exacerbated by the "absence of a regular crew." The Smalls only returned to service at Fort Eustis, Virginia in May 2024. 

Likewise, USAV El Caney (LCU-2017) entered a yard period for a service life extension in 2018 and was still under repair in mid-2024, more than five years later. Unexpected hull damage and repeated problems in finding parts dragged out the project and forced seven contract modifications. 

GAO also found that the Watercraft Inspection Branch - one of three offices responsible for vessel maintenance - still uses handwritten work orders to track events, not the enterprise data systems that are used by the rest of the service. The paper-based management system means that the office can't readily analyze trends across the fleet - for example, the parts availability issues for the service's aging vessels. 

GAO recommended that the Army should improve the governance of its watercraft program, start tracking maintenance electronically, and work with Indo-Pacific Command to bridge any gaps in landing craft capability in the region where it is needed most. The Army concurred with all recommendations. 

 

Op-Ed: Legacy Pollution in Union Bay is Not Linked to Working Waterfront

Coal Hill
Courtesy DWR

Published Oct 20, 2024 11:05 AM by Mark Jurisich and Andrew Bohn

 

 

Union Bay, Vancouver Island, has long been the site of industrial activity, primarily coal processing, which has left a heavy legacy of pollution. Today, Deep Water Recovery (DWR), a company specializing in the recycling of steel vessels, is facing scrutiny from provincial regulators – but there is well-documented evidence pointing to the area’s long history of contamination. The region’s pollution is clearly tied to past coal and logging activities, not DWR’s ongoing business.

A Historical Legacy of Pollution

A 32-acre coal waste pile adjacent to DWR’s property continues to leach arsenic, copper, mercury, and other toxic metals into Baynes Sound and Hart Creek. This coal pile, remnants of Vancouver Island's coal industry, has been identified through environmental studies as a significant source of contamination extending over 30 yards offshore. Tests have shown that seep water from the coal pile is rife with harmful metals, including cadmium, cobalt, iron, and nickel, all of which have had decades to permeate the local ecosystem. Sediment analyses have found similarly high levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and metals, exacerbating the environmental damage in Union Bay.

These facts paint a clear picture: the primary source of pollution in the area predates DWR’s presence and stems from coal-related activities. In fact, the coal waste pile adjacent to DWR’s site necessitated a multi-million-dollar remediation effort from the government to cap the area and reduce further contamination. This effort, while significant, has not yet addressed the wider environmental impact of Union Bay’s industrial past.

Challenges of Operating in a Historically Contaminated Site

Operating in an area with such a deeply entrenched history of industrial pollution poses significant challenges for DWR, which has to navigate the complex realities of conducting business on a site that is already under heavy environmental regulation. This includes a recurring obligation to prove that its operations - which adhere to the Hong Kong International Convention for Ship Recycling - are not the source of these pollutants. Provincial and federal agencies subject the company to stringent guidelines, requiring constant monitoring and compliance. While this level of oversight is appropriate for any industrial operation, the focus on DWR ignores the far larger historical contamination issues that remain unresolved.

Recycling steel vessels—a critical and environmentally beneficial process—does not introduce contaminants such as arsenic, mercury, or PAHs into the environment. These operations differ significantly from historical coal mining, which is responsible for the heavy metal contamination still plaguing the region today.

Difficulties of Operating in a "Green" Zone

Public sentiment around industrial operations often tends to skew negatively, particularly in areas where environmentalism is a strong local value. Recycling vessels prevents them from becoming environmental hazards in other areas of the world, particularly in countries with less stringent environmental regulations.

DWR’s presence in Union Bay should not be viewed as a detriment to the environment but rather as a positive step towards addressing waste in a sustainable, responsible manner – steps that contrast with the legacy pollution that continues to seep into the water from coal and forestry activities.

Robert Bohn is the owner of Deep Water Recovery. 

The opinions expressed herein are the author's and not necessarily those of The Maritime Executi

 

Mediation Proposal Rejected to End Overtime Strike by Montreal Dockworkers

Port of Montreal
Dockworkers are rejecting overtime in an effort to pressure the MEA into a new cotnract (Port of Montreal file photo)

Published Oct 22, 2024 4:36 PM by The Maritime Executive

 


Mediation Proposal Rejected to End Overtime Strike by Montreal Dockworkers 

A proposal by Canada’s Minister of Labor to restart the mediation process to end the standoff in the labor dispute at the Port of Montreal was rejected with no clear path apparent in the ongoing dispute. For nearly two weeks, the Montreal Longshoremen’s union CUPE Local 375 has been rejecting all overtime assignments in a pressure tactic for the long-running dispute with the Maritime Employers Association.

Minister of Labor Steven MacKinnon met with both sides on October 15 five days after the overtime strike began and proposed appointing a special mediator to oversee a 90-day period of negotiations. He said it would permit the sides to resume negotiations without further pressure tactics.

“The parties have since been unable to reach an agreement. They must find a path forward towards a negotiated settlement as quickly as possible,” wrote MacKinnon Monday night saying his proposal had failed. “Federal mediators and I remain available to assist them, and I will continue to closely monitor the situation.”

The longshoremen’s union announced starting on October 10 it would stop all overtime work as the latest step in the prolonged negotiations. The employers represented by MEA warned it would not pay employees assigned to shifts with incomplete crews while calling for the union to withdraw the pressure tactic and return to the negotiations.

Montreal is Canada’s second-largest port and the largest on the East Coast. The Port Authority warned the overtime strike could result in processing delays and a backlog of containers waiting to be handled. The Port of Montreal said as of October 10 around ten ships expected at the port could be affected by these pressure tactics. The overtime strike is not impacting liquid bulk, grain, and operations to the Atlantic provinces.

“The current overtime strike may slow down or disrupt the handling of around 50 percent of goods transiting through the Port of Montreal, both imports and exports,” the port said in a written statement. “These goods include food, medical and pharmaceutical products, raw materials for industry, consumer goods for retail, as well as a variety of other goods crucial to the operations of thousands of businesses.”

The MEA has said, “Clearly, the current mediation process is no longer producing results.” They said after the minister’s statement that the “time has come to determine the next steps with the support of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.”

The sides met on September 26 and after that, the union filed notice of the 3-day strike impacting two of the port’s container terminals. After the partial strike, they met again on October 4 but three days later the union filed the notice of the overtime strike. The next meeting was on October 15 with the Minister of Labor.

The dockworkers have been without a contract for all of 2024 with the union demanding a 20 percent pay increase over four years and improvements in scheduling of shifts. Negotiations have been ongoing for more than a year but the union contends many of the issues are holdovers from its 2020 and 2021 disputes. The Canadian federal government intervened in the prior strike ordering the longshoremen back to work.

The Port of Montreal asserts that the ongoing dispute is hurting its reputation with shippers and carriers and causing cargo to be rerouted. They contend that cargo handled by Montreal longshore workers is down 24 percent since 2022. Recently, the port has been handling more than 120,000 TEU a month but volume was down nearly five percent year-over-year in September as the labor dispute persisted.

The global arms trade has never been more lawless, more deadly, more corrupt – or more profitable


OCTOBER 23, 2024

Mike Phipps reviews Monstrous Anger of the Guns: How the Global Arms Trade is Ruining the World and What We Can Do About It, edited by Rhona Michie, Andrew Feinstein and Paul Rogers, with Jeremy Corbyn, published by Pluto.

Sponsored by the Peace & Justice Project, this book is especially timely: once again the world’s largest weapons makers are enabling belligerent states to commit systematic and repeated violations of international humanitarian law and war crimes with impunity. Over the last decade, it was the trade with Saudi Arabia that ignored international treaties and arms export control laws. Today Israel is in the spotlight.

“With over $2.2 trillion spent on defence in 2022, the global arms trade has never been more lawless, more deadly, more corrupt – or more profitable,” argue Rhona Mitchie, Andrew Feinstein and Paul Rogers in their Introduction. The weapons business accounts for half a million deaths every year and is responsible for about 40% of corruption in all world trade. Additionally, the world’s military is one of the biggest contributors to climate change, although as Stuart Parkinson points out, its impact is largely concealed from official statistics – the 2015 Paris Agreement made the reporting of military emissions voluntary. The pervasive influence of the military-industrial complex also distorts the political process, gearing it towards military confrontation as opposed to conflict resolution.

Of the world’s over $2 trillion a year expenditure on armaments, explains Anna Stavrianakis, one-third is accounted for by the US, dwarfing the expenditure of other countries. It also exports arms to over 100 different countries.

Some of the companies involved are outright law-breakers. The author contends that BAE systems established a global money-laundering network, and while its close ties to the UK government may have helped it avoid accountability here, in the US in 2010 it pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud and was fined $400 million. “Court documents indicated there had been substantial payments to shell companies and intermediaries, false statements had knowingly been made, and there had been a failure to ensure compliance with anti-bribery laws.”

In principle, Western democracies place more restrictions than other countries on the activities of their arms companies  – including some observance of international law. Yet this has not stopped the steady flow of Western arms to the Saudi-UAE coalition which has credibly been accused of war crimes in Yemen, including attacks on schools, hospitals, markets and other civilian targets. Loopholes abound: Germany, for example, suspended arms export to Saudi Arabia but continued to export components to the UK which were incorporated into arms for the same country. Direct action protests have been more effective at stopping the trade.

A chapter by the independent Yemeni organisation Mwatana for Human Rights details the full impact of the war on Yemen, where half the population are reliant on humanitarian assistance and only half of the country’s health facilities are operational. The cost of the conflict to Yemen’s economy is estimated at $126 billion and 377,000 people have been killed. Almost 90% of the population has no access to publicly supplied electricity. Two-thirds of the country’s teachers have not been paid in years. The organisation holds the international arms trade responsible for prolonging the conflict.

Vijay Prashad demonstrates how the arms trade distorts international relations, with US embassies abroad becoming lobbyists for the private arms industry, throwing the full weight of American power behind commercial negotiations. He highlights Nigeria, nearly two-thirds of whose citizens live in poverty, despite its immense oil wealth. In 2021, Nigeria increased its military budget by 56% to $4.5 billion – money, like the oil wealth, leached by foreign companies.

Last year, the majority of African governments reduced their investment in agriculture and increased their spending on arms. As Tabitha Agaba and Ian Katusiime explain, this means less food is produced, exacerbating hunger and social and economic tensions. At the same time, the increase in military bases on the continent has fuelled a surge in the trade of illegal arms.

India too has seen a huge proliferation in small arms, as Binalakshmi Nepram details in a chapter on the country, now the world’s biggest arms importer. Women in particular suffer from armed violence and play a significant role in peace and disarmament initiatives.

A similar problem is gripping Latin America. In Brazil, which has the highest homicide rate in the world, there are nearly six times as many privately owned weapons as those under the control of state-wide security forces, as Ana Penido notes. In 2020, Brazilians spent $27 million importing firearms, 34 times more than in 2016.

Last year Antony Loewenstein published The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation around the WorldIt looked at how Israel developed  “a world-class weapons industry with equipment conveniently tested on occupied Palestinians.”

That process has continued in the current, genocidal stage of the conflict, with the IDF experimenting with a variety of robots, drones and shoulder-fired missiles in its onslaught on Gaza. In his chapter in this new book, Loewenstein concludes: “ The use of Palestine as a vital testing ground has become even more brazen since 7th October 2023.”

The devastating human cost of the arms trade in Gaza is explored in a chapter by Ahmed Alnaouq. He lost his great-grandfather when an Israeli bomb killed 150 people at a market in 1948. During the 1967 Six-Day War, his grandparents saw Israeli soldiers indiscriminately shooting people in the streets. Even after the War, “my parents witnessed Israeli soldiers digging holes through school walls to shoot Palestinian students for sport.”

Ahmed grew up in Gaza during the Second Intifada and periodic Israeli incursions and bombardments. It was during the 2008 assault on Gaza that its residents became familiar with the deadly F-16 fighter jet, now produced by Lockheed Martin, responsible for deadly air strikes in the region. His own uncle’s house was repeatedly targeted with internationally prohibited white phosphorus bombs. In 2014, his brother was targeted with an F-16 plane and killed. In the latest onslaught, last October, an Israeli fighter jet dropped a bomb on his home, killing 21 members of his family – his father, two brothers, three sisters, a cousin and 14 nieces and nephews, all under the age of 13.  

Part Three of the book looks at global campaigns against the arms trade. Stop the War convenor Lindsey German looks at the role of that organisation, but unfortunately it’s a flawed account that attempts to portray Russian imperialism’s unprovoked war on Ukraine as “a conflict between major powers possessing nuclear weapons”, because of the supply of Western arms to Ukraine. As Michael Calderbank argued on this site a year ago, “Simply calling the conflict ‘NATOs proxy war’ strips Ukrainians of any agency. It erases from the picture Putin’s military aggression and its brutal treatment of Ukrainian civilians.”

One wonders if Russia would have dared invade if Ukraine had the latter not willingly given up its nuclear weapons in the interests of peaceful relations with its colonial neighbour in 1994. In fact, Ukraine did not just give up these weapons – it transferred them to Russia and became a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, in exchange for assurances from Russia to respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders – assurances that later proved worthless.

There are also contributions from direct action group Palestine Action, which has targeted Elbit Systems, which supplies 85% of Israel’s military drone fleet; and Carmen Wilson, Director of Operations at Demilitarise Education, which has succeeded in getting some universities to stop investing in armaments.

Investigative journalist Lorenzo Buzzoni reports on efforts by workers to oppose the arms trade, such as the refusal of Belgian transport workers in late October 2023 to handle military equipment being sent to Israel, followed by similar steps in Barcelona and Italy.

Despite these important efforts, world military expenditure is rising significantly, as new wars create new markets. Arms companies are a spearhead of neoliberal fundamentalism, working hard to avoid regulation, and lobbying states to promote their interests.

The wars they profit from solve nothing: Israel’s decades-long militarized response to the Palestinians will never suppress their desire for self-determination any more than Russia’s onslaught on Ukraine will crush the latter’s commitment to an independent state. Ultimately the power of the arms trade will be reduced only as part of a wider struggle for a fairer world order and more truly democratic, equal societies.

Mike Phipps’ book Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow: The Labour Party after Jeremy Corbyn (OR Books, 2022) can be ordered here.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY

REVEALED: The only demographic in Britain that wants Trump to win the US election
Yesterday
LEFT FOOT FORWARD

A new poll shows who in the UK is backing Trump




The US Presidential election is now just weeks away. Opinion polls in the USA indicate a divide country. They suggest the contest is neck and neck between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, particularly in the key swing states that will decide the outcome.

By contrast, the British public aren’t split. They’re clear who they want to win. A new poll from YouGov has found that a whopping 64 per cent of Brits want the Democrats’ Kamala Harris to become the next US President. Only 18 per cent say they want Trump to win, with 66 per cent saying they have a ‘very unfavourable’ opinion of him.

Below the headline figures, the poll also indicates a number of interesting things about British attitudes towards the former President. Men are twice as likely (24 per cent) to say they want Trump to win than women (12 per cent). Under 25s are by far the most likely to say they want Harris to win (70 per cent).

The most revealing figures from YouGov’s polling come from breaking down the numbers by supporters of different UK political parties. An overwhelming majority of Labour and Liberal Democrat voters say they want Harris to win – 83 per cent and 86 per cent respectively. Meanwhile, Tory voters back Harris over Trump by a margin of 57 per cent to 25 per cent.

There is only one group of people who are more likely to back Trump than they are Harris. That’s supporters of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK Party. Over half (54 per cent) of Reform voters told YouGov they want Trump to win the US election, compared to just 26 per cent who prefer Harris.

Chris Jarvis is head of strategy and development at Left Foot Forward


Labour plays down US ‘election interference’ claim after Trump hits out


Donald Trump’s campaign has accused Labour of interference in the US presidential election, as volunteers from the party have travelled to America to campaign for his opponent Kamala Harris.

A LinkedIn post from Labour’s head of operations encouraged activists to head stateside to campaign for the Democratic nominee for president, adding that nearly 100 volunteers had already signed up.

However, Trump, the Republican nominee, has accused Labour of “foreign assistance” and “anti-American election interference”.

READ MORE: Five problems Starmer will face if Trump wins the White House

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has sought to downplay the row, highlighting that volunteers from the party have travelled to the US to campaign in previous presidential elections.

In an interview on BBC Breakfast, environment secretary Steve Reed said that the volunteer work of activists was not organised or funded by the Labour Party itself.

He said: “It is up to private citizens how they use their time and money – and it’s not unusual for supporters of a party in one country to go and campaign for a sister party in another.”

Polls suggest an extremely close race between Trump and Harris in several crucial swing states, including Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Voters in the United States go to the polls on November 5.




Canada should be opening more doors to gifted Afghan students, not closing them

Our protectionist dragnet keeps out highly qualified students in a bid to prevent potential asylum claimants from entering Canada. It makes no sense.


Afghan women wait to receive food rations distributed by a humanitarian aid group in Kabul, Afghanistan, May 2023. (AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi)


by Lisa Ruth Brunner 
October 23, 2024


As the Taliban government in Afghanistan continues to tighten the vice on women’s rights – most recently by outlawing the sound of a woman’s voice outside her home – Canada is denying Afghan women the opportunity to pursue their academic dreams.

Recent examples include several women admitted to top Canadian universities yet refused study permits by the federal government.

Despite exceptional academic and leadership qualifications, prestigious scholarships and the support of local communities and legal immigration professionals, these decisions put post-secondary education out of reach for talented youth with few other options.

Of all the international students admitted to Canada, the small number of fully funded Afghan women should be among those prioritized. However, they face an uphill battle.

The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act stipulates that study permit applicants must prove they “will leave Canada by the end of the period authorized for their stay.” This is extremely difficult for Afghan women who likely qualify for asylum because they fear persecution in their home country.

In addition, their Afghan passport limits their ability to obtain legal entry into some other countries. Thus, no matter how exceptional the student or how generous the scholarship, proving not just their intention but even their ability to leave Canada once their studies are complete is easier said than done.

As a result, the study-permit approval rate for Afghans is extremely low. Yet other pathways to Canada are closed or exceptionally challenging.

In Kabul, Afghanistan, girls attend school on the first day of the new school year in March 2023. (AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi, File)


Systemic double-standard

The irony is that Canada explicitly positions and uses its international student program to retain a significant proportion of graduates as workers and economic immigrants.

The federal government recognizes dual intent as legitimate, meaning study-permit applicants can intend to eventually apply for permanent residence. In certain cases, it is explicitly encouraged – as the recent francophone minority-communities student pilot demonstrates.

Even with the study-permit application cap recently introduced, Canada will continue to rely on international students as “a pool of talent for workers and/or permanent immigrants.”

If these Afghan students were granted permits to study in Canada, they would likely qualify for at least one economic provincial or federal government permanent residency pathway. For those admitted to highly ranked academic programs, particularly at the master’s and doctoral level, the odds are in their favour.

Yet in most cases, the barrier isn’t academic performance, funds or dual intent. The main hurdle these students face is simply obtaining the visa required to board a plane to Canada in the first place.
Border protection gone astray

Like many countries, Canada attempts to externalize its borders and as much as possible prevent the mere possibility that migrants will make asylum claims or attempt to stay beyond the validity of their permits.

As public attitudes toward the Liberal government’s immigration policies continue to sour, the government has been highlighting “bogus” asylum claims as a tactic to justify various immigration restrictions.

However, as a consequence many international students from countries with high levels of people trying to escape repressive conditions get caught in the same protectionist dragnet.

The result – the prevention of potential asylum claimants from stepping foot in Canada, no matter how valuable their contributions – is at odds with Canada’s humanitarian, economic and geopolitical goals.

It does not have to be this way.

The House of Commons special committee on Afghanistan drew a sharp contrast between Canada’s response to Afghanistan’s humanitarian crisis and the “swift and generous response to the displacement crisis generated by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.”

The incoherence of Canada’s refugee policy

Afghanistan, “graveyard of empires,” was once beautiful, vibrant and safe

The Canada-Ukraine authorization for emergency travel used temporary residence as a flexible pathway toward more long-term protection. While this measure was not without its challenges, it demonstrated the potential for accommodation when Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada assesses a temporary resident’s intent to leave Canada.

In response to the committee’s suggestion to allow “Afghans to access study permits, including individuals who have obtained full scholarships or are continuing their studies…without assessing the intention of returning to their country of origin,” the government committed to actively explore the recommendation and consider options to enable Afghans to study in Canada.

That was in 2022. Nearly three years later, the refusals continue.
Opening doors

One option is to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to better reflect the realities of multi-step immigration today.

Another is to build upon lessons learned from what are known as “complementary education pathways.” For example, the World University Service of Canada student refugee program successfully uses Canada’s private sponsorship of refugees to resettle displaced post-secondary students through a youth-to-youth model.

Since 1978, a small number of highly qualified displaced students have made long-term economic contributions to Canada and played leadership roles in their home countries’ future development.

Higher education is a key area of disparity among displaced populations. Only seven per cent of refugees access higher education compared to a global average of 42 per cent. Young women and girls are especially excluded.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees now encourages the development of more complementary education pathways to help students seeking protection in third countries.

The Global Task Force on Third Country Education Pathways is working to expand such measures and the United States recently launched its welcome corps on campus program.

Complementary education pathways can come in many forms and are an obvious win. They not only provide opportunities for education and skills training, but also offer safe haven.

Canada should honour its stated commitments and live up to its international brand. This can be achieved by developing study-permit approval structures for displaced international students during future urgent crises.

More importantly, as Canada rethinks the structure and purpose of both its international student program and international education strategy, it should explore new, sustainable and innovative complementary education pathways that enable international students who are facing injustices unimaginable to most of us to build a brighter future.



Lisa Ruth Brunner
Lisa Ruth Brunner is a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of British Columbia Centre for Migration Studies; a public-policy consultant with the Affiliation of Multicultural Societies and Service Agencies of BC; and a regulated Canadian immigration consultant.View all by this author

You are welcome to republish this Policy Options article online or in print periodicals, under a Creative Commons/No Derivatives licence.



 

Humanity is more connected than ever before, but globalization requires cooperation

Whether covering world conflicts, environmental disasters, the mass movement of populations, or science and technology to solve problems – Orato World Media stands at the forefront of the global human experience. Every day, we have the rare privilege of working with qualified journalists who interview subjects who experience newsworthy events first-hand, from every corner of the globe. 

     

  • October 23, 2024

What happens, however, when globalization causes challenges nation by nation? When wars erupt, trade is disrupted, and diseases spread?What happens, however, when globalization causes challenges nation by nation? When wars erupt, trade is disrupted, and diseases spread?

“Centuries of advances in technology, transportation, and international cooperation have produced a world that is more connected than at any time in history,” reported the Peterson Institute for International Economics. The institute describes globalization as a “growing interdependence of the world’s economies, cultures, and populations, brought about by cross-border trade in goods and services, technology, and flows of investment, people, and information.”

What happens, however, when globalization causes challenges nation by nation? When wars erupt, trade is disrupted, and diseases spread? Typically, pockets of the population push for deglobalization, thinking it solves the problem. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the 2024 presidential election in the U.S. One candidate suggested slapping a 1,000 percent tariff on foreign-imported vehicles, and taking extreme measures aimed at mass deportation of immigrants.

With international wars wreaking havoc globally, experts at the Fall Policy Forum, put on by Standford’s Institute for Economic Policy Research, said the consensus is, we need more global coordination, not less. In practice, they say it takes coalitions. These coalitions must focus on globally beneficial solutions instead of policy enacted as weaponry. In short, stop weaponizing everything – including ideas – which only results in mass harm of everyday citizens.

Globalization is not going away. In fact, it’s growing

The DHL Global Connectedness Index strongly rebuts the notion we are retreating from globalization. Using four million data points, DHL proves the continued expansion of globalization. For example, the Pandemic doubled the growth rate of international internet traffic and it’s not going backwards. Scholarly work with co-authors from different countries boomed. Scientific research with participants collaborating across borders flourished.

Increases in global communication, science, and the exchange of ideas reveal people’s willingness to collaborate. However, powerful nations often lean into isolation and insulation. The report continued, “Major economies such as the European Union, the United States, China, India, and Russia have each embraced distinct approaches to the governance of international data flows, increasing complexity and raising concerns about fragmentation.”

At a time when we, the people, remain inherently connected, we need governments to embrace global cooperation now. Otherwise, the next pandemic, war, or environmental disaster could send us further towards demise and individual negative outcomes. So, what does global cooperation look like? The Cato Institute points out that as goods and services travel the world, they are accompanied by “new ways of thinking,” “new technologies, new products, and new ways of reworking and maintaining human civilization.”

Democracy remains one of those ideas, and it very well may be the most formidable opponent of authoritarianism and human suffering. The institute continues, “It is only now that the prospects for democracy appear to many to be abating. It is no coincidence that this is occurring when the growth of trade is slowing amid a global backlash of protectionism led by an increasingly insular United States.”

The case for global cooperation now

In the The Moral Case for Globalization, we see its tremendous benefits to humanity. “…the freedom to move, trade, accept influences from far away, and incorporate those influences into your experience and identity is central to being human. Every person should be entitled to enjoy the equal presumption of liberty to travel and of liberty to exchange, just as there is a presumption of the liberty to think, speak, and live.”

Whether covering world conflicts, environmental disasters, the mass movement of populations, or science and technology to solve problems – Orato World Media stands at the forefront of the global human experience. Every day, we have the rare privilege of working with qualified journalists who interview subjects who experience newsworthy events first-hand, from every corner of the globe. 

Equally important and ethically required, our journalists verify the veracity of each story. This is so you can be confident every published piece is a true reported event experienced by a real person. When a news event breaks, wherever that might be, Orato is there searching for someone who not only witnessed the event but, more importantly, survived it. An Orato journalist interviews that individual in their own domestic language, so we can publish – in English and the subject’s native language – the account of their story.

We call this first-person news reporting. Orato’s content gives people a reliable, trusted source for news, while generating understanding, empathy, and compassion for the people impacted by world events. Day in and day out, our readers’ hearts are moved, and their souls are stirred.  Orato’s stories help us open our minds to the truth of our global society, and the impact world issues have on each of us, wherever we reside. We see the intense disparities from nation to nation and this compels us to pursue change.

Solving global issues country by country gets us nowhere. We demand #GlobalCooperationNow!

Imagine if this movement to embrace true stories from real people around the globe gained the same kind of traffic enjoyed by modern-day social media platforms. Imagine if millions of people cared enough to pay attention and engage. Imagine if those people collectively demanded global cooperation from our elected officials in our respective countries. A movement like this could be a powerful beacon, ushering in an era of unprecedented communication, cooperation, and collaboration between nations.

Together, we can demand global cooperation now. Join us today. Sign our #GlobalCooperationNow! petition and make a gift to the Orato World Media Foundation. Your support

The Orato World Media Foundation Inc. is a non-profit corporation incorporated in the state of Delaware, USA in 2021 and certified by the IRS on March 25, 2022, as a tax-exempt entity from federal income tax under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 501(c)(3) that is qualified to receive tax deductible bequests, devises, transfers, or gifts under Section 2055, 2106 or 2522. This corporation’s mandate is to invest in the teaching, training and engagement of professional journalists to learn how to write first-person stories to thereby create a network of correspondents to interview, verify and produce first-person news stories from real people (eyewitnesses, survivors, whistleblowers, first responders, photographers, videographers to name a few) and who’ve been directly impacted by a current and or newsworthy event.

Wherever they may be located and in whatever language they speak, Orato’s journalists and correspondents will represent a community of professional writers dedicated to the task of reporting the news in the words of the interview subject after verifying the facts and collecting the evidence which establishes the veracity of the interview subject’s truthful account.

In addition to the above, this non-profit corporation will be dedicated to the establishment, publication, and production of Orato’s first-person content in as many commonly spoken languages as humanly possible.  It will also focus on incorporating complimenting features into their online content which will increase the appeal like audio functionality and entertaining elements such as polls, petitions and puzzles.

In slap to France’s right-wing govt, left-wingers and centrists unite to make tax on the rich permanent


Member of parliament Vincent Trebuchet, of the Union des Droites (UDR) parliamentary group, looks at his laptop as he attends the questions to the government session at the National Assembly in Paris, France, October 22, 2024. — Reuters pic

Wednesday, 23 Oct 2024 

PARIS, Oct 23 — France’s minority right wing government suffered a major blow when left wing and centrist deputies united to make a temporary tax on the rich into a permanent levy.

Prime Minister Michel Barnier’s cabinet will today consider using a controversial measure under which a law can be adopted without a national assembly vote to pass its 2025 budget, government spokeswoman Maud Bregeon said.

The government had proposed a special tax on the rich for three years to help reduce a crippling public deficit which it estimates could hit 6.1 percent of gross domestic product in 2024.

Under European Union rules it should be a maximum of three per cent.

But in a vote late yesterday, deputies from a left wing coalition joined with the centrist Modem party, a part of the government coalition, to make the tax permanent.

The government estimates that the tax on households where a single person earns more than 250,000 euros (RM1.2 million) a year, or a couple more than 500,000 euros a year, will bring in two billion euros in 2025. But it had insisted the measure would be “exceptional”.

“Victory!” declared Mathilde Panot, parliamentary leader of the hard left France Unbowed (LFI) party.

“You ask everyone to make an effort (...) and the only ones whom you say ‘don’t worry, it’s exceptional!’ are those who have plenty to live on,” added LFI deputy Eric Coquerel, head of the national assembly finance commission.

Mathieu Lefevre, a lawmaker for President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Rebirth party condemned the national assembly vote as a kind of “permanent tax revenge” and called for the government to use its right to pass a law without a vote.

Bregeon said the cabinet would discuss Wednesday using a so-called Article 49.3 adoption of a law, which would avoid a parliament vote, to get the government’s version of the budget passed.

“It is a constitutional possibility,” Bregeon told France 2 television but it was not the prime minister’s “desire”.

Barnier’s government which took office in September after a July election left France with no single party able to govern alone.

With the backing of only 212 members in the 577 seat national assembly, it will rely on the support of the far-right National Rally (FN) to survive

. — AFP


French government considers forcing through budget bill after tax on rich vote

Left-wing and centrist MPs banded together on Tuesday and voted to make a temporary tax on the rich a permanent levy to help reduce France's crippling public deficit, dealing a major blow to the minority right-wing government. In response, the government is considering using a controversial measure to adopt its entire 2025 budget without a national assembly vote.

Issued on: 23/10/2024 -
By: NEWS WIRES
A view of the French National Assembly during a debate session on the 2025 budget on October 22, 2024. © Ludovic Marin, AFP

France's minority right wing government suffered a major blow when left wing and centrist deputies united to make a temporary tax on the rich into a permanent levy.

Prime Minister Michel Barnier's cabinet will on Wednesday consider using a controversial measure under which a law can be adopted without a national assembly vote to pass its 2025 budget, government spokeswoman Maud Bregeon said.

The government had proposed a special tax on the rich for three years to help reduce a crippling public deficit which it estimates could hit 6.1 percent of gross domestic product in 2024.

Under European Union rules it should be a maximum of three percent.

Read more  How far to the right? France's new centre-right coalition

But in a vote late Tuesday, deputies from a left wing coalition joined with the centrist Modem party, a part of the government coalition, to make the tax permanent.

The government estimates that the tax on households where a single person earns more than 250,000 euros ($270,000) a year, or a couple more than 500,000 euros a year, will bring in two billion euros in 2025. But it had insisted the measure would be "exceptional".

"Victory!" declared Mathilde Panot, parliamentary leader of the hard left France Unbowed (LFI) party.

"You ask everyone to make an effort (...) and the only ones whom you say 'don't worry, it's exceptional!' are those who have plenty to live on," added LFI deputy Eric Coquerel, head of the national assembly finance commission.

Mathieu Lefevre, a lawmaker for President Emmanuel Macron's centrist Rebirth party condemned the national assembly vote as a kind of "permanent tax revenge" and called for the government to use its right to pass a law without a vote.

Bregeon said the cabinet would discuss Wednesday using a so-called Article 49.3 adoption of a law, which would avoid a parliament vote, to get the government's version of the budget passed.

"It is a constitutional possibility," Bregeon told France 2 television but it was not the prime minister's "desire".

Barnier's government which took office in September after a July election left France with no single party able to govern alone.

With the backing of only 212 members in the 577 seat national assembly, it will rely on the support of the far-right National Rally (FN) to survive.

(AFP)

A bitter dish to swallow: Japan continues whaling   


FRANCE 24 English


Oct 23, 2024

The anti-whaling activist Paul Watson has been held by Danish authorities in Greenland since July. Japan accuses him of injuring fishermen and damaging a vessel during a whale hunt in 2010. Tokyo is demanding Watson's extradition so he can face charges, with a court in Denmark expected to rule this Wednesday. Japan is one of only a few countries that hunt whales for commercial gain – a practice it says is an important part of its culture. FRANCE 24's Makiko Kobayashi, Alexis Bregere, Justin McCurry and Mélodie Sforza report. 

Read more about this story in our article: https://f24.my/AghB

US fines American Airlines $50 million over mishandling of disabled passengers and wheelchairs

AP |
Oct 23, 2024


DALLAS — The U.S. government fined American Airlines $50 million for failing to provide wheelchair assistance to passengers with disabilities and damaging thousands of wheelchairs over a five-year period,US fines American Airlines $50 million over mishandling of disabled passengers and wheelchairs

The Transportation Department said Wednesday that “in some cases,” wheelchair users were injured, but it did not give a number.

American said it has made significant investments to improve the handling of wheelchairs. The airline will be credited $25 million, or half of its civil penalty, for those investments and compensation paid to affected passengers, according to a consent order.

The incidents raised by the Transportation Department occurred between 2019 and 2023.

The investigation was prompted in part by three formal complaints the Paralyzed Veterans of America filed against American.

Investigators also seized on video of an incident at Miami International Airport last year. Workers slid a wheelchair down a baggage ramp. It crashed into the bottom of the chute, flipped over and skittered across the concrete

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said American Airlines “appeared to be one of the worst offenders,” but the problems that investigators found “are not confined to one airline.” He said the department is conducting similar investigations into other airlines, but he would not name them.

“The era of tolerating poor treatment of wheelchair users on airplanes is over,” Buttigieg declared to reporters.

From 2019 through 2023, American mishandled more than 10,760 wheelchairs and mobility scooters, according to Transportation Department figures. Only Southwest Airlines, at more than 11,100, had more incidents. Spirit Airlines had the highest percentage of errors in several of the years, according to the department.

American said it has invested more than $175 million this year on infrastructure, training and other steps to improve the travel experience for people with disabilities.

American said it has cut its rate of mishandling wheelchairs and power scooters by more than 20%, and fewer than one in every 1,000 customers who ask for wheelchair assistance wind up complaining to the airline.

The punishment for American is far more severe than the Transportation Department meted out to other airlines that it determined had violated laws protecting travelers with disabilities. The previous record penalty was $2 million against United Airlines in 2016, which was reduced to $700,000 after United got credit for compensating passengers and other spending.

Department officials said the size of the fine against American reflected the large number of incidents, which included damaging wheelchairs or taking too long to return them to passengers after flights.

Federal regulations require airlines to return wheelchairs and scooters to customers quickly and undamaged after flights, and to help passengers with disabilities get around airports and get on and off planes. Airlines are required to pay for repairs or replacement of damaged wheelchairs, but advocates say that can still leave users without a suitable way to get around for weeks.