Most Americans, including half of young Democrats, disapprove of Biden’s handling of recent Gaza crisis

Shibley Telhami

BROOKINGS INSTITUTE

Thursday, July 29, 2021

President Joe Biden’s handling of the crisis that followed Israeli plans to expel Palestinians from their Jerusalem homes in May — which included Hamas firing rockets on Israel and massive Israeli bombings of Gaza, resulting in the death of over 230 Palestinian civilians and 12 Israelis — was notable for the president’s public support for Israel and pinning the blame on Hamas. Biden refused to publicly criticize Israeli actions or even push for an early end of the crisis — to the point that he faced criticism not just from Democratic progressives, but even from usually-reliable pro-Israel Democrats in Congress.



Shibley Telhami
Nonresident Senior Fellow -

  Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy
ShibleyTelhami



To put this in perspective, White House concerns about congressional reactions to policy on Israel are typically the opposite. As Ben Rhodes, who served as deputy national security advisor under former President Barack Obama, noted, working on Israel at the White House is unique: The number of meetings with pro-Israel groups equals all other meetings on foreign policy issues combined, and congressional interest dwarfs that on other issues.

A new University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll conducted from June 22 to July 21 shows why Democrats in Congress were willing to be critical of a new Democratic president, even in a highly partisan political environment: A significant segment of the Democratic public pinned the blame for the Gaza crisis on Israel far more than on the Palestinians, even as Biden took a decidedly pro-Israel tone. More centrally, the poll shows public disapproval of Biden’s handling of the Gaza crisis, including by a significant minority of Democrats — something that could not have helped the president as his overall approval ratings dropped in recent weeks. And the Gaza crisis appears to have led to the largest increase to date in the number of Democrats, especially young Democrats, who want the U.S. to lean toward the Palestinians.

Here are seven takeaways from our poll, among a nationally representative sample of 3,379 American adults (margin of error: 1.69%), fielded by Nielsen Scarborough.

First, most Americans disapproved of Biden’s effort to end the Gaza fighting, with disapproval especially high among those who say they followed the conflict closely. Overall, 52.6% disapproved of Biden’s effort, while 47.4% approved. Among those who said they followed the crisis very or somewhat closely the disapproval was higher: 56% disapproved, while 44% approved. When one considers that Biden’s overall disapproval ratings among Democrats have been consistently in the single digits, the 27.7% disapproval of his Gaza policy is unusually high. The attitudes of Democrats ages 18-34 are even more critical, with about half, 49.7%, disapproving of Biden’s effort.

Republican disapproval of Biden’s handling of Gaza crisis likely includes many who think Biden is not pro-Israel enough. But it’s notable that the Republicans who approve of Biden on Gaza, 20%, outnumber Republicans who generally approve of his job as president, which have ranged from 8 to 12%. It’s also notable (as pointed out in the fifth takeaway below), that 44.4% of Republicans who know where their elected representatives are on Israel/Palestine say their representatives lean toward Israel more than they do.



Second, only 8.1% of Democrats pinned the blame for the crisis on the Palestinians, while 34.8% blamed Israel, and 52.5% blamed both equally. In contrast, 59.1% of Republicans blamed the Palestinians, 3.7% blamed Israel, and 31.3% blamed both sides equally. Overall, Americans 18-34 tended to blame Israel (30.1%) more than the Palestinians (20.2%), and Democrats 18-34 tended to blame Israel (45.1%) much more than the Palestinians (6.1%).



Third, a significant number of Democrats (43.7%), and a quarter of Americans overall, want the U.S. to “apply more pressure on Israel, including withholding aid.” In contrast, 49% of Republicans and 8.5% of Democrats want to apply similar pressure on Palestinians. Overall, 48.7% of respondents do not want to apply additional pressure to either side, with roughly the same number of Republicans (44.7%) and Democrats (47.8%) choosing this option.

Fourth, one-third of all respondents support linking American arms supplies to Israel to its actions toward Palestinians. Strikingly, nearly as many Republicans (32.3%) as Democrats (36.3%) back linking U.S. arms supplies to Israel to Israel’s actions toward the Palestinians. Overall, 46.6% oppose such links, including 50.3% of Republicans and 43.4% of Democrats.



Fifth, two-thirds of Democrats (67.7%), and 44.4% of Republicans who know where their elected congressional representatives stand on Israel/Palestine say their representatives lean toward Israel more than they do. About half of all respondents said they didn’t know where their congressional representatives stood on Israel/Palestine. These findings highlight that, not only are constituents’ positions — especially those of Democrats — less pro-Israel than their representatives tend to be, but also that the public perceives that to be the case.



Sixth, the polarization on Israel/Palestine continues to grow. Most Republicans want the U.S. to lean toward Israel outright, while an overwhelming majority of Democrats and independents want the U.S. to lean neither toward Israel nor the Palestinians. Among the minority of Democrats who want the U.S. to take a side, a majority now want the U.S. to lean toward the Palestinians by a ratio of about two to one (17.9% to 9.5%) — the highest ratio favoring the Palestinians recorded in our polls so far. Even more striking, among Democrats 18-34, 34.5% want the U.S. to lean toward to the Palestinians, compared to 9.1% to Israel — also the highest ratio recorded in our polls so far.



Seventh, more Americans think Iran possesses nuclear weapons than think Israel does. While Israel has been known to possess nuclear weapons for decades (without officially acknowledging it) and Iran is not known to have ever possessed any, the American public perception presumes a different reality: 60.5%, including 70.6% of Republicans and 52.6% of Democrats, say Iran possesses nuclear weapons — compared to 51.7% who say Israel does, including 51.7% of Republicans and 51.9% of Democrats.


ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: GAZA MATTERED — A LOT

One striking finding in this poll is the large shift in Democratic attitudes toward Israel that’s too big to be explained simply by long-term trends, putting the spotlight on May’s Gaza conflict. The poll certainly shows a continued, now-familiar trend of robust support for Israel among Republicans, coupled with a reduction of backing for Israel among Democrats. It also highlights a contrast between the highly supportive public posture that the Biden administration has taken on Israel and Democratic public opinion, which overwhelmingly wants the U.S. to be even-handed, with those who want to take a side increasingly backing the Palestinians.

But the findings go beyond demographic and partisan trends. There is evidence that the recent Gaza fighting further diminished support for Israel among Democrats, especially young Democrats. In particular, the change from just 11 months earlier is too substantial to be a function of long-term demographic trends, or a further outcome of political polarization in Washington: In our August 2020 poll, 13.1% of Democrats wanted the U.S. to lean toward the Palestinians, compared to 10.4% preferring leaning toward Israel; in the new poll, 17.9% wanted the U.S. to lean toward the Palestinians, compared to 9.5% who wanted to lean toward Israel. In August 2020, 18.3% of Democrats 18-34 wanted the U.S. to lean toward the Palestinians, compared to 11.4% toward Israel; in the new poll, 34.5% wanted the U.S. to lean toward the Palestinians, compared to 9.1% toward Israel.



It is also notable that the poll was conducted (June 22-July 21) after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (who was unpopular among Democrats) was voted out of office by Israel’s Knesset (June 13) and his government replaced by one more amicable to Biden’s White House. The shift in Democrats’ opinion is thus likely an outcome of this year’s Gaza violence.

Interestingly, in recent weeks, Biden’s overall approval ratings have dropped, mostly because of a drop in approval among Democrats. While there is no direct evidence to suggest that Gaza was one reason for this drop, there is plenty of evidence to conclude that it did not help and may have hurt.

Methodology: The University of Maryland’s Critical Issues Poll was led by Professor Shibley Telhami, director, and Professor Stella Rouse, associate director, June 22 – July 21. It was fielded by Nielsen Scarborough from a nationally representative sample of Nielsen Scarborough’s probability-based panel, originally recruited by mail and telephone using a random sample of adults provided by Survey Sampling International. The poll was conducted among a national poll of 3,379 respondents, with a margin of error of +/- 1.69%. Overall, the sample was adjusted to reflect population estimates (Scarborough USA+/Gallup) for Americans. The survey variables balanced through weighting by age, gender, race/ethnicity, household income, level of education, census regional division, and political party affiliation.

Note that for questions 71B and 71C on Israeli and Iranian nuclear capabilities, the poll was conducted July 13-21, among a national poll of 1,525 respondents, with a margin of error of +/- 2.51%.

 

Presidential Executive Order 14008: The Climate Crisis Order

by Anthony B. Cavender

Posted July 28, 2021

Presidential Executive Order 14008, “Tackling the Climate Crisis,” a long and unusually detailed Executive Order published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2021 (see 86 FR 7619), has generated considerable discussion and commentary. Below, I briefly outline its provisions.

This EO describes the “climate crisis” in existential terms:

“There is little time left to avoid setting the world on a dangerous, potentially catastrophic climate trajectory.” Confronting and combating climate change will be an important component of  American foreign policy and national security, and domestically, the federal government’s resources will be mobilized to deploy a “govern-wide approach to the climate crisis.”

Part I of EO 14008 states that climate considerations will be an essential element of United States foreign policy and national security. The only effective response is to obtain short-term global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and net-zero global emissions by mid-century. A Special Presidential Envoy for Climate has been established, and this office will work with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of State on a climate finance plan that, among other things, will “promote the flow of capital towards climate-aligned investments and away for high-carbon investments.” The Secretary of Homeland Security will consider the implications of climate change “along our Nation’s borders,” and the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman if the Joint Chiefs of Staff will consider the national security implications of climate change.

Part II is devoted to the implications of climate change for domestic policy. Again, the policy is being driven by a climate crisis that threatens “our ability to live on Planet Earth.” The overarching goals are to:

• strengthen our clean air and water protections;
• hold polluters accountable;
• deliver environmental justice in communities all across America;
• and drive the assessment, disclosure and mitigation of climate pollution and climate-related risks in every sector of our economy.

Consequently, it is the policy of the new Administration to organize and deploy the full capacities for Federal agencies to combat the climate crisis to reduce climate pollution, increase resilience, deliver environmental justice and spur the increase of well-paying union jobs. The White House Office of Domestic Climate Policy and the National Climate Task Force have been established by this Order. The Federal Government’s Buying Power and Real Property and Asset Management functions will be used to support “robust” climate action. Renewable Energy on Public Lands and Offshore waters will be emphasized, and the Secretary of the Interior was directed to “pause,” consistent with applicable law, new oil and gas leases on public lands and in offshore waters, pending the completion of a comprehensive review of existing permitting practices, which will include an assessment of potential climate change impacts.

Each affected Federal agency will develop and submit to the Task Force a draft action plan regarding the steps an agency can take to increase resilience to the effects of climate change on facilities subject to its jurisdiction. The Chair of the CEQ and the Director of OMB will take steps, consistent with applicable law, to ensure the federal infrastructure investment reduces climate pollution, and will require federal permitting agencies to consider the effects of greenhouse gases and climate change. American farmers also have an important role to play by reducing their greenhouse emissions and using their properties to sequester carbon in soils, grasses and other vegetation. The Secretary of the Interior is directed to develop a strategy by which a “Civilian Climate Corps can be created. This EO disfavors fossil fuel subsidies, and such subsidies are not to be included in future budget requests. The Secretary of the Interior will submit to the Task Force the steps that can be taken to conserve “at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030,” and includes guidelines which can be used to decide whether specific waters and lands qualify for conservation. An interagency Working Group on Coal and Power Plant Communities and Economic Revitalization has been established to address the issues created by a shift clean energy economy.

Another issue of importance to the new Administration is “environmental and economic justice.” Agencies will make achieving environmental justice an important part of their missions. The White House Environmental Justice Interagency Council has been established, as well as an Environmental Justice Interagency Council, which will be chaired by the head of CEQ. The Council will develop “clear performance metrics” to measure the success of the new program. A White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council is established and will be housed within EPA. Both EPA and the Attorney have specified roles in strengthening environmental enforcement in unserved communities; indeed, it is recommended that the Environmental and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice be renamed the Environmental Justice and Natural Resources Division.

EO 14008 also discusses the “Justice 40 initiative,” the goal of which is that 40 percent of federal “overall benefits” flow to disadvantaged communities. Finally, an Environmental Justice Scorecard will be published on an annual basis.

GT Voice: China could constructively facilitate Afghanistan’s economic reconstruction

By Global TimesPublished: Jul 29, 2021 

Photo:VCGChinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Wednesday met with the visiting delegation led by head of the Afghan Taliban political committee Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in North China's Tianjin Municipality, according to China's Foreign Ministry.

During the meeting, Wang said that the hasty withdrawal of the US and NATO troops from Afghanistan actually marks the failure of the US policy toward Afghanistan. The Afghan people now have an important opportunity to achieve national stability and development.

Over past decades, unsatisfying development of economy and standard of living has contributed to the continuing instability in the country. "Afghanistan's economy is shaped by fragility and aid dependence," described the World Bank. Its GDP ranked 112 in 2020 across the world, with employment concentrated in low-productivity agriculture.

Economic reconstruction and better integration to the regional economic development are crucial for the country to improve people's livelihood and pursue stability in the long run; and it will ultimately benefit the overall peace and development of the whole region. In this sense, China together with Afghanistan's other neighboring states could join hands to facilitate the economic reconstruction based on each one's advantages.

China is Afghanistan's largest neighbor, and has always respected Afghanistan's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, adhered to non-interference in Afghanistan's internal affairs and pursued a friendly policy toward the entire Afghan people, Wang stressed. The Afghan Taliban stated in Tianjin that it hopes that China will be more involved in Afghanistan's peace and reconciliation process and play a bigger role in its future reconstruction and economic development.

In fact, China and Afghanistan have developed a foundation for economic cooperation. Not only that Afghanistan is an important partner under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), it is also an observer state in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Both frameworks have been offering increasingly strong facilitation for the development of related economies.

Previously, the foreign ministers of China, Pakistan and Afghanistan held a dialogue in September 2019. They reportedly agreed that the three countries should push the extension of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), an important pilot project of the BRI, to Afghanistan. Based on the principle of mutual benefit, it would help the country further accelerate its peaceful reconstruction. The CPEC has made significant and positive progress in such areas as transportation infrastructure, energy, ports and industrial parks.

There's no need to further interpret the significance for Afghanistan to improve its infrastructure, and China's advantages in infrastructure construction and in industrial development. Moreover, China is an important driver of the global recovery during the post-COVID era, generating huge growth momentum for the global economy, especially neighboring regions.

Compared to the West's military and political intervene, economic cooperation based on mutual respect has absolute advantages for the stability and growth of the country and the region; and more importantly, it in lines with the essential interest of broad Afghan people.

UK faces regular bouts of 40°C heat even if climate change is tackled


By E&T editorial staff
Published Thursday, July 29, 2021

The UK will experience higher temperatures and wetter weather for the foreseeable future even if climate change is kept in check, the Met Office has said in a report.

The latest data from its State Of The UK Climate 2020 report shows that 2020 was the first year to have temperature, rain and sunshine rankings all in the top 10 since the beginning of weather data collection.

All of the top-ten warmest years for the UK in records back to 1884 have occurred since 2002, and, for central England, the 21st century so far has been warmer than the previous three centuries.

Furthermore, the last 30-year period (1991-2020) has been 0.9°C warmer than the preceding 30 years (1961-1990) and this warming trend is evident across all months and all countries in the UK.

The greatest warming compared to 1961-1990 has been across the East Midlands and East Anglia where average annual temperatures have increased by more than 1°C, with the least warming around western coastal fringes and parts of Northern Ireland and Scotland

As well as increased temperatures, the UK has been on average 6 per cent wetter over the last 30 years (1991-2020) than the preceding 30 years (1961-1990). Six of the ten wettest years for the UK in a series from 1862 have occurred since 1998.

Professor Liz Bentley, chief executive of the Royal Meteorological Society, said the world was already seeing extreme heat as a result of warming of 1.1°C to 1.2°C above pre-industrial levels.

“If you take that up by another 0.3°C, these (heatwaves) are just going to become much more intense – we’re likely to see 40°C in the UK although we have never seen those kinds of temperatures (before),” she said.

“As we hit 1.5°C of global warming, that’s going to not just become something that we see once or twice, it’ll start to become something that we see on a much more regular basis.”

The lead author of the report, Mike Kendon, said: “2020 was another notable year for the UK climate, with records broken for daily rainfall and monthly sunshine hours.

“Average temperatures for the UK continue to climb, with nearly a degree of warming when comparing the most recent 30 years with the preceding 30-year period. Last year saw some significant weather extremes including severe flooding from heavy rainfall in February and a major heatwave in early August.”

Earlier this week, homes, roads and Tube stations in London saw significant flooding while hospitals asked patients to stay away after thunderstorms battered the south of England.

In February 2020, Storms Ciara and Dennis hit the UK just one week apart, making it the wettest February on record. Most of the UK received more than twice the February long-term average rainfall, with 300 per cent quite widely reported in the north and west, and over 400 per cent in parts of the Pennines.

Coercive conversion therapy must be done away with

Opinionista • Siviwe Gwarube • 30 July 2021

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/

SOUTH AFRICA

Historically, homosexuality was considered a pathological condition that needed to be ‘cured’. While strides have been made to do away with this theory, it is still pervasive.

Every year, many countries celebrate Pride Month and host a myriad of events to mark the day and the month. The intention is noble; we do, after all, want to create societies that embrace many different communities, promote inclusivity, and celebrate diversity.

However, the proof really lies in what happens in practice. Even the most progressive Constitutions like ours can only be useful if corresponding legislation gives effect to them. We may not be able to change beliefs and attitudes, but we can certainly protect those who are marginalised through harmful societal practices.

Daily, we hear of horrific hate crimes happening where the LGBTQIA+ community is targeted. “Corrective rape”, mutilation and murder are not rare in South Africa. There are many actors in the activist space doing incredibly important work to raise awareness, promote tolerance and even provide safe spaces for people at risk. Their work must be commended and supported. However, until this work is complemented by those who have been elected to public office, progress will be slow.

Members of Parliament, as elected public representatives and legislators in South Africa, need to come to the party in various ways to help rid the country of the scourge of hate crimes. There are various ways in which this can be done. Making amendments to existing legislation, rectifying legislative lacunae and giving effect to provisions of the Constitution are some of the interventions which we should expect from the people who took an oath to serve.

This is why I have published my intention to introduce a Private Member’s Bill that would amend the existing Children’s Act of 2005 so that it can explicitly outlaw what is known as “coercive conversion therapy” for children (ie, persons under the age of 18).

It is absolutely crucial to trace back the roots of “coercive conversion therapy” to understand its potentially devastating effects on children in particular. Historically, homosexuality was considered a pathological condition that needed to be “cured”. While strides have been made to do away with this theory, it is still pervasive. In 1990, the World Health Organization (WHO) removed homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses upon adopting a new version of its international classification of diseases. The American Psychology Association (APA) removed homosexuality from its Official Manual of Mental Disorders Diagnosis and Statistics (DSM) in 1973; and supported the same position in several court cases, notably in the cases of Jegley & Another vs. Picado and Shields & Others vs. Madigan.

However, the stigma persists and various practices of coercive conversion still take place. This is borne purely from societal and internalised homophobia and transphobia, and its prevalence is encouraged by negative attitudes towards LGBTQIA+ persons. It is a practice that aims to alter, “heal” or “repair” an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity. It is a practice that is not supported by science and is a violation of internationally-entrenched prohibitions against torture and inhuman treatment.

Through coercive conversion practices, people in the LGBTQIA+ community are at times subjected to corrective violence and harmful drugs (including antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics and hormone injections). In some cases, electroconvulsive procedures and practices of exorcism are used. Sometimes ritual cleansing is used – a practice that can involve violence, starvation, forced exposure to nudity, forced isolation and confinement. There is nothing therapeutic about these practices. These practices are simply inhumane and should be outlawed.

Globally, Germany, Brazil, Malta and Taiwan are leading the way in having outlawed coercive conversion therapy. And we should follow their lead.

By explicitly and legally banning these brutal and coercive practices, we can make sure that in South Africa no healthcare professional, organisation or individual is allowed to do this to children.

Coercive conversion practices have proven psychological and mental effects that are harmful and destructive to the people it is inflicted on, and professional organisations, such as the South African Society of Psychiatrists, have labelled them as unscientific and ineffective in altering one’s sexual orientation and gender identity.

Some interest groups and political parties have sought to distort the purpose of prohibiting coercive conversion practices in the Children’s Act as an infringement on religious rights or even interfering with the rights of parents to raise their children according to chosen values. The passing of this bill will not inhibit any parent or guardian from having conversations with children under their care about sexuality or gender identity.

This bill would ensure that South Africa does no harm to minors by way of unscientific interventions that are destructive. It would also affirm the provisions and the very spirit of our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which prohibits any form of discrimination or harm against people on the basis of sexual orientation.

As the legislative process unfolds, I will be lobbying the public, various interest groups and other political parties to vote in favour of this amendment to the Children’s Act. A drafting process in Parliament would need to take place where terms like “coercion” and “consent” are defined clearly. If the law does not allow you to physically and emotionally abuse children, it should prohibit anyone from coercing them to undertake harmful, psychologically damaging and archaic “therapy” interventions. This is the legislative gap that this bill will address.

It is difficult to change attitudes and cultural norms through legislation, but our Constitution affords us the ability – as citizens and public representatives – to take legislative action to protect marginalised groups and the most vulnerable in our society, namely children. We simply cannot keep delivering the same platitudes condemning hate crimes against LGBTQIA+ persons without any real change in our legal framework.

The Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996, the Civil Unions Act of 2006 and, most recently, the Civil Unions Amendment Act of 2020 all forged the way in changing attitudes before the shifts in core beliefs came. That is why we must always be guided by principle and constitutionalism instead of personal fears that expose the worst in humanity. DM


Siviwe Gwarube
Follow Save More
Siviwe Gwarube is a Member of Parliament for the Democratic Alliance, serving on the Health Portfolio Committee. She also serves as the DA’s National Spokesperson.

Nanjing COVID-19 outbreak source detected: cleaning staff get infected in cabin of flight CA910 from Russia

By Global Times Published: Jul 30, 2021 

Photo: VCG
A flight from Russia was identified as the source of the latest round of the COVID-19 infections in Nanjing, East China's Jiangsu Province, the Nanjing health authority said on Friday. Airport cleaning staff members were infected when cleaning the cabin.

The city found the genetic sequences of the cleaners at Nanjing Lukou International Airport, who were reported as confirmed cases at the beginning of the outbreak, are consistent with those of imported cases on the flight CA910, which arrived in Nanjing on July 10 from Russia, local authority said.

Flight CA910 has been suspended 10 times for carrying passengers who tested positive for COVID-19, since China introduced "circuit breaker" measures for inbound air flights in June 2020, media reported. In July alone, it was suspended for three times.

In its 10 flights that triggered a "circuit breaker," CA910 has transported a total of 69 COVID-19 patients from Moscow to Chinese cities including Nanjing, Tianjin and Zhengzhou, China Youth Daily reported on Friday.

Cleaning staff most likely contracted the virus after not strictly adhering to personal protection requirements while completing a deep clean of flight CA910, said Nanjing Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Nanjing CDC) at a press release on Friday.



Photo: VCGInvestigations found the cleaners were responsible for garbage removal for both domestic and international flights, Nanjing CDC said. The other cases at the airport were infected by contacting with the cleaners, or by being exposed to the contaminated environment, it added.

Nanjing CDC has completed sequencing work of the virus genes of 52 cases in the outbreak, all of which are of Delta strain, said Ding Jie, the CDC's deputy director.

"The gene sequences of these viruses are highly homologous, suggesting they are from the same transmission chain," Ding added.

Nanjing authorities have identified13 local COVID-19 patients on Thursday. The city has reported a total of 184 confirmed cases and one silent carrier since the latest outbreak on July 20.

Global Times

Nanjing outbreak spreads to 5 provinces and Beijing; most extensive contagion after Wuhan

By GT staff reporter sPublished: Jul 29, 2021 

A billboard outside a shopping mall reads "Nanjing, stand strong" on Wednesday as the city in East China's Jiangsu Province is fighting a fresh COVID-19 resurgence, which had infected 159 in the province and spread to at least 10 cities in five provinces (See story on Page 4). Photo: cnsphoto

A new surge of COVID-19 cases starting from an airport of Nanjing, capital city of East China's Jiangsu Province, has spread to five other provinces and Beijing municipality, the most extensive domestic contagion after Wuhan.

Since the first confirmed case of the latest outbreak was detected on July 20 at Nanjing Lukou International Airport, nearly 200 infections have been reported as of Thursday morning. Compared to previous rounds of domestic virus resurgences that were usually limited to one city or a few nearby cities, the Nanjing epidemic occurred at a busy international airport, and trans-regional passengers traveling for long distance soon brought the virus across the country to places including Southwest China's Sichuan and Northeast China's Liaoning, experts noted.

Zhangjiajie, a popular tourist site in Hunan Province and the shooting location of the James Cameron's blockbuster Avatar, is believed to be another key node on the infection chain. Four infected cases who had been to the Lukou airport were found watching a cultural performance with more than 2,000 people in Zhangjiajie on July 22. Beijing reported two confirmed cases who returned from Zhangjiajie on Thursday.

The highly transmissible Delta variant strain also led to the quick spread of the virus nationwide, Wang Guangfa, a respiratory expert at Peking University First Hospital, told the Global Times on Thursday.

The unexpected and extensive contagion starting from Nanjing has a strong psychological impact on the public, many of whom have loosened daily protective efforts or are planning their summer vacations, but have to cancel them.

"It's time for us to detect possible loopholes in our epidemic prevention and control efforts," Wang said, noting even cities that haven't found Nanjing-related infections should stay alert.

Many cities across China have ramped up screening for close contacts and identify residents who have been to Nanjing or other cities where confirmed cases have been found and tightened prevention work. For example, authorities in Handan, North China's Hebei Province, and Hulun Buir in North China's Inner Mongolia have also released epidemiological investigation results of some close contacts of cases confirmed in Nanjing.



Staff members carry out sterilization work at the Terminal 2 of Nanjing Lukou International Airport in Nanjing, East China's Jiangsu Province on Wednesday after 17 airport workers tested positive for the COVID-19. Photo: Xinhua

Raising the alarm

The new surge in Nanjing as well as the flare-up in Southwest China's Yunnan Province shared similarities as they were all related to imported cases, which raised the alarm that anti-epidemic work must avoid a lax attitude and management needs to be further strengthened in airports, entry and exit ports and transportation hubs, experts warned.

Nanjing has been comparatively slow in taking action, but fortunately the city is still in the early stage of the outbreak, Chen Xi, an assistant professor of public health at Yale University, told the Global Times.

The surge in Nanjing would last longer than the outbreak outside the city, but accelerated screening and epidemiological investigation will help curb virus transmission, Chen said.

The current outbreak in Nanjing is a small one caused by imported cases in the area, which is not on the same level as the pandemic in other countries. The outbreak was detected at an early stage and the measures taken were strong. It is believed that the epidemic will be under control in a short time, Shao Yiming, a leading physician and immunologist from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, said at an interview during the launch of the Report on the Global Use of COVID-19 Vaccines with Global Times on Thursday.

Experts reached by the Global Times said that the epidemic is still controllable since confirmed cases in other provinces are linked to the source of the outbreak in Nanjing Lukou International Airport.

Always staying vigilant against virus spread is one of the biggest lessons that people can learn from the latest outbreak in Nanjing, said Zhou Zijun, a professor at Peking University's School of Public Health.

Preventing and controlling the virus with strict measures is routine, especially for those who work at international transport hubs like the Nanjing Lukou airport, where the imported COVID-19 cases were found, Zhou said.

"Quarantine and regular nucleic acid tests are still necessary, as some people who have been vaccinated only have mild symptoms after being infected, that they don't realize the symptoms in time, or don't take them seriously," Zhou told the Global Times on Thursday.

Facing the current resurgence of the virus, Zhou said the public may need to get a booster shot. "But we should wait for the result of its phase III clinical trials for booster shot takers, to see how effective that will be to us," he added.

Medical experts previously told the media that most of the cases in Nanjing had been vaccinated. However, the local authority revealed that seven of the cases in Nanjing had been classified as critical, which raised concerns among netizens over the efficacy of vaccines.

Zhuang Shilihe, a Guangzhou-based expert, told the Global Times that it is still not clear whether these people had been vaccinated, and previous research had proven that vaccines were still the best method of preventing critical cases.

Shao said that the existing vaccines are still effective for all the variants, while it's protective efficiency to prevent the infection of virus variants may be lower. But there is no big gap on the protection efficiency for severe cases and deaths caused by the coronavirus and its variants.

Northern Ireland  virus professor: 

Tiny ‘hardcore’ of anti-vaxxers causing ‘significant problems’

A professor specialising in viruses has suggested the government should start convening town hall-style meetings to allow people fearful about the Covid-19 vaccines to air their concerns.

By Adam Kula
Friday, 30th July 2021, 

24th July 2021 parade in Belfast city centre

Dr Ultan Power of Queen’s University Belfast – who has been vocal throughout the pandemic about the risks posed by coronavirus – made the remarks as uptake of vaccines is slowing down.

As reported earlier this week, the rate at which people are getting first doses of the vaccine is beginning to tail off in Northern Ireland (and across the UK more generally).

The Office for National Statistics found that, by July 27, the proportion of over-18s in Northern Ireland who had their first jab was 82.6% – the lowest in the UK (England was at 88.2% and Wales and Scotland both on 90.2%).

Some of the protestors gathered in Belfast on Saturday

Meanwhile at the weekend hundreds of people took to the streets in Belfast with signs denouncing the vaccines.

Dr Power was asked if we will simply have to accept that a rump of the population will not get vaccinated.

“No, I don’t think that’s the case,” he said.

“I think there’s a certain hardcore group of people, in a very, very small minority, that are anti-vaccinations.

“And if you talk to them, they’re anti every vaccination. So there’s no amount of scientific evidence that can be given that will persuade these people the vaccines are safe and worthwhile.

“There are other people who are genuinely concerned. I call them ‘vaccine-hesitant individuals’. Those are the people we need to try and reach with appropriate information to address their concerns.

“Maybe there are forums that need to be organised, where these people have an opportunity to ask genuine questions they have.

“If you’re somebody who’s not in the field and don’t have expertise, and you’re hearing tremendous scary stories about what vaccines will do, you’re obviously going to be thinking twice about it.”

He said anti-vax attitudes appeared alongside the very first vaccines, pioneered by Edward Jenner to treat smallpox in the 18th century.

He found success using some cowpox cells to inoculate against smallpox.

But because of the association with cowpox, cartoonists “were drawing figures of people growing horns and hooves and tails, saying: This is going to turn us into weird beings”.

Anti-vax campaigners nowadays “sound so plausible”, and the free reign they have on the web means people are “hearing two completely different stories”.

“It’s causing a significant problem because it’s giving a lot of false information to individuals who are genuinely concerned about their health.

“Those are the individuals I think we need to spend a lot of time trying to educate on the reality of the risks that are there.”

This could take the form of public health officials addressing “townhall meetings, or some kind of meetings, that will allow people to express their concerns”.

Dr Power in particular fears that younger people in particular may shun the vaccines because they do not believe they will be harmed by Covid – “but if you do get infected and pass it on to vulnerable people, that’s a huge deal for somebody else who could end up in hospital”.

Hundreds of people gathered at Belfast City Hall last Saturday for what was termed a “freedom march” to protest against lockdown, masks, and vaccinations, with an even bigger march in Dublin.

Here are a handful of the slogans on display at the Belfast protest:

>> “The spike protein they inject is the bioweapon”


>> “Stop pharma fascism”

>> “Prevention treatments for Covid-19: vitamin C, vitamin D, zinc, ivermectin, hydroxocloriquine – why then is the government pushing a clinical trial vaccine instead?”


>> “Wake up, Covid is a hoax, the plan is mass genocide”


>> “Distrust government, avoid mass media, fight the lies”


>> “Revelation 18:23 – All nations were decieved by your sorcery = pharmakiea the Greek, wake up!”

>> A small child had also been given a sign saying: “They are coming for me.”

Cost of neoliberalism

Abrahim Shah

Published July 30, 2021 

THE harrowing news of a young girl who recently committed suicide on account of her failure in the CSS exam points to a deep malaise in society. This mental health crisis we are witnessing today stems from the political and economic realities we live every day. These realities, in turn, are altering society and the human psyche, and exposing individuals to the whims of a precarious labour market.

The job market today is characterised by a surplus pool of labour vying for a handful of jobs. This disequilibrium results in quite literally — “a reserve army of labour” — as Marx predicted. The modern economy, however, has witnessed a significant deviation from Marx’s prediction with this reserve army including not just blue-collared labour — as Marx suggested — but also highly qualified individuals such as engineers, doctors and teachers.

This excess supply of labour carries significant ramifications. As the surplus pool widens and people with higher qualifications enter the market, minimum qualification requirements go up. No longer is a simple degree adequate to secure a position. Instead, the candidate will be judged on research experience, papers published, etc.

This triggers a pernicious process whereby individuals are constantly forced to ‘enhance their value’, either by pursuing higher qualifications or attaining work experience to make them a ‘better fit’ for the market. Thus, individuals are trapped in a perennial cycle of competition and ‘self-improvement’, where they are forced to not only compete against each other but against themselves as well, since they remain unsure which qualification or how much work experience is enough.

Our mental health crisis must be seen in the larger sociopolitical context.

Young individuals live through this cycle of competition every day, with the pressure to outdo others and their own selves constantly impacting their mental health. This competiveness is a product of neoliberalism — the preponderant ideology today. Neolib­eralism with its emphasis on the free market, individualism and competition alters the very psyche of individuals and forces us to view each other as competitors and to see the world strictly through an economic lens.

This distortion of the human psyche stems from what political theorist Wendy Brown calls the ‘marketisation’ of human society, in which states and individuals are reduced to mere capital. Hence, all conversations are reduced to economic products and goals, and, like capital, the return they generate. Countries, for instance, are determined by their GDP growth rates and their FDI potential. Academic disciplines are selected based on the economic value and returns they may provide in the future. Individuals pursue degrees and experience to increase their ‘marketability’ in the labour market. Neoliberalism forces us to view the world through this myopic lens, and as Todd McGowan in Capitalism and Desire argues, distorts notions of human satisfaction and contentment.

Neoliberal ratio­nality and its distortion of the human psyche is also predicated on the emphasis neoliberalism lays on individualism. This emphasis places the onus of success and failure on individuals. People must, therefore, not only bear the competition a neoliberal economy perpetuates, but also contend with the very real possibility of unemployment and financial loss this might incur.

People are thus now fully responsible for their fate and in a world riddled with class, gender and racial disparities, that fate is too often risky. This is why we witness individuals striving so hard to secure their futures — a career in the civil service being a prime example — at the expense of their physical and mental health.

Neoliberalism’s emphasis on the individual, moreover, also necessitates that it erode the most common manifestation of collective support: public welfare and social security. Hence, while neoliberalism perpetuates individual responsibility, it concomitantly pushes an agenda for a hollowed-out state where the state provides very little social security such as employment or health insurance.

Here again people are left at the whims of the market. Not only must they now contend with a debilitating sense of competition, they must remain cognisant of the very real fear of unemployment and the lack of state support available. This only further exacerbates social and economic anxieties and contributes to the mental health crisis we are witnessing today.

It is essential that we view this mental health crisis in a larger sociopolitical context, and trace its roots to a pernicious ideology that is triggering inequality and eroding the very social fabric of societies. As we grieve such loss of life, it is high time we moved towards an economic system that promotes equality and human welfare and one that is not predicated on the labour or mental health of the people.

The writer is a civil servant and studied at Cornell University and at the University of Oxford.

Published in Dawn, July 30th, 2021

FEMICIDE, MISOGYNY, PATRIARCHY

Twitter calls for #JusticeForNoor and 

wonders when Pakistani women will be safe

PUBLISHED 21 JUL, 2021
IMAGES STAFF
DESK REPORT

This is the third brutal attack on a woman in
Pakistan in the past couple of days.
  

It seems like every day there is a new hashtag informing us of 

another brutal act of violence against a Pakistani woman. 

Women get no respite from this never-ending cycle of violence

 and every day there is another example of how women are not 

safe.

On Tuesday, 27-year-old Noor Muqaddam, the daughter 

of the former ambassador to South Korea, was killed in Islamabad. 

According to the police, she was slaughtered after being shot at.

Twitter is currently filled with posts from people shocked at

 the murder and calling for justice for Noor.

It should be declared a national emergency, said one user.

 Perhaps someone will actually do something about it then.

Actor Osman Khalid Butt vowed that he wouldn't stop 

screaming until justice was served.

Singer Meesha Shafi sarcastically congratulated 

those who opposed the violence against women bill.

Other people noted that there had been three hashtags 

calling for justice for women victims of violence back to 

back.

The first was for Quratulain and the second for Saima.

One user reminded us that, yes, all men.

Why do women need more rights, people ask. 

This is why.

This violence is a terrifying prospect women 

live in fear of every day.

This user reflected on the inherently unsafe 

world women live in.

Others were just in shock and disbelief.

Safety is a privilege and it can be snatched 

away at any time, reminded this user.

Don't confuse the issue, this was a murder, 

one user asserted.

Another questioned what the state of other cities

 is if Islamabad is this unsafe.

These users had reminders for everyone about 

how often this happens and how unsafe they feel.

There is very little left to say because every other day a 

brutal incident of violence against a woman is reported

 and no one is doing anything to stop it. 

We need action and we need it now because women

 are not safe. 

If their killers, harassers and abusers are not behind bars, 

women will never be safe and we need the government 

and our law enforcers to step up. Help protect your citizens 

and make this country safer for everyone.