Sunday, January 23, 2022





Turkey extends duties for post-coup commission

Jan 23 2022

Turkey’s State of Emergency (OHAL) Inquiries Commission will remain active for one more year with a presidential decree dated Jan. 21.

The commission has processed 16,060 applications as of Dec. 31, 2021, and still has 6,080 applications waiting. Since it started to take applications in May 2017, the commission has rejected 104,643 applications.

The OHAL commission was established to assess compaints by those subjected to expulsions and bans via presidential decrees following the failed coup attempt of July 15, 2016. Applicants include dismissed public servants, retired members of armed forces who have had their ranks removed, expelled students, and organisations and institutions that have been shut down.

In October, the commission rejected a series of appeals by academics who were dismissed from their positions in public and private universities after signing a petition to call for an end to violence and clashes between Turkey and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

December saw a healthcare worker who was dismissed via an OHAL presidential decree commit suicide.

The commission is an obstacle to Turkish citizens pursuing their rights, opposition deputy Mustafa Yeneroğlu said in a statement.


Yeneroğlu, who left the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) to join the Democracy and Progress Party (DEVA) founded by former economy minister Ali Babacan, said the commission should be disbanded immediately.

“The extension of the duties of this commission means that our citizens will not be able to exercise their freedom to seek justice for one more year,” Yeneroğlu said. “The extension is in line with the government’s strategy to keep the country in a constant state and feeling of emergency.”

Under two years of state of emergency following the failed July putsch, 131,922 dismissals were made as a ‘precaution’, the deputy added.

Citizens subjected to human rights abuses would have been able to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) directly if the commission did not exist, Yeneroğlu said, because the OHAL decrees were not subject to judicial oversight.

Dr İbrahim Kaboğlu, constitutional law professor and deputy for main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), told daily Evrensel on Saturday that the commission had “turned into a body that rejects the Constitution constantly, on top of blocking the path to seek justice for six years”.

The presidential decrees were used for “fundamental changes to the rule of law” in areas unrelated to the coup attempt or the state of emergency, Kaboğlu said.

Persons affected by decrees have had their dignity and reputation tarnished beyond repair, and were unable to defend themselves in court, he added.

“Via the commission, those affected are deprived of their right to access courts. (Authorities) avoid confronting them. The affected persons are unable to speak a single word before the commission that decides on their rights that have been taken away,” the deputy continued. “The commission was established unlawfully and prevents appeals to justice.”
East Timor Nobel laureate Ramos-Horta to run for president again


By AFP
Published January 23, 2022


Jose Ramos-Horta was a critical figure in East Timor's independence struggle - Copyright AFP/File Valentino Dariell DE SOUSA

Former East Timor President Jose Ramos-Horta on Sunday announced he would run for the top job again in the upcoming election, a decade after the end of his first term.

The 72-year-old was a critical figure in East Timor’s independence struggle, winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 1996 along with Carlos Filipe Ximines Belo.

The presidential election will be held on March 19, with the winner taking office on May 20, the day East Timor celebrates its 20th anniversary of independence from Indonesia.

Ramos-Horta’s candidacy was announced at a meeting held by the National Congress of the Reconstruction of Timor-Leste (CNRT), a political party led by the charismatic former president Xanana Gusmao.

“I am carrying out what has been entrusted to me by CNRT party and the people of East Timor to run in the 2022-2027 presidential election,” Horta said after the congress.

Gusmao added: “Let’s together support Horta to the presidential palace.”

Ramos-Horta served as the president of Southeast Asia’s youngest country from 2007 to 2012 and as prime minister from 2006 to 2007.

He will go against several other candidates including the outgoing president Francisco “Lu-Olo” Guterres and former Catholic priest Martinho Germano da Silva Gusmao.

Incumbent Guterres, from the Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor Party (Fretilin), announced his candidacy on January 16 while Gusmao said he would run in the election after Pope Francis revoked the priesthood status of the diocesan priest last November, clearing his path to run in the election.

Catholic-majority East Timor, a former Portuguese colony, announced its independence in 2002 after a 24-year long occupation by the neighbouring country Indonesia.

The country’s major political events have often been marred by chaos and violence.

In 2018 more than a dozen were injured and several cars were torched after a clash broke out between Fretilin and CNRT supporters.

Dozens were killed in 2006 as political rivalries turned into open conflict on the streets of the capital, Dili.



US doesn't care for China's Muslims: Boycotting the Olympics is about global competition

January 23, 2022 

An illuminated installation of Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics mascot Bing Dwen Dwen and Winter Paralympics Shuey Rhon Rhon shows up on the central axis of Beijing on January 22, 2022 in Beijing, China. The Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics are set to open February 4th [Lintao Zhang/Getty Images]


Dr Ramzy Baroud
January 23, 2022

The diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games may go down in history as the official start of the cold war between the US, a handful of its allies and China. The American strategy, however, of using boycotts to pressure Beijing in the name of 'human rights,' may prove costly in the future.

On 6 December, Washington declared that it would not send any diplomatic representation to the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing. In subsequent days, the UK, Canada and Australia followed suit.

The official American line claims that US diplomats will not participate in the event in protest of the "human rights abuses … in Xinjiang." That claim can easily be refuted by simply recalling that the US has taken part in the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics.

Then, claims of human rights violations in China were hardly a priority for the Americans, for one single reason: the thriving Chinese economy was the last line of defense that saved the global economy from total collapse, itself a result of the gross mismanagement of the US economy and malpractices of America's largest banking institutions.

"Since the onset of the global financial crisis in 2008, one country more than any other has provided the 'heavy lifting' to support global economic growth," Stephen King wrote in the Financial Times in August 2015.

READ: Saudi Arabia to deport Uyghur scholar to China 'within days,' daughters say

Things have changed significantly since then. China emerged as a global economic power, which is increasingly replacing the US and its allies on the world's stage. Desperate to recover from their economic woes – worsened by unhindered military spending on seemingly endless wars – the US has been waging a different kind of war against China. This economic war, which began under Barack Obama's administration in 2012, and accelerated under Donald Trump's administration, continues under the administration of Joe Biden.

However, forcing a country the size of China to compromise on its economic growth merely to allow Washington to sustain its global dominance is easier said than done. Additionally, it is utterly unfair.

Using a sports boycott to make a point that Washington still has plenty of options has actually resulted in the opposite. Only three other countries have agreed to join the American diplomatic boycott, a negligible number if compared to the twenty African countries that refrained from participating in the 1976 Montreal Summer Games in protest of the New Zealander participation. The latter was criticized for validating the South African apartheid regime when their rugby team had toured South Africa in that same year.

Earlier, in the Mexico City Olympics of 1968, 38 countries had refused to participate in protest of the admission of South Africa into the Olympics. Despite the initial decision by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to allow South African participation, international pressure led by African nations succeeded in the expulsion of the apartheid country – which was excluded from the international event until its re-admission in 1992.

The US and three of its allies want us to believe that their diplomatic boycott is motivated by principles, namely, though not exclusively, in defense of China's Uyghur Muslims. If that was the case, what is one to make of the US-led wars on Muslim countries over the last two decades? What kind of human rights standards did Washington apply when it waged war on Afghanistan in 2001 and invaded Iraq in 2003? Tellingly, and ironically, the same three countries – the UK, Canada and Australia – actively participated in America's military misadventures that have claimed countless Muslim lives and destroyed entire countries.

The fact that only three other countries have adhered to the American call for a diplomatic boycott also illustrates the weakening grip of Washington over international affairs. It is worth mentioning that the European Union has refused to join the US in its latest foreign policy intrigue.

For its part, China criticized Washington's position, rightly stating, in the words of its Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Zhao Lijian, that the boycott is motivated by "ideological prejudice and based on lies and rumors."

READ: The Muslim world must do more to help Uyghurs being persecuted in China

Historically, international sports events have been politicized in two different ways: First, morally-driven boycotts based on an ethical agenda, like the boycott of South African apartheid and so on; and second, purely political boycotts that are instituted to serve a political agenda or to isolate host countries as a form of economic pressure. An example of the latter was the US-led boycott of the Moscow Summer Olympics of 1980, for which the Soviet Union and their allies retaliated by boycotting the Los Angeles Summer Olympics of 1984.

The American diplomatic boycott of the upcoming Chinese Olympics is an example of a politically-motivated boycott. The fact that it is a diplomatic boycott only, as opposed to a full boycott, is most likely compelled by Washington's fears that a full-fledged boycott would only serve to illustrate its own isolation in the international arena.

Keeping in mind existing global divisions and the need for international unity to confront collective crises – such as that of the environment, deadly pandemics, among others – delving back into yet a new cold war will serve no purpose, aside from harming millions of people around the world for no fault of their own. What is required is dialogue, one that aims at providing equitable opportunities for all nations to grow and prosper.

That said, the age of global hegemony is coming to an end and no amount of self-serving boycotts or trade wars will alter this unavoidable fact.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
When the US is back, the world turns dark

By Xin Ping
Published: Jan 20, 2022


US President Joe Biden Photo: AFP

January 20 marks the one-year anniversary of President Joe Biden's presidency. To its allies and partners, Biden's announcement that "America is back" brought much hope and confidence. One year has passed, and US has by no means become a "beacon of democracy" to light other countries, but instead brought darkness to the world.

Fall of Kabul

The US came to Afghanistan with resolve and ambition but ended up with chaos and suffering. Over the past two decades, the democracy experiment in Afghanistan has cost $2 trillion, 100,000 civilian casualties, and death of over 2,000 US soldiers. It has turned this country into a hell-like place rather than a "paradise of democracy" as promised by the US. The hasty withdrawal of US troops left with such bloody scenes as American soldiers shooting civilians and Afghan young men falling from a US military cargo plane. It remains a permanent scar for US democracy and morality. Be it Vietnam, Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan, wherever US democracy is imposed, there has always been destruction and misery. Uncle Sam is the "Weapon of Mass Destruction" itself.

Undermining global COVID-19 response

Despite the rosy pictures painted by the Biden administration to help the global fight against COVID-19, the world has only seen the US hypocrisy and "America first" in global vaccine distribution. It has been hoarding vaccines well beyond its needs and dumping defective or nearly-expired vaccines to developing countries. Instead of leaving origin-tracing to scientists, the US government appointed the intelligence community to concoct a so-called "review," relentlessly scapegoating other countries and hyping the lab-leak theory. In the face of the virus, the US has barely done anything good. Uncle Sam's promises are no more than lip service.

Exporting inflation

To save the US economy from sliding into a mess, the Biden administration has resorted to rounds of quantitative easing and large-scale stimulus packages, resulting in high inflation. By December 2021, America's CPI registered a record high in four decades, with a 6.8 percent growth year-on-year. The US Congressional Budget Office estimated that federal debt will rise to $3.33 billion. Yet the Federal Reserve continues to introduce reckless QEs. The irresponsible monetary policies by the US spilled over to exacerbate global inflation and the whole world has to pay the price: global commodity prices skyrocketed by 20 percent, and crude oil prices exceeded 80 dollars per barrel. Indeed, the US is best at exporting inflation.

Disrupting global supply chain

The US contributed directly to global supply chain disruptions. Its loose COVID protocols led to outbreaks in American ports, leading to insufficient labor and overstocked commodities. The Biden administration also hastily introduced high unemployment benefits, which worsened labor shortages. The result is that global freight costs were driven to an unbearable level. Taking the China-US route as an example, freight rates per container soared from $1,500 in 2019 to $28,000 at one point and still remained at a high level. To keep the skeleton in its own cupboard, the US once again shifted blame to China, smearing China's zero-COVID policy as an obstacle to the recovery of global transportation and the root cause of the global supply chain crisis. Ironically, China's trade in 2021 exceeded $6 trillion, growing by more than 20 percent year-on-year. It's clear who the real troublemaker is.

Pseudo multilateralism

President Biden claimed that his administration will uphold multilateralism. However, it turned out to be pseudo multilateralism or coterie-lism driven by ideological confrontation. The US rallied its allies and partners worldwide to create small cliques and blocs such as G7, Five Eyes, QUAD and AUKUS, trying to divide the world into different camps, just like what it did during the Cold War. It vows to promote a "rule-based international order," but everything it has done runs contrary. As more countries are suffering from America's unilateral sanctions, long-arm jurisdiction, and coercion, the so-called "rules" are none other than the American rules that serve its own interests and hegemony.

Technological decoupling

There are no stones left unturned for the US to maintain its dominant position in technology. The enactment of the Endless Frontier Act demonstrated that America would go further down the path of decoupling. From sanctioning specific companies to blocking the whole industry, from technology control to cutting off academic exchanges, the US has laid its intention on the ground: suppress China's development. Do not forget that development can only be achieved through cooperation rather than isolation. Decoupling with China means decoupling with the world and the future.

Nuclear proliferation

According to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, non-nuclear states could only use nuclear power for peaceful purposes under supervision and guidance. Nuclear submarines as strategic weapons apparently don't fit into the category of peaceful use. But the US insisted on creating AUKUS to assist Australia, a non-nuclear state, in building at least eight nuclear submarines, which will very likely spark an arms race and damage peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific. The Pandora's Box of nuclear proliferation has been wantonly opened by the US. Playing with fire will only burn itself.

Dead end for US democracy

The US held the so-called Summit for Democracy despite a major landslide at home and the chaos it caused abroad. US democracy has now been plagued by partisan divisions, plutocracy, and social injustice. At the summit, the president of Argentina exposed America's hypocrisy by openly criticizing its dark track records in Latin America. Even Foreign Policy admitted: What is Biden's Democracy Summit Missing? It misses the power of people. Democracy is never a fixed formula, but an idea of people's sovereignty. By pointing fingers at other countries' political systems, the US only makes its own democracy questioned and embarrassed.

Indeed, "America is back," so are bullying, hegemony and confrontation. If these are what the US brings back to the world, it would be better that it never comes back.

The author is a commentator on international affairs, writing regularly for Global Times, China Daily, etc. He can be reached at xinping604@gmail.com.
Walking conflict of interest Ginni Thomas is finally catching people’s attention

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's wife is a hard-right activist who gives out awards to people with business before the Court and advocates for issues that appear before the bench.

Commentary by John Gallagher
Saturday, January 22, 2022

Photo: Wikipedia/Gage Skidmore

Imagine if a Supreme Court justice was married to a radical activist who defended a group charged with sedition, encouraged a rally challenging election results, and gave out awards to people with an interest in cases appearing before the Court.

As it turns out, you don’t have to imagine. That’s a description of Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Related: More people now identify as Republicans than Democrats

For years, Ginni Thomas has been a walking conflict of interest that everyone has seemingly agreed not to talk about. It’s not as if she tried to hide. She’s been a fixture in conservative circles since the 1980s. She has had her own lobbying firm for more than a decade.

But thanks to a new profile of Ginni in The New Yorker, the spotlight is on the Thomases, and not in a good way. The headline for the story tells it all: Is Ginni Thomas a threat to the Supreme Court?

It’s pretty hard to answer no.

The public’s faith in the Supreme Court is at its lowest level since polling began. Just 40 percent of Americans approve of the Court’s work.

Chief Justice John Roberts has both waved off concerns about the politicization of the Court and taken steps to protect its reputation. Roberts’ vote to uphold the Affordable Care Act, considered an act of betrayal by Republicans, was viewed by many as an attempt to preserve the legitimacy in the Court in the eyes of most Americans.

Yet Ginni Thomas has been undermining Roberts’ efforts for years, intentionally or otherwise. Her husband is now the longest serving Justice on the Court — but for more than 30 years, her activities, which are pretty hard core, have not been subject to much scrutiny, except for some passing glances every once in a while.

One of those times came in 2019, when a group of far-right extremists led by Thomas met at the White House with then-President Trump. The meeting was an opportunity for Thomas, who has a long history of anti-LGBTQ animus, and her group to complain about transgender rights and marriage equality.

At the time of the meeting, The New York Times oh-so-delicately described Thomas as having “long been close to what had been the Republican party’s fringes” and said it was “unusual” for the wife of a Supreme Court justice to hold such a meeting with the president.

In fact, to be blunt, Thomas is a far right activist and the meeting was a blatant conflict of interest. It should never have happened.

The Trump era was prime time for Thomas in that it brought the fringe, Thomas’ home turf, into the party mainstream. Four years ago, she started handing out the Impact Awards to “courageous cultural warriors” battling the “radical ideologues on the left.” Many of the honorees have submitted amicus briefs to the Supreme Court or petitions asking the Court to hear cases.

Thomas was characteristically Trumpy on social media, complaining about Black Lives Matter and COVID mandates. She also praised the people planning to attend the January 6 Stop the Steal March in Washington. “LOVE MAGA people!!!!” she tweeted. (Untrue rumors later circulated that she paid for buses to transport people to the rally.)

While Thomas wasn’t saying much about Trump’s loss publicly, she was privately and in a very exclusive forum: the private listserv for her husband’s former law clerks, many of whom are now on the federal bench. Normally, the listserv is for talk about personal milestones, but Thomas used it to complain about the election results. She subsequently apologized.

Not that Thomas has changed her tune. In December, she signed a letter to the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection complaining that the Oath Keepers, the far-right militia group, were the subject of “political harassment” and “overtly partisan political persecution.” Also signing onto the letter was Tony Perkins, head of the anti-LGBTQ hate group Family Research Council.

This month, 11 members of the Oath Keepers were charged with seditious conspiracy in the attack on the Capitol.

The standard defense for Thomas’s behavior is that the activities of the spouse can’t be attributed to the justice. But we have no idea what the firewall is between Ginni and Clarence Thomas that prevents their professional lives from overlapping. By many accounts, Justice Thomas values his wife’s counsel.

Even if it’s not a conflict of interest for him — a highly generous interpretation — it sure is for her. It’s the swampiest example possible from the fantasy world conservatives live in that purports to want to drain the swamp. But, of course, that was never the goal.

 

2,500 Americans signatories demand Blinken to stop ethnic cleansing of Al-Naqab

WASHINGTON, Sunday, January 23, 2022 (WAFA) – Nearly 2,500 Americans have signed a petition calling on US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken to intervene to stop the Israeli ethnic cleansing campaign against the Palestinian citizens of Al-Naqab, a region which makes up almost a half of the area of historic Palestine.

Launched by Code Pink, a women's organization that supports Palestinian rights, the petition states that "since 1948, the Jewish National Fund (JNF) has been planting trees to displace Palestinians from their lands. They are currently carrying out an afforestation project in the Negev/Naqab (Southern Israel) on land used by Bedouin communities for agriculture. They aim to drive the Bedouins from their lands. "

The petition asks Blinken to immediately halt the afforestation in the Palestinian communities. It details how the Jewish National Fund was established in 1901 for the purpose of buying and developing land for Jewish settlement in Palestine.

Code Pink noted that the JNF "played a central role in the plans to expel Palestinians from their lands. They meticulously charted topography, roads, land, and water sources and profiled the entire Palestinian population by age, political affiliations, and hostility to the Zionist project. Known as the Village Files, these documents became a crucial military tool for Jewish militias, who in 1948 burned villages, carried out massacres, and drove around 750,000 Palestinians out of their homes and villages, making them refugees."

The petition adds that the Israeli government has been working tirelessly to expel Palestinian Bedouin populations that are Israeli citizens from the Al-Naqab desert, south of occupied Palestine. The community of Al-Araqeeb has been demolished over 100 times since it is situated in Bedouin agricultural areas, where the JNF is currently carrying out its afforestation/ethnic cleansing program.

The petition asks Blinken to use his position as Secretary of State to pressure "Israel" and the JNF to end the afforestation project in Al-Naqab and stop displacing Palestinians from their lands and dwellings.

M.N

Civil society questions Facebook for delaying India human rights impact assessment report
A consortium of 25 civil society organisations Wednesday published a letter sent to Facebook on January 3 2021, against the delayed release of the India Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) report and lack of action towards addressing grave concerns about the company’s human rights record in India.

The letter was sent to the Facebook Director of Human Rights, Miranda Sissons, reminding the company that the HRIA is an important way through which the company can evaluate its role in spreading hate speech and incitement violence on its services in India. India is the company’s largest market and reports of whistleblowers such as Frances Haugen, Sophie Zhang and former Facebook Vice President Brian Boland, have made it clear that Facebook’s platform has been used to target Muslims and other minorities in India.

The organizations stated:

The current perception is that Facebook is not committed to respecting rights in this case…The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are clear that transparency is a key aspect of human rights due diligence and that in order to account for how they address human rights impacts, companies should be prepared to communicate this externally, particularly when concerns are raised by or on behalf of the affected stakeholders.

In 2020, Facebook (now Meta) had commissioned the law firm Foley Hoag to conduct a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) for India. The Wall Street Journal recently reported civil society apprehensions about Facebook narrowing the scope of the report by making technical objections and demanding more data. Facebook has yet to respond to the letter or issue any date for the full publication of the HRIA report.

Let us celebrate Penguin Awareness Day with Falklands one of the world's great penguin capitals

Friday, January 21st 2022 -
As many as a million penguins nest in the Falklands every summer, representing five of the world’s eighteen species, King, Gentoo, Rockhopper, Magellanic and Macaroni

Penguin Awareness Day is celebrated annually on the 20th of January and this year was on Thursday. The founder of Penguin Awareness Day is unknown, and there is no information on when this day was first celebrated.

However, it is known Penguin Awareness Day is celebrated to help raise awareness about the dwindling of numbers of these beautiful black and while creatures, primarily due to human activity. Emperor Penguins are the tallest… about 4 feet tall, the smallest, Little Blue, stand about 16 inches. Awareness Day hopes to shine a light on the importance of conservation of penguin habitats, and also intends to communicate the impacts of climate change on the region.

Scientific reports indicate that penguin populations, particularly Emperor Penguin populations, are declining and research shows that the world's second-largest Emperor penguin colony has declined by 88%.

Penguin Awareness Day gives people the opportunity to learn about these incredible animals, such as how they have managed to survive in harsh climate conditions for over 65 million years, and understand how climate change is impacting them.

Some facts about penguins,

In the water, a group of penguins is called a raft. But when they are on land, they are called a waddle. They nest in rookeries.

Penguins' distinctive black and white markings are a form of camouflage called 'counter-shading'.

Penguins love a cuddle! Or rather, a huddle, which keeps them warm and safe from predators.

Penguins are great divers, Emperor Penguins can dive 530 meters deep. Not only are they great swimmers, up to about 22 mph, they're also great walkers and can walk up to 60 miles across sea ice.

But penguins are also an iconic feature of the Falkland Islands, represented in crests, symbols and in colored prints of all kinds, and have become one of the great attractions of the South Atlantic archipelago.

In effect the Falkland Islands are considered one of the world’s great penguin capitals: as many as a million penguins nest in the Falklands every summer, representing five of the world’s eighteen species – King, Gentoo, Rockhopper, Magellanic and Macaroni. Actually for the Gentoo, Falklands are home to the largest population on Earth.

It must also be mentiones that there is another celebratory date for penguins, April 25th, World Penguin Day, which coincides with the annual northern migration of Adelie penguins. This intrinsic migration pattern is conserved across generations. Native to Antarctica are six breeding species, Emperor, King, Chinstrap, Adelie, Gentoo and Macaroni penguins.


Most penguins are monogamous and have distinct calls, enabling them to locate their mates in large groups. Penguin species lay up to two eggs per mating season with the Emperor and King penguins laying only one egg. Alarmingly, of the 18 recognized living species, 11 have been listed as Vulnerable or Endangered.

National Penguin Day began in 1972 when Gerry Wallace wrote the event on his wife’s (Aleta’s) calendar in Alamogordo, California. They later brought the celebration to the US Naval Weapons Center in Ridgecrest, California where the Penguin Patrol made the news.

As climate change melts Antarctic ice, gentoo penguins venture further south

by Mongabay.com on 21 January 2022

Researchers have discovered a new colony of gentoo penguins in Antarctica previously unknown to science.

The colony was found on Andersson Island on the east side of the Antarctic Peninsula, which is the furthest south the species has ever been found in that region.

Scientists say climate change played a key role in the penguins’ presence on the island, as warming temperatures and record ice melt make new locations habitable for the species.

Scientists and conservationists are making renewed calls to establish a network for marine protected areas in Antarctica to help safeguard the region as the climate rapidly changes.

The crew of the M/V Arctic Sunrise, an icebreaker vessel owned by Greenpeace, were sailing through Antarctica’s Weddell Sea this month when they saw something they didn’t expect.

“One of the scientists on board, Alex Borowicz … was looking through the binoculars from the bridge of our ship,” Louisa Casson, an ocean campaigner with Greenpeace UK currently on board the Arctic Sunrise, told Mongabay in a video interview. “He spotted what he thought looked like a penguin colony, where we had seen no previous records.”

As the ship drew near, the crew discovered a colony of gentoo penguins (Pygoscelis papua) consisting of about 75 chicks living on Andersson Island on the east side of the Antarctic Peninsula, previously unknown to science. Scientists say this is the furthest south the species has ever been seen in this part of Antarctica, and posit their presence here to the impacts of climate change
.

Researchers just discovered a new colony of gentoo penguins on Andersson Island on the east side of the Antarctic Peninsula. Image © Tomás Munita / Greenpeace.

“It’s may be a cliché at this point, but they’re the canary in the coal mine for climate change because they’re so closely tied to those sea ice conditions,” Heather Lynch, an Antarctic penguin expert at Stony Brook University in New York and the remote leader of the expedition, told Mongabay in a video interview.

Gentoo penguins are generally found across the sub-Antarctic region, with the largest colonies on the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and parts of the Antarctic Peninsula. Unlike other penguin species that migrate to feed or breed, gentoo penguins will stay in the same place in both summer and winter, so conditions have to be ideal for them to survive year-round in a given location.

“They’re very opportunistic, so any chance they get, they’re going to colonize rock as the glaciers retreat,” Lynch said. “So they’re the thing that we tend to use to see how far climate change has gone in terms of turning the Antarctic Peninsula into a more sub-Antarctic or more temperate climate.”

Glacial ice around Antarctica has been melting at an alarming rate as climate change heats up the planet. A 2019 study found that Antarctica’s ice was melting six times faster than it was in the 1970s. Scientists have been keeping a particularly close eye on the Thwaites Glacier, known as the “Doomsday Glacier,” which, if it melted entirely, could raise global sea levels by several meters.

Scientists Clare Flynn and Michael Wethington fly a drone over a penguin colony on Andersson Island, Antartica. Image © Tomás Munita / Greenpeace.

But it’s not just sea level rise that would be impacted by the melting of Antarctica’s ice — it could change ocean currents, influence weather patterns as far as the tropics, and disturb krill populations that many species depend upon, including penguins, whales and fish.

Scientists and conservationists have been advocating for the establishment of three new marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Antarctic region, including East Antarctica, the Antarctic Peninsula and the Weddell Sea, which would cover about 4 million square kilometers (1.5 million square miles) of the Southern Ocean, arguing that such a move is essential in helping the region withstand the innumerable impacts of climate change, as well as the additional pressure of industrial krill fishing. The international body responsible for making such a decision is the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), but it has repeatedly failed to agree upon the establishment of these MPAs.

Casson said the CCAMLR originally set itself a deadline of 2012 to set up the network of MPAs “precisely to protect penguins because they’re experiencing all of this change” — but nothing has happened in the nearly 10 years since.

“We know that marine protected areas are a really important tool in helping wildlife adapt to and build resilience to ongoing changes,” Casson said.

The Arctic Sunrise is halfway through its expedition of the Weddell Sea. In addition to surveys of gentoo penguins, it will be looking at Adélie (Pygoscelis adeliae) and chinstrap penguin (Pygoscelis antarcticus) populations.

“We hope to make a stronger scientific case for why these areas should be protected,” Casson said, “and to also raise public pressure on governments so that they finally reach agreement and get the Antarctic protected as it should be, and as it should have been long ago.”

Gentoo and Adélie penguins on Andersson Island in Antarctica. Image © Tomás Munita / Greenpeace.

Citations:

Armitage, T. W., Manucharyan, G. E., Petty, A. A., Kwok, R., & Thompson, A. F. (2020). Enhanced eddy activity in the Beaufort gyre in response to sea ice loss. Nature Communications, 11(1). doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14449-z

Fuentes, V., Alurralde, G., Meyer, B., Aguirre, G. E., Canepa, A., Wölfl, A., … Schloss, I. R. (2016). Glacial melting: An overlooked threat to Antarctic krill. Scientific Reports, 6(1). doi:10.1038/srep27234

Rignot, E., Mouginot, J., Scheuchl, B., van den Broeke, M., van Wessem, M. J., & Morlighem, M. (2019). Four decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet mass balance from 1979–2017. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(4). doi:10.1073/pnas.1812883116

Banner image caption: Gentoo penguins on Andersson Island in Antarctica. Image © Tomás Munita / Greenpeace.
The drifting giant A68 iceberg released billions of tons of fresh water in South Georgia ecosystem

Saturday, January 22nd 2022 -
Satellite images shows A68a heading towards the sub-Antarctic island of South Georgia. Credit: MODIS from NASA Worldview Snapshots

Scientists monitoring the giant A68a iceberg from space reveal that a huge amount of freshwater was released as it melted around the sub-Antarctic island of South Georgia. An estimated 152 billion tons of freshwater – equivalent to 20 x Loch Ness or 61 million Olympic sized swimming pools, entered the seas around the sub-Antarctic island of South Georgia when A68a melted over three months in 2020/2021, according to a new study published this month by the British Antarctic Survey.

In July 2017, A68a calved off the Larsen-C Ice Shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula and began its epic three-and-a-half year, 4.000 km journey across the Southern Ocean. At 5719 square kilometers – about a quarter the size of Wales – it was the biggest iceberg on Earth when it formed and the sixth largest on record. Around Christmas 2020, the berg received widespread attention as it drifted worryingly close to South Georgia, raising concerns it could harm the island’s fragile ecosystem.

A team from Center for Polar Observation and Modeling and BAS used satellite measurements to chart the iceberg’s area and thickness change throughout its life cycle. The authors show that the iceberg had melted enough as it drifted to avoid damaging the sea floor around South Georgia by running aground. However, a side effect of the melting was the release of a colossal 152 billion tons of fresh water in close proximity to the island – a disturbance that could have a profound impact on the island’s marine habitat.

For the first two years of its life, A68a stayed close to Antarctica in the cold waters of the Weddell Sea and experienced little in the way of melting. However, once it began its northwards journey across the Drake Passage it traveled through increasingly warm waters and began to melt. Altogether, the iceberg thinned by 67 meters from its initial 235 m thickness, with the rate of melting rising sharply as the berg drifted around South Georgia.

Laura Gerrish, GIS and mapping specialist at BAS and co-author of the study said, “A68 was an absolutely fascinating iceberg to track all the way from its creation to its end. Frequent measurements allowed us to follow every move and break-up of the berg as it moved slowly northwards through an area called ‘iceberg alley’, a route in the ocean which icebergs often follow, and into the Scotia Sea where it then gained speed and approached the island of South Georgia very closely.”



If an iceberg’s keel is too deep it can become grounded on the sea floor. This can be disruptive in several different ways; the scour marks can destroy fauna, and the berg itself can block ocean currents and predator foraging routes. All of these potential outcomes were feared when A68a approached South Georgia. However, this new study reveals that it collided only briefly with the sea floor and broke apart shortly afterwards, making it less of a risk in terms of blockage. By the time it reached the shallow waters around South Georgia, the iceberg’s keel had reduced to 141 meters below the ocean surface, shallow enough to avoid the seabed which is around 150 meters deep.

Nevertheless, the ecosystem and wildlife around South Georgia will certainly have felt the impact of the colossal iceberg’s visit. When icebergs detach from ice shelves, they drift with the ocean currents and wind while releasing cold fresh melt-water and nutrients as they melt. This process influences the local ocean circulation and fosters biological production around the iceberg. At its peak, the iceberg was melting at a rate of 7 meters per month, and in total it released a staggering 152 billion tons of fresh water and nutrients.

“This is a huge amount of melt water, and the next thing we want to learn is whether it had a positive or negative impact on the ecosystem around South Georgia. Because A68a took a common route across the Drake Passage, we hope to learn more about icebergs taking a similar trajectory, and how they influence the polar oceans,” said Anne Braakmann-Folgmann, a researcher at CPOM and PhD candidate at the University of Leeds’ School of Earth and Environment, and lead author of the study.

The journey of A68a has been charted using observations from five different satellites. The iceberg’s area change was recorded using a combination of Sentinel-1, Sentinel-3, and MODIS imagery. Meanwhile, the iceberg’s thickness change was measured using CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 altimetry. By combining these measurements, the iceberg’s area, thickness, and volume change were determined.

Tommaso Parrinello, CryoSat Mission Manager at the European Space Agency pointed out that “Our ability to study every move of the iceberg in such detail is thanks to advances in satellite techniques and the use of a variety of measurements. Imaging satellites record the location and shape of the iceberg and data from altimetry missions add a third dimension as they measure the height of surfaces underneath the satellites and can therefore observe how an iceberg melts.”

“Observing the Disintegration of the A68A Iceberg from Space” is published in the journal Remote Sensing of Environment at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112855.
Brexit: Think lorry queues are bad now? It’s going to get a lot worse – here’s why

"How long until portable toilets are out on the A20 ? There are NO facilities for drivers waiting for hours. Forced to p*ss in bottles like animals."

by Joe Mellor
2022-01-22 13:11



Huge lorry queues building up at the Port of Dover have been blamed “entirely” on extra controls which have come into force from Brexit, and it is only going to get worse

It comes as National Highways rejected claims they deliberately switched off traffic cameras showing Brexit-related lorry queues.

The government company released a comment following backlash on Twitter.

One person tweeted: “THIS IS INSANE… 17km Brexit lorry queue on the M20, but the government have seemingly turned off the traffic cameras so you can’t see it!!”

Actor David Schneider shared his tweet, added: “If you want to know how the sunlit uplands are looking they’re literally turning off cameras on the M20 so people can’t see the damage.”
Going to get worse?

Sadly it looks like it will be getting worse later this year.

At the end of September, the European Union’s new Entry/Exit System (EES) comes into effect, reports ITV news.

Passengers from non-EU countries will have to carry out biometric checks at the border.

“I’m worried about EES,” says Doug Bannister, the chief executive of the Port of Dover.

“It works great at airports, where you have single passengers presenting themselves one at a time in an orderly fashion in a nice well-lit hall.

“Where it doesn’t work here, is there is no process, no technology, no design for a car-load of passengers transiting a busy ferry terminal on a dark stormy night. It just doesn’t not exist.”

Between them, the Channel Tunnel and Port of Dover carry more than 30 million passengers a year.

They also account for more than £260 billion of trade. 59% of all trade in goods between the UK and the EU.

“All the dire predictions of what would happen in a hard Brexit scenario didn’t happen,” says Mr Bannister.

“Now what’s at stake though is a repeat of that. EES could create the same challenges.”
Power theories in political ecology

September 2018
Journal of Political Ecology 25(1):350
DOI:10.2458/v25i1.23044

Abstract
Power plays a key role in definitions of political ecology. Likewise, empirical studies within this field tend to provide detailed presentations of various uses of power, involving corporate and conservation interventions influencing access to land and natural resources. The results include struggle and conflict. Yet, there is a lack of theoretical elaboration showing how power may be understood in political ecology. In this article, we start to fill this gap by reviewing the different theoretical perspectives on power that have dominated this field. There are combinations of influences, two of them being actor-oriented and neo-Marxist approaches used from the 1980s. Typically, case studies are presented of environmental interventions by a broad range of actors at various scales from the local to the global. The focus has been on processes involving actors behind these interventions, as well as the outcomes for different social groups. Over the last two decades, in political ecology we have increasingly seen a move in power perspectives towards poststructuralist thinking about "discursive power", inspired by Foucault. Today, the three approaches (actor-oriented, neo-Marxist and Foucauldian) and their combinations form a synergy of power perspectives that provide a set of rich and nuanced insights into how power is manifested in environmental conflicts and governance. We argue that combining power perspectives is one of political ecology's strengths, which should be nurtured through a continuous examination of a broad spectrum of social science theories on power.

The Political Economy and Political Ecology of the Hydro-Social Cycle

We are witnessing something unprecedented: Water no longer flows downhill. It flows towards money

(Robert F. Kennedy Jr.).

Geographers have been engaged in research into access to safe drinking water for years. In fact, Abel Wolman helped chlorinate the world's water. Over the past few years and in the wake of the resurgence of the environmental question on the political agenda, a growing body of work has emerged on the political-economy and political-ecology of water and water circulation (Gandy 1997Loftus 2005Kaika 2005Castro 2006). This is re-defining the contours of water resources research and opening up an exciting and vitally important research agenda for the years to come.

Political-ecological perspectives on water suggest a close correlation between the transfor-mations of, and in, the hydrological cycle at local, regional and global levels on the one hand and relations of social, political, economic, and cultural power on the other (Swyngedouw 2004). In a sustained attempt to transcend the modernist nature – society binaries, hydro-social research envisions the circulation of water as a combined physical and social process, as a hybridized socio-natural flow that fuses together nature and society in inseparable manners (Swyngedouw 2006a). It calls for revisiting traditional fragmented and interdisciplinary approaches to the study of water by insisting on the inseparability of the social and the physical in the production of particular hydro-social configurations (Bakker 2003Heynen et al. 2005).

Such a perspective opens all manner of new and key research issues and urges considering a transformation in the way in which water policies are thought about, formulated, and implemented. In what follows, an outline is provided of some of the vital issues and socio-natural properties of the hydro-social cycle and charts the terrain for future research.

Metabolizing the Global/Local Hydro-Social Cycle: The Connection to Struggles for Power

Changes in the use, management, and socio-political organization of the water cycle and social changes co-determine each other (Norgaard 1994). Combined with the transformation of water's terrestrial and atmospheric circulation, they produce distinct forms of hydro-social circulation and new relationships between local water circulations to global hydrological circuits. In other words, hydraulic environments are socio-physical constructions that are actively and historically produced, both in terms of social content and physical-environmental qualities. There is, therefore, nothing apriori unnatural about constructed environments such as dams, irrigation systems, hydraulic infrastructures, and so forth (Harvey 1996).

Produced environments are specific historical results of socio-biophysical processes. Most social processes and socio-ecological conditions (cities, agricultural or industrial production systems and the like) are invariably sustained by and organized through a combination of social processes on the one hand (such as capital/labor relations and forms of organization of labor) and metabolic-ecological processes (that is the biological, chemical or physical transformation of ‘natural’ resources, usually organized through a series of interlinked technologies) on the other (Heynen et al. 2005). These metabolisms (for example, the production of potable water, agricultural products or computer chips) produce a series of both enabling and disabling social and environmental conditions. While environmental (both social and physical) qualities may be enhanced in some places and for some people, this often leads to a deterioration of social and physical conditions elsewhere (Peet and Watts 1996Keil 2000). Processes of socio-environmental change are, therefore, never socially or ecologically neutral. This results in conditions under which particular trajectories of socio-environmental change undermine the stability or coherence of some social groups or environments, while the sustainability of others elsewhere might be enhanced. Consider, for example, how the provision of water to large cities often implies carrying water over long distances from other places or regions. The mobilization of water for different uses in different places is a conflict-ridden process and each techno-social system for organizing the flow and transformation of water (through dams, canals, pipes, and the like) shows how social power is distributed in a given society (Swyngedouw 1999). For example, access to potable water in the megacities of the Global South is precarious for a large number of people despite the fact that the rich and powerful generally have more than enough water available for necessary and luxury use. In sum, the political-ecological examination of the hydro-social process reveals the inherently conflict-ridden nature of the process of socio-environmental change and teases out the inevitable conflicts (or the displacements thereof) that infuse socio-environmental change. Particular attention, therefore, needs to be paid to social power relations (whether material, economic, political, or cultural) through which hydro-social transformations take place. This would also include the analysis of the discourses and arguments that are mobilized to defend or legitimate particular strategies. It is these power geometries and the social actors carrying them that ultimately decide who will have access to or control over, and who will be excluded from access to or control over, resources or other components of the environment. In sum, it will be vital to examine how hydro-social transformations are imbedded in and infused by class, gender, ethnic or other power struggles. These struggles will undoubtedly intensify in the near future as environmental change accelerates and this requires urgent scholarly attention.

Water Scarcities or Water Surpluses?

One of the pivotal terrains of environmental social struggle unfolds over access to, control over, and distribution of parts of the hydro-social cycle. Powerful arguments have been mobilized in recent years that frame water as a fundamentally scarce resource in some places on the one hand, and as posing immanent or real dangers due to overabundance in areas prone to flooding, hurricanes, and the like on the other (Bakker 2000Kaika 2003). This area requires immediate and urgent attention, especially given impacts of climate change. Forms of relative scarcity in relation to existing socio-physical conditions can be observed in particular historical-geographical contexts. And, water power can wreck considerable socio-climatologic havoc (e.g., in New Orleans in 2005 or in the UK in 2007). Just as importantly, the positive and negative socio-environmental consequences of such conditions are socially highly unevenly distributed, and are generated through the particular political and institutional organization of the hydro-social cycle. While hegemonic neoliberal arguments claim that the market offers the optimal mechanism for the allocation of presumably scarce water resources, and the literature on water-related hazards charts the uneven distribution of the social effects engendered by such water crises, a political-ecological perspective insists on, and traces, the fundamentally socially produced character of such inequitable hydro-social configurations (Swyngedouw 2006b, 2007). There is an urgent need, therefore, to theorize and empirically substantiate the processes through which particular socio-hydrological configurations become produced that generate inequitable socio-hydrological conditions. Put simply, interventions in the organization of the hydrological cycle are always political in character and therefore contested and contestable. This intrinsically social character of water resources management and organization needs to be teased out and clarified.

Whose Waters?

The above implies the need to address the question of who is entitled to what quality, kind and what volumes of water and who should control, manage and/or decide how the hydro-social cycle will be organized. While social movements often invoke principles of universal water rights on the basis of the biological necessity of access to minimum volumes of sufficient quality of water in order to sustain bodily metabolisms and social reproduction, such calls for universal water rights are systematically undermined by equally powerful calls related to property rights and the exclusive usage associated with them. In fact, uneven access to or control over water is invariably the outcome of combined geographical conditions, technical choices and politico-legal arrangements and water inequalities have to be understood increasingly as the outcome of the mutually constituted interplay between these three factors. Water research has for too long concentrated on either the physical side or the managerial side of the water problematic, often tiptoeing around the vexed question of how political economic power relations fuse the physical and the managerial together in particular and invariably socially uneven ways.

As Aristotle pointed out a long time ago, when two equal rights meet, power decides. Indeed, under the current neo-liberal hegemony, water rights are increasingly articulated via dynamics of commodification of water, private appropriation of water resources, dispossession tactics, and the like (Bakker 2003). Consider, for example, how in former socialist states or in China publicly owned water facilities and infrastructure have been transferred, often without much compensation, to private actors and capital, or how financial investment funds (of the kind that produced, in 2008, the greatest financial crisis in a century) have been investing in water facilities as a purely financial asset. Macquarie, the Australian investment fund, for example, bought Thames Water, London's water supply system, in 2006. In other words, the hydro-social circulation process is increasingly articulated via the financial nexus (see Swyngedouw 2009).

There is an urgent need to analyze how common or public water rights are socially, politically, and economically transformed into exclusive property rights whose access is choreographed though market mechanisms. There is significant urban-rural tension in this scenario, evident in cities such as Las Vegas (for more see the article by Smith, Jr. in this same volume). Accumulation by dispossession and the systematic inclusion of parts of the hydro-social cycle in accumulation tactics of private actors is rapidly reshaping the mechanisms and procedures that regulate and organize access to, and exclusion from access, to water, and is, consequently, altering the social mechanisms that shape water entitlements and water rights (Harvey 2003). Increasingly, access to water is understood and seen as organized through market mechanisms and the power of money, irrespective of social, human or ecological need.

An understanding of the above is vital in light of the failure of the international community to move decisively towards fulfilling the “Millennium Goal” of halving the number of people worldwide that have inadequate access to water and sanitation by 2015. It can now be confidently predicted that these objectives will not be met, largely because of the hegemony of the neo-liberal model that makes public subsidies unacceptable, while privatizing water delivery systems have systematically failed to alleviate significantly the water crisis in the Global South in places such as Manila, Jakarta, or Lagos (see Swyngedouw 2009). Inadequate access to water services, particularly in the less-wealthy world's megacities, is the prime cause of premature mortality and this human and environmental cost outweighs massively the predicted negative human consequences of global climate change.

Of course, it is invariably the poor and powerless that die of inadequate sanitation (Gleick 2004Gleick and Cooley 2006). True scarcity does not reside in the physical absence of water in most cases, but in the lack of monetary resources and political and economic clout. Poverty and governance that marginalizes makes people die of thirst, not absence of water. It is these urban political-ecological perspectives that bring out the economic and political power relations through which access to, control over, and distribution of water is organized. While choices regarding what technology is ‘appropriate,’ in terms of being physically, culturally, and economically sustainable and equitable, also play a major role in determining access to safe water in less-wealthy settings (Smith, Jr. 2008), the consideration and implementation of these choices is a decidedly political process and should be analyzed as such.

Governing Hydro-Social Configurations

Hydro-social configurations, of course, generally reflect hegemonic political, social, and cultural preferences. Ever since Karl Wittfogel's seminal work on the relationship between autocratic power and hydrological systems, it has become clear that social power becomes articulated through socio-technical systems (Wittfogel 1957). This is as true for the Three Gorges Dam in China as for the management of the Upper and Lower Colorado River, or irrigation of vineyards in California. There is an urgent need, therefore, to explore the intricate relationship between political systems, and the use, management, and distribution of water and organization of the hydro-social system. In particular, questions arise as to the relationship between democratic governance on the one hand and water management on the other. It is now commonly recognized that many large hydro-social systems are associated with autocratic political and institutional organizations (Worster 1985Swyngedouw 2006b). The present debate over water resources often sacrifices democratic governance on the altar of technological or economic efficiency, while safeguarding existing power relations. Exploring the relationship between democracy, water governance and social power is a vitally important research question. There are also quality questions to be asked regarding the capacity of democratic and other systems to deal with crises that can be associated with drought, floods, and disease. This is particularly acute as water-related crises are bound to increase both in number and in scale. There is an urgent need, therefore, to consider democratic modes of water governance on a variety of interrelated geographical scales. This is particularly acute in regions with strongly competing water demands (e.g., urban vs. rural demand regarding scarce water) on the one hand, or where significant socio-political tensions propel water to be used as a formidable geo-political weapon (e.g., in the recent threat by Israel to cut off Gaza's water supply).

Imagining Different Hydro-Social Metabolisms

To summarize, there are intricate and multidimensional relationships between the socio-technical organization of the hydro-social cycle, the associated power geometries that choreograph access to and exclusion from water, as well as the uneven political power relations that affect flows of water. There is an urgent need to explore the various ways in which social power in its different economic, cultural, and political expressions fuse together with water management principles, choice of technological systems, and structures of supply, delivery, and evacuation of water. To the extent that there is indeed a close relationship between hydro-social ordering and political-economic configurations or, in other words, between the “nature of society” and the “nature of its water flows,” every hydro-social project reflects a particular type of socio-environmental organization. Imagining different, more inclusive, sustainable and equitable forms of hydro-social organization implies imagining different and more effective, assumingly democratic, forms of social organization. This challenge is probably the most pressing one, and one that requires a sustained intellectual endeavor and the mobilization of significant creative energies of all those who make water their terrain of scholarly work.

Author Bio and Contact Information

Erik Swyngedouw is Professor of Geography at the School of Environment and Development of Manchester University. He previously taught at Oxford University and was Fellow of St. Peter's College. He is the author of, among others, Social Power and the Urbanization of Water (Oxford University Press 2004) and co-editor of In the Nature of Cities (Routledge 2006). He has written extensively on the political ecology and the political economy of water. He can be contacted at erik.swyngedouw@manchester.ac.uk.