Photo Credit: NATO

Why NATO Is Outdated, Dangerous And Deserves To Be Abolished – OpEd

 July 12, 2022  Eurasia Review  0 Comments

By Jan Oberg

Let’s look at NATO’s reaction to Russia’s ill-considered and international law-violating military action in Ukraine. From a conflict-analytical point of view, it is reasonable to say that Russia is responsible for the war but that NATO with it reckless expansion against all promises given to Russia and a series of expert warnings is responsible for the underlying conflict.

It can safely be concluded that the Western/NATO response has moved beyond the proportionality principle, beyond rationality and a realistic image of the world and its own role in it:

NATO leaders express limitless hatred of everything Russia; historically hard and time-unlimited economic sanctions have been imposed – using the illegal method of collective punishment;  weapons for an estimated US$ 60-100 billion will be pumped into Ukraine to defeat Russia there. NATO has added US$ 350 billion in military expenditures since the US-instigated regime change in Kiev in 2014 and, since then, prepared Ukraine for a role in NATO. The 2% goals is now a floor, not a ceiling. Forward reaction forces shall increase from 40 000 to 300 000; US troops in Europe up to 100 000. Russian reserves in the West – some US$ 300 billion – are frozen and will likely be stolen and used to rebuild Ukraine. Russia is, for all practical purposes, cancelled from Europe.

According to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, 310 000 have died in Syria but less than 5 000 in Ukraine. The US War on Terror has cost a million lives and forced 35-50 million to become refugees and IDPs.

We seem to have to do with an outdated militarist institution that has proven itself unable to create peace – having tried to since 1949 – and which violates it own funding Treaty on a daily basis.

TFF Associates and myself are working on a larger report – ”The Abolish NATO Catalogue” – with articles, videos and arguments on why it is time to abolish it and create something entirely new. We also argue that today’s post-Ukraine NATO is the single most dangerous institution on Earth.

Western decision-makers and mainstream media seem to see their role as simply selling NATO. They seldom, if ever, discuss NATO as such, its strong and weak sides. An examination of a 73-year old institution would be natural, like for decades there have been debates about how to reform the United Nations. But criticism of NATO as such is hard to find.

NATO is consistently called a “defensive” alliance.  One must indeed wonder how the systematic use of that particular adjective across all mainstream media has come about since there exist no valid definition of defensiveness that could possibly include NATO.

Likewise, it’s taken for granted that NATO has contributed to peace. But what kind of peace? What other factors have contributed to it – and is it at all meaningful to use the word ’peace’ about today’s Euro-Atlantic space?

NATO simply exists. It’s a saviour. Like God exists in the lives of the believers who may then expect salvation. Its fundamentally militarist values come across to the taxpayers (who finance it) as benevolent and innocent in its role as the Creator of stability, security and peace – to repeat the Secretary-General’s unsubstantiated mantra at virtually every press conference.

While there can be – and has been – intelligent philosophical debates about what a world without God looks like, there has not yet been a broad discussion about what a world without NATO might look like.

Or, to put it differently, NATO has become a kind of God to those who believe in it and there is a scholarly, media and political priesthood that propagates it to such an extent that meaningful, rational analyses of what it’s good and not so good at hardly exist.

TFF Associate David R. Loy has a more philosophical – Buddhist – approach to militarism and writes in “Why We Love War”:

“If our modern, secularized world is plagued by an unacknowledged and therefore misunderstood sense of lack, it is not surprising that war too continues to be so attractive, even addictive. War can give us the meaning we crave, because it provides a reassuring way to understand what is wrong with our lives.

War offers a simple way to bind together our individual lacks and project them outside, onto the enemy. They are evil because they want to hurt us. Since we are merely defending ourselves, we can feel good about what we do to them. The karma that results is not difficult to understand: the cause of each war is usually the previous one, at least in part.

If war is a collective response to our collective problem with lack, we cannot expect war to cease until we find better ways to address that basic spiritual problem.”

The contemporary West’s unreflective belief in violence as the solution – or militarism as the new secular religion promising salvation – and our culture’s psycho-political need for constant enemy imaging often by sheer projection of one’s own dark sides – must come from somewhere. Perhaps the lack of meaning and the need for standing together around some values and some policy. Just think “Ukraine” which has become the single event that brought the otherwise rather declining and fragmented West together, at least for a short while.

This is of particular relevance also because NATO is an alliance based on nuclear weapons; it’s an alliance that is able to wipe out humanity many times over – that is, do harm way outside its circle of member states. It is also an alliance that reserves for itself the right to be the first to use nuclear weapons even against a conventional attack.

And it’s an alliance led by the United States with a global Empire, human history’s largest military expenditures – some 40% of the world’s military expenditures – which insists on being the unchallenged global power with 600+ military basis in 130+ countries and special forces in even more.

In other words, while there is a tendency to see NATO as a predominantly Euro-Atlantic alliance because all its members minus one are European, the alliance is a de facto global military power-projecting institution because of its leader’s global power reach and imperial ambitions. We see how, at the moment Art 5 is de facto applied to Ukraine, a non-member of NATO. And at NATO’s Madrid Summit and elsewhere in NATO, China is appointed the Enemy # 1 in the future.

Surreal or bizarre as it may seem, the idea that NATO might be a party to a conflict with Russia is also pretty foreign to itself and most of its advocates. The media choreography is simple: As a principle, NATO has never done anything wrong and continues to only promote “security, stability and peace” while Russia and its president act as a constant nuisance. It’s rather much like a homeowner who is not in a conflict with a thief – a criminal – but has to guard himself and his family against the thief’s evil plans.

Compared with being in a conflict, this self-understanding relieves the presumed innocent from any sense of responsibility.

From that stems the symbolic idea that NATO is a kind of home insurance. However, an insurance is paid only after the unwanted event and the destruction it wrought. Insurances do not prevent the accident, so this is pure nonsense but also never addressed.

Contrary to the pervasive positive but unreflective mainstream concepts and images of NATO that are disseminated virtually on a daily basis to millions, there is absolutely nothing sacrosanct about that old institution. And in contrast to the pious believers’ attitude to their God, NATO can and should be criticised. And replaced.

Let’s discuss the post-NATO world.

Prof. Jan Oberg, Ph.D. is director of the Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFF and a member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace Development Environment. CV: https://transnational.live/jan-oberg
https://transnational.live

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS)

No Starvation For Oil – OpEd

An internally displaced woman and her daughter look over the city of Sana’a, Yemen, from the roof of this dilapidated building they call their new home. Photo: Giles Clarke/UN OCHA

 July 12, 2022  

By Kathy Kelly

President Joe Biden’s foreign policy advisors are applauding themselves for devising a “sensitive” itinerary as he plans to embark on a trip to the Middle East on July 13.

In a Washington Post op-ed, Biden defended his controversial planned meeting with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud (known as MBS), saying it is meant not only to bolster U.S. interests but also to bring peace to the region.

It seems that his trip will not include Yemen, though if this were truly a “sensitive” visit, he would be stopping at one of Yemen’s many beleaguered refugee camps. There he could listen to people displaced by war, some of whom are shell-shocked from years of bombardment. He could hear the stories of bereaved parents and orphaned children, and then express true remorse for the complicity of the United States in the brutal aerial attacks and starvation blockade imposed on Yemen for the past eight years.

From the vantage point of a Yemeni refugee camp, Biden could insist that no country, including his own, has a right to invade another land and attempt to bomb its people into submission. He could uphold the value of the newly extended truce between the region’s warring parties, allowing Yemenis a breather from the tortuous years of war, and then urge ceasefires and settlements to resolve all militarized disputes, including Russia’s war in Ukraine. He could beg for a new way forward, seeking political will, universally, for disarmament and a peaceful, multipolar world.

More than 150,000 people have been killed in the war in Yemen, 14,500 of whom were civilians. But the death toll from militarily imposed poverty has been immeasurably higher. The war has caused one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, creating an unprecedented level of hunger in Yemen, where millions of people face severe hardship.

Some 17.4 million Yemenis are food insecure; by December 2022, the projected number of hungry people will likely rise to nineteen million. The rate of child malnutrition is one of the highest in the world, and nutrition continues to deteriorate.

I grew to understand the slogan “No Blood for Oil” while living in Iraq during the 1991 Operation Desert Storm war, the 1998 Desert Fox war, and the 2003 Shock and Awe war. To control the pricing and the flow of oil, the United States and its allies slaughtered and maimed thousands of Iraqi people. Visits to Iraqi pediatric wards from 1996 to 2003 taught me a tragic expansion of that slogan. We must certainly insist: “No Starvation for Oil.”

During twenty-seven trips to Iraq, all in defiance of the U.S. economic sanctions against Iraq, I was part of delegations delivering medicines directly to Iraqi hospitals in cities throughout the country. We witnessed the ghastly crime of punishing children to death for the sake of an utterly misguided U.S. foreign policy. The agony endured by Iraqi families who watched their children starve has now become the nightmare experience of Yemeni families.

It’s unlikely that a U.S. President or any leader of a U.S-allied country will ever visit a Yemeni refugee camp, but we who live in these countries can take refuge in the hard work of becoming independent of fossil fuels, shedding the pretenses that we have a right to consume other people’s precious and irreplaceable resources at cut rate prices and that war against children is an acceptable price to pay so that we can maintain this right.

We must urgently simplify our over-consumptive lifestyles, share resources radically, prefer service to dominance, and insist on zero tolerance for starvation.

This article first appeared in The Progressive Magazine.

Kathy Kelly

Kathy Kelly (Kathy@vcnv.org) co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Kelly is an American peace activist, pacifist and author, as well as one of the founding members of Voices in the Wilderness. She has been arrested more than sixty times at home and abroad, and written of her experiences, including among targets of U.S. military bombardment.

US To Possibly Resume Offensive Arms Sales To Saudi Arabia: Report

Senior Saudi officials pressed their US counterparts to scrap a policy of selling only defensive arms to its top Gulf partner in several meetings in Riyadh and Washington in recent months.

Posted by Supriti David

Updated: July 11, 2022 


Saudi Arabia is the biggest US arms customer.

Washington/Riyadh: 

The Biden administration is discussing the possible lifting of its ban on US sales of offensive weapons to Saudi Arabia, but any final decision is expected to hinge on whether Riyadh makes progress toward ending the war in neighboring Yemen, according to four people familiar with the matter.

Senior Saudi officials pressed their US counterparts to scrap a policy of selling only defensive arms to its top Gulf partner in several meetings in Riyadh and Washington in recent months, three of the sources said ahead of President Joe Biden's visit to the kingdom this week.

The internal US deliberations are informal and at an early stage, with no decision imminent, two sources said, and a US official told Reuters there were no discussions on offensive weapons under way with the Saudis "at this time."

As Biden prepares for a diplomatically sensitive trip, he has signaled that he is looking to reset strained relations with Saudi Arabia at a time when he wants increased Gulf oil supplies along with closer Arab security ties with Israel to counter Iran.

At home, any move to rescind restrictions on offensive weapons is sure to draw opposition in Congress, including from Biden's fellow Democrats and opposition Republicans who have been vocal critics of Saudi Arabia, congressional aides say.

Soon after taking office early last year, Biden adopted a tougher stance over Saudi Arabia's campaign against the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, which has inflicted heavy civilian casualties, and Riyadh's human rights record, in particular the 2018 killing of Washington Post journalist and political opponent Jamal Khashoggi.

Biden, who as a presidential candidate denounced Saudi Arabia as a "pariah," declared in February 2021 a halt to US support for offensive operations in Yemen, including "relevant arms sales."

Saudi Arabia, the biggest US arms customer, has chafed under those restrictions, which froze the kind of weapons sales that previous US administrations had provided for decades.

Biden's approach has softened since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in March, which has prompted the United States and other Western countries to appeal to Saudi Arabia, the world's top oil exporter, to pump more oil to offset loss of Russian supplies.

Saudi Arabia also won White House praise for agreeing in early June on a two-month extension of a UN-brokered truce in Yemen, scene of the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

Washington would now like to see it turned into a permanent ceasefire.

A person in Washington familiar with the matter said the administration had begun internal discussions about the possibility of removing Saudi weapons restrictions but indicated they had not reached a decision-making stage.

Among the times when Saudi officials raised the request was during Deputy Minister of Defense Khalid bin Salman's visit to Washington in May, according to a second source.

The Saudi government did not respond to a request for comment.

Yemen Conflict

The sources stressed, however, that no announcement was expected around Biden's July 13-16 trip, which will include stops in Israel and the West Bank.

Any decision, they said, is expected to depend heavily on whether Riyadh is deemed to have done enough to find a political settlement to the Yemen conflict.

Among the biggest-ticket items the Saudis would likely seek are precision-guided munitions (PGM) such as those approved under former President Donald Trump in the face of objections from members of Congress.

The Biden administration is expected to move cautiously as it discusses which systems might be offered, two sources said. Amnesty International said US-made precision-guided bombs were used in a Saudi-led coalition air strike on a detention center in Yemen in January that killed scores.

If Washington eases the ban, it may be easier to push through sales of less-lethal equipment such as armored personnel carriers or replenish stocks of less-sophisticated ground-to-ground and air-to-ground weaponry.

Even under existing restrictions, the United States began stepping up its military support for Saudi Arabia earlier this year following Houthi missile strikes on the kingdom.

Washington approved missiles and an anti-ballistic defense system sales to Saudi Arabia, the Pentagon said in November, and the United States sent Patriot missiles this year as well - all deemed by US officials to be defensive in nature.

The Biden administration has also maintained backing for the Saudis to receive a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system first approved in 2017 to counter ballistic missile threats.

While lawmakers have mostly acquiesced to such sales, Biden could face fallout on Capitol Hill if he decides to sell Riyadh offensive weapons again.

Some have questioned Biden's decision to visit Saudi Arabia, seeing it as lending legitimacy to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi de facto leader who the US intelligence community concluded was behind Khashoggi's murder.

Among the likely opponents would be Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, a staunch critic of the Saudi campaign in Yemen who praised Biden when he froze offensive arms sales.

An aide said Murphy does not believe now is the time to resume such supplies.

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

Beachgoers flee from Sea Lions in California

Beachgoers flee sparring sea lions in viral video: ‘Godzilla is chasing them’

A TikTok clip showing the panicked frolickers running helter-skelter has nearly 10m views, but experts say it’s common behavior



00:27Beachgoers flee as sea lions chase each other on California beach – video


Associated Press
Tue 12 Jul 2022 

A TikTok video showing dozens of San Diego beachgoers running and jumping out of the way of two fast-moving sea lions has generated nearly 10m views and sparked conversations about whether the mammals were going after people and reclaiming picturesque La Jolla Cove’s narrow strip of sand.

But sea lion expert Eric Otjen of SeaWorld San Diego said what he saw was normal sea lion behavior for this time of year, when males are sparring as breeding season gets underway.

Otjen said the male flopping along at a rapid-fire pace as he darted around people was fleeing from the other male closer to the water’s edge that was chasing him because they were likely fighting over which females they could get. Both sea lions had ample opportunities to attack people but instead barreled past them, he said.

“He’s got swimmers all around him on his way back out, but they don’t bother him. What this is all about is his right to mate,” Otjen said, adding: “This behavior is not uncommon at all. The reason why the video has gotten like 10 millions views is because everybody is running like Godzilla is chasing them.”

It it not uncommon to see sea lions basking in the sun in La Jolla, San Diego, California. Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters

And with good reason, he added.

“It may look funny that everybody is running, but it’s not a bad choice. You don’t want to be caught in the cross fire,” Otjen said. “Even if they don’t bite, it’s not a great feeling to have 200 to 300 pounds roll over you.”

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s guidelines, people should stay at least 50 ft (15 meters) away from sea lions, seals and other species protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act.

Otjen said for questions on behavior of the animals or to report a sick or injured animal, people can all SeaWorld’s hotline at 800-541-7325.

Baseball-Dodger Stadium workers vote to authorize strike ahead of All-Star game

By Rory Carroll - 

© Reuters/Kirby Lee MLB: Chicago Cubs at Los Angeles Dodgers

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -Concession workers at Dodger Stadium have voted overwhelmingly to authorize a strike just over a week before the venue is set to host Major League Baseball's All-Star Game.

More than 1,500 workers for concessions giant Compass Group and Levy Restaurants voted 99% in support of the authorization and union leaders said a strike could be called at any moment.

The workers are currently trying to negotiate a new contract.

"I voted yes to strike because I often have to pick up shifts at the Rose Bowl just to try to make ends meet," Dodger Stadium bartender Laura Ortiz said in a press releases put out by Unite Here Local 11.

"I love working at Dodger Stadium and know that our company can do better."

The union said it represents food servers, bartenders, suite attendants, cooks and dishwashers at the iconic Southern California stadium.

The All-Star Game, which includes nearly a week of events in the lead-up to the July 19 contest, is returning to Los Angeles for the first time since 1980 and is expected to draw thousands of hungry and thirsty fans from around the country and beyond.

The Dodgers did not respond to a request for comment but the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) voiced their support for the workers.

"Like thousands of ballpark workers across the country, Local 11's members are a vital yet under-appreciated part of what makes our game great," the players said in a statement.

"They deserve to be treated fairly and will continue to have 1,200 members of the MLBPA behind them."

The players themselves were locked out by the league's owners earlier this year amid a contract dispute that threatened to cancel the start of the season before an agreement was reached in March.

(Reporting by Rory Carroll in Los Angeles; Editing by Ken Ferris)

 UK SCAB CHARTER

MPs approve controversial plans to let agency workers cover for striking staff

Critics accuse ministers of introducing a ‘scab charter’ that risks public safety and workers’ rights

The legal change comes hours after further strike action was confirmed, this time involving drivers at eight train companies who are preparing to walk out over pay.

Photograph: Dinendra Haria/SOPA Images/Rex/Shutterstock

Cash Boyle

Tue 12 Jul 2022 

Ministers have approved controversial plans to allow agency workers to replace striking workers, voting through the regulations on Monday night by 289 votes to 202.

While the business minister, Jane Hunt, said the change, which was accelerated as a result of the ongoing rail strikes, was needed to remove the “outdated blanket ban” on using agency workers to cover official industrial action, critics say the measure is akin to a “scab charter”.

Hunt told the Commons: “Some trade unions appear to us to be looking to create maximum disruption in a bid to stay relevant rather than constructively seeking agreement with employers and avoid conflict.”

The TUC had urged MPs to vote against the “pernicious anti-union measures”, which were deplored as “anti-business and anti-worker” by Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner.

“They will risk public safety, rip up workers’ rights, and encourage the very worst practices. And above all they will not prevent strikes, they will provoke them,” said Rayner.

Hunt denied safety concerns, and said these changes will not affect the right to strike.

The Conservative MP Alec Shelbrooke voted against the plans, arguing that they diminish the intended impact of industrial action.

“If people are going to lose their ability to have an effect when they withdraw their labour, then I am afraid they have effectively lost the ability to withdraw their labour,” the Elmet and Rothwell MP said.

This was the first time Shelbrooke had voted against the government since being elected in 2010.

The Labour MP Ian Byrne said the government should be voting to protect workers’ rights, rather than introducing a “scab charter for bad employers”.

This change comes hours after further strike action was confirmed, this time involving drivers at eight train companies who are preparing to walk out over pay.

Though agency workers can now replace strikers, questions remain over the numbers of spare teachers, nurses and train drivers who can step in as replacements.

With both the National Education Union and NASUWT threatening strike action in the autumn term, the Conservative MP Jonathan Gullis offered to return to the classroom should those threats materialise.

Separately, a Labour motion to annul regulations to increase the level of damages a court can award in the case of unlawful strike action was defeated by 290 votes to 201.

UK Seeks to Stymie Future Strikes With Use of Agency Workers

Alex Morales, Bloomberg News

Stationary London tube trains during a strike by tube workers, at the London Underground Northfields Depot, in London, UK, on Tuesday, June 21, 2022. UK rail workers began Britain's biggest rail strike in three decades on Tuesday after unions rejected a last-minute offer from train companies, bringing services nationwide to a near standstill. , Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- Battling to contain the UK’s worst rail strikes in 30 years, Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government is moving ahead with legislation to allow employers to use agency workers to stand in for those taking industrial action. 

The framework to be introduced Thursday by Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng will peel back what the government called “burdensome legal restrictions” and help counter future walkouts, according to a statement from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. 

The move comes as some 40,000 rail workers staged a second one-day strike over pay and conditions on Thursday after talks between employers and the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers failed to produce a deal. The first stoppage on Tuesday brought much of the nation’s rail network to a standstill, and a third is planned for Saturday. 

“The situation we are in is not sustainable,” Kwarteng said. “Trade unions are holding the country to ransom by grinding crucial public services and businesses to a halt.”

RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch is pushing 13 train firms and track operator Network Rail for pay rises to match soaring inflation, as well as a guarantee that there will be no compulsory layoffs as part of the settlement.

The union is “working constructively” with the rail companies but the government is a “silent partner” and should be taking part in talks, Lynch told the BBC. Further strikes are likely if a settlement isn’t reached, he said.

Teachers, Postal Workers

Johnson’s administration faces the prospect of what the UK media has dubbed a summer of discontent, with barristers also planning strikes and teachers and postal workers warning they too may take industrial action. Late on Wednesday, National Education Union Deputy General Secretary Niamh Sweeney told Sky News that a strike is more likely than at any point in the two decades she’s worked in the teaching profession. 

Inflation at a four-decade high of 9.1% and predicted by the Bank of England to hit double figures later in the year is squeezing household budgets and leading workers to clamor for wage increases that keep pace with rising prices. 

“The pay simply hasn’t kept up with other graduate professions and teachers are saying to us that they are finding it difficult,” Sweeney said, adding that many are “struggling to survive” as heating bills rise.  

The RMT’s Lynch and Transport Secretary Grant Shapps have clashed repeatedly over the rail crisis, with the potential use of temporary workers one of the sore points. Lynch -- who has become a minor celebrity due to his handling of TV interviews -- says the staff won’t be adequately trained and union members would encourage them not to go to work. The government denies that will be the case. 

“Businesses will still need to comply with broader health and safety rules that keep both employees and the public safe,” BEIS said. “It would be their responsibility to hire cover workers with the necessary skills and/or qualifications to meet those obligations.”

The changes will be made through a so-called statutory instrument that’s subject to Parliamentary approval. The government said it hopes the rules will come into force “over the coming weeks.”

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.

UK Strike Threat Returns as Train Drivers Vote on Action

Joe Mayes, Bloomberg News

Stationary London tube trains during a strike by tube workers, at the London Underground Northfields Depot, in London, UK, on Tuesday, June 21, 2022. UK rail workers began Britain's biggest rail strike in three decades on Tuesday after unions rejected a last-minute offer from train companies, bringing services nationwide to a near standstill. Photographer: Hollie Adams/Bloomberg , Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- The UK train drivers’ union will announce on Monday whether it plans to strike, raising the prospect of further British travel disruption in a summer marked by industrial action across sectors.

The Aslef union is expected to post results of a vote of more than 21,000 members for a possible work stoppage over a pay dispute. The group has said it’s likely to coordinate across the national railway system to maximize disruptions.

A decision to strike by Aslef drivers would mark a new wave of turmoil for Britain’s rail network, in a week where criminal barristers and post office staff are also taking industrial action. The UK government is facing widespread anger from trade unions over pay settlements and conditions, with Boris Johnson’s administration having argued that it needs to be cautious with pay awards for fear of stoking inflation.

Read More: UK Confronts 1970s-Style Problems With Strikes and Inflation

The Aslef vote comes even as the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers consults with members on the latest proposals to resolve its dispute, which led in June to the country’s biggest train strike in 30 years.

Aslef is seeking higher wages for members who it says have had no raise since 2019 as inflation spirals. Aslef General Secretary Mick Whelan told the Financial Times last week that a national drivers strike would cause “massive” disruptions to travel this summer. 

Read More: UK Seeks to Stymie Future Strikes With Use of Agency Workers

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.

UK
Teachers and nurses ‘ready to quit’ over delays to pay rises, union leaders warn

Newly appointed cabinet ministers are under pressure to swiftly resolve wage deals for public sector workers or face them leaving their professions in coming weeks

A protest in London last month against the government's handling of the cost of living crisis and call for pay rises for public sector workers. 

Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Toby Helm 

THE GUARDIAN

Sun 10 Jul 2022 

Union leaders have warned newly appointed cabinet ministers that many teachers and nurses will quit their professions in the coming weeks if public sector pay deals are further delayed by chaos at the top of government.

The decision on Thursday by Boris Johnson to step down as prime minister – and a series of changes to his cabinet – have left public sector workers increasingly fearful that long-overdue pay rises will be pushed back to the autumn.

Even before the implosion of the Johnson government last week, unions were already on collision course with it over the extent of any pay increases – and were warning of possible strike action if their demands were not met.

Teachers, NHS workers and others in the public sector have been demanding increases of at least the rate of inflation – currently 9.1% – while ministers had been insisting that pay restraint was necessary because the Treasury needs to limit spending and curb inflation.

Now, however, there is anxiety that the already delayed pay process, including consultations with unions, will be delayed further, meaning many workers will quit in frustration. The impasse over pay – and threats of strikes – will be one of the most pressing issues facing the government as the Conservative party prepares to select a new leader and prime minister.

On Saturday the country’s biggest union, Unison, said it had written to the new health secretary, Stephen Barclay, demanding to see the as yet unpublished recommendations of the NHS pay review body. It also reiterated warnings about possible industrial action unless progress was made quickly.

Unison’s head of health, Sara Gorton, said: “The government’s leadership vacuum is no excuse for further delay on putting NHS pay right. The government is already months behind its own timetable. Surging costs are having a terrible effect on staff and helping them should be top of the priority list for the new secretary of state, not an afterthought.”

In her letter to Barclay, Gorton added: “The ambitious targets to reduce waiting times and remove the elective backlog will not be met without urgent pay action from you to prevent people leaving the health service.

“NHS staff cannot afford to wait for the leadership matters in your party to be settled before announcing your pay position. I will be talking to other unions about coordinating our plans, including consultative ballot options over inaction.

“Pay is crucial in making sure the NHS is properly staffed and able to provide the care patients need. Giving a proper wage award will show that ministers are serious about protecting the health service and the millions who rely on it.”

Patrick Roach, general secretary of the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers, has also written to the new education secretary, James Cleverly, asking for publication of the review body recommendations for teachers.

Roach said it was essential that agreement was reached as soon as possible so that teachers did not leave the profession before the beginning of the new school year. “What is important is that process is not kicked into the long grass. We must ensure that full consultation takes place and that teachers get what they deserve.”

The TUC’s general secretary, Frances O’Grady, said: “The government may be in chaos, but ministers must not forget the cost of living crisis facing workers. Britain needs a pay rise now.”

A government spokesperson said: “The government wants a fair pay deal for nurses, doctors and the taxpayer, and is carefully considering the recommendations from the independent pay review bodies.

“We are incredibly grateful to all NHS staff and they received a 3% pay rise last year – increasing nurses’ pay by £1,000 on average despite a public sector pay freeze – and we are giving NHS workers another pay rise this year.”

This article was amended on 10 July 2022 to add a comment from a government spokesperson that was received after publication.

WASABI BLUES

Japanese horseradish farmers fear for future amid climate change

A woman waters a flower bed at a park under the strain of Tokyo's hottest June streak since 1875, on June 30, 2022. 

PHOTO: REUTERS

TOKYO (REUTERS) - Masahiro Hoshina, a Japanese farmer, starts worrying about typhoon season months before it begins, haunted by memories of the heavy rains and landslides that washed away wasabi farms during one 2019 storm.

"Recently the power of typhoons feels totally different from before due to global warming. It's getting stronger," said the 70-year-old farmer in Okutama, west of downtown Tokyo.

"Since it's happened once, there's no guarantee it won't happen again."

Wasabi, the tangy Japanese horseradish that's an essential part of sushi and dabbed onto slices of raw fish or into bowls of soba buckwheat noodle soup, is usually grown along streams in narrow valleys, leaving farms prone to disasters.

Typhoon Hagibis, which slammed into eastern Japan in 2019, slashed production in Okutama by nearly 70 per cent the next year. The need for replanting and careful tending meant it's taken nearly three years for sushi farms there to recover.

Experts say global warming is affecting production not only by increasing the number and severity of storms, but with rising temperatures that threaten growth of the plants, which need to be in water a consistent 10-15 degrees Celsius year-round.

A lack of wasabi could also endanger traditional Japanese foods such as sushi and sashimi, where the tang of the wasabi is used as a contrast with raw fish.

Weather isn't the only obstacle wasabi farmers face. A drop in rural populations due to aging means there are no successors.

Because of the two factors, the output of wasabi grown in clear-flowing water, like at Hoshina's farm, had fallen to half that of 2005, according to the Agriculture Ministry.

Norihito Onishi, head sales manager at a chain of soba buckwheat noodle restaurants called Sojibo, has seen his business directly affected by wasabi shortages and supply problems.

The restaurants were long known for allowing customers to grind their own wasabi roots to produce the spicy paste used as a condiment for soba. But they've had to mostly give this up.

"In the past, we served all the cold soba noodles with a piece of raw wasabi, but now we can no longer do that," Onishi said.

Though wasabi root was plentiful when the restaurant first opened 30 years ago, Onishi said over the last 5 to 10 years there have been times when he couldn't get any at all. The precious root is now made available only for certain types of dishes.

"If this unstable supply of wasabi persists, due to many factors including global warming, we will face a situation where we need to come up with other ways to overcome the problem so we don't end up not serving raw wasabi at all," said Onishi.