Biden to push $6 trillion U.S. budget for next fiscal year – NYT

By David Morgan
Posted on May 27, 2021

FILE PHOTO: President Biden speaks about jobs and the economy from the White House in Washington


WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Joe Biden will seek $6 trillion in U.S. federal spending for the 2022 fiscal year, rising to $8.2 trillion by 2031, the New York Times reported on Thursday, a day before the White House is expected to unveil its budget proposal.

Citing documents it had obtained, the Times said the Democratic president planned to pay for his agenda through increased taxes on corporations and high earners, and that the budget deficits would start to decrease in the 2030s.

On Friday, Biden is set to release his first full budget since taking office in January as he seeks to push his priorities of investing in infrastructure, childcare and other public works in a national rebuilding effort.

Representatives for the White House could not be immediately reached for comment on the report, which noted Biden’s proposal would put the nation on track for its highest sustained level of spending since World War II.

Republicans have criticized the president for seeking trillions in new spending, setting the stage for pitched battles over his priorities.

“It just seems like the trillions keep on coming,” Republican U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito, who is leading a group of colleagues pursuing a counteroffer to Biden’s current $1.7 trillion infrastructure proposal.

While the president can propose an annual budget for the U.S. government, it is up to Congress to approve spending bills. And while Democrats hold the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, they only narrowly control the 50-50 divided U.S. Senate, with Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris holding the tie-breaking vote.


Still, Biden campaigned on charting a new course for the country after four divisive years under his Republican predecessor, Donald Trump, and has vowed to press ahead with his sweeping proposals.

His plan, expected Friday, will offer more details on that path, including possible spending jumps in Medicaid and other social programs. It will also lay out proposed funds for foreign aid, immigration, policing and national defense.


(Writing by Susan Heavey and Andrea Shalal; editing by John Stonestreet and Mark Heinrich)

LOVE ME I'M A LIBERAL

Biden administration backs Trump-era Alaska oil drilling plans

Rebecca Falconer
AXIOS

27/5/2021

An aerial view of Nuiqsut, Alaska, near the oil drilling project. Photo: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post via Getty Images

The Biden administration on Wednesday defended in the U.S. District Court for Alaska a massive ConocoPhillips oil and gas project approved during the Trump-era, per the New York Times.

Why it matters: President Biden has pledged to move away from fossil fuels. But the project has the backing of officials including Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) — who's viewed as a potential ally for Biden in his attempts to push through policies in an evenly divided Senate, NYT notes.

Driving the news: Some tribal leaders and unions also back the project, but environmental groups say the Trump administration didn't consider the effects the Willow drilling project in part of the National Petroleum Reserve would have on wildlife and climate-change, according to Reuters.

A judge temporarily blocked the project in May after the environmental groups filed a lawsuit.

What they're saying: The Biden administration didn't clarify how its stance fit with climate policies, but it said in the filing sufficient considerations had been made in regards to greenhouse gas emissions and the effects the project would have on "fish, caribou and polar bear habitat," the Times reports.

The filing noted that Conoco has "valid lease rights" and can "develop its leases 'subject to reasonable regulation,'" per the NYT.

An Interior Department spokesperson said in an emailed statement to Axios that the filing by the Justice Department "continues to defend a 2020 Record of Decision for the Willow Project in the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska (NPR-A)."

"The filing maintains that the decision complied with NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] standards in place at the time, and that the plaintiffs did not challenge the Record of Decision within the time limitations associated with environmental review for projects in the NPR-A."

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment from the Interior Department.

Big Oil's climate earthquake

Ben Geman, author of Generate
AXIOS 27/5/2021

Illustration: Shoshana Gordon/Axios

A rat-tat-tat burst of events Wednesday could mark a turning point in pressure against Big Oil to act more aggressively on global warming.

Catch up fast: In a span of hours, ExxonMobil shareholders voted to add at least two new board members nominated by activist investors (a third nominee's vote is outstanding).
Chevron shareholders backed a resolution urging emissions cuts from use of its products in the economy, called Scope 3.

Royal Dutch Shell was ordered by a Dutch court to slash emissions well beyond current plans.

Why it matters: The investor votes, especially after Exxon's intense fight against the activist slate, make crystal clear that mainstream finance wants stronger steps on climate.
In one sign of this trend, asset management giant BlackRock voted for three of the four insurgent directors nominated by the investment group Engine No. 1.

Meanwhile, the Dutch court decision is the first to order a major oil company to make its emissions plans more consistent with the Paris Climate agreement targets.
It could spur legal action against other oil and gas firms, but also other industrial giants too.
“This case does open the door for challenges to other energy-intensive sectors,” Liz Hypes, an analyst with the consultancy Verisk Maplecroft, tells the Wall Street Journal.

What they're saying: Energy experts tell Axios the court ruling and Exxon votes illustrate what could be a significant shift.

They "reflect the growing societal expectations that oil firms be able to demonstrate their business strategies are aligned with our long-term climate goals and resilient to climate risk," says Jason Bordoff, who heads a Columbia University energy think tank.

"The era of 'always be drilling' oil major capex has clearly come to an end with today's events. Investors are betting there are profitable ways for legacy energy companies to transform themselves in alignment with the net zero [emissions] imperative," says climate finance expert Daniel Firger, managing director at Great Circle Capital Advisors.

Yes, but: The substantive effects of Wednesday's action won't be known for a long time.
It's impossible to say, for now, how much influence Exxon's small share of new board members will have on the company's direction.

Shell said it would appeal the decision in a statement that also touted its existing near-term targets and its plan to become a "net-zero" emitter by 2050.

Here's a little more from Bordoff, who was an energy aide in the Obama White House, on the rising climate pressure on oil majors:

"It is important to note that if the response is for companies to sell oil assets in order to reduce emissions from the oil they produce, global emissions will not decline if others just buy those assets and produce the oil, which is why it is urgent that policy and technology start to curb oil use that is still rising year after year."

THAT WOULD BE CORRECT
China says politics behind US call for coronavirus origin probe

By Simran Kashyap

Published: Thursday, May 27, 2021

Beijing, May 27: China on Thursday accused the Biden administration of playing politics and shirking its responsibility in calling for a renewed investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic that was first detected in China in late 2019.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said at a daily briefing that President Joe Biden's order showed the US "does not care about facts and truth, nor is it interested in serious scientific origin tracing."

Biden told US intelligence officials to redouble their efforts to investigate the origins of the pandemic, including any possibility the trail might lead to a Chinese laboratory.

After months of minimising that possibility as a fringe theory, the Biden administration is joining worldwide pressure on China to be more open about the outbreak, aiming to head off Republican complaints the president has not been tough enough to press China on alleged obstruction.

Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, have promoted the theory that the virus emerged from a laboratory rather than naturally through human contact with an infected animal in Wuhan, China. Zhao also said the US must open itself up to investigations into its biological laboratories, including at the military's Fort Detrick base.

THE REASONABLE THING TO DO

"The US side claims that it wants China to participate in a comprehensive, transparent, evidence-based international investigation," Zhao said. "We would like to ask the US side to do the same as China and immediately cooperate with the World Health Organization on origin tracing research in a scientific manner."

 

UK SOCCER DISASTER

BBC radio presenter sorry for not challenging QC’s ‘evil nonsense’ Hillsborough claims

Campaigner Margaret Aspinall, whose 18-year-old son James died in the disaster, said: “They tried to bring our fans into it again at this trial when we have already cleared their names and to me that is so sad.”

 by Joe Mellor
May 27, 2021

LONDON ECONOMIC EYE
in Media, News




Radio presenter Adrian Chiles has told listeners he is “absolutely mortified” that he failed to challenge a lawyer over “evil nonsense” claims he made on his show about Liverpool fans causing a “riot” ahead of the Hillsborough Disaster.

Jonathan Goldberg QC spoke to Chiles on BBC Radio 5 Live on Wednesday after his client Peter Metcalf, who was solicitor for South Yorkshire Police in 1989, was cleared of perverting the course of justice following the disaster.

During the same show on Thursday, Chiles made a lengthy apology, saying he had been a “fool” not to pick the QC up on his comments.

He said he reported the end of the inquests into the tragedy in 2016 and that he knew “as much as anyone that it was absolute nonsense, and proved to be nonsense several times in the past, that Liverpool fans themselves were in any way culpable for what happened.”

Chiles said that “calamitously and incompetently” he was momentarily distracted during the interview and did not hear Mr Goldberg make the comments, which caused uproar among the families of those who died in 1989.

He said: “I’m absolutely mortified with myself.”

Fool

And he added: “I absolutely know it was just evil nonsense and I apologise for not picking him up there and then.

“But, honestly, I was fool not a knave on this one.


“Have a go at me for incompetence, please, and I deserve it. I just didn’t hear it.”

Chiles said: “If I had heard it, I don’t think I would have believed my ears.”

Mr Goldberg said on the show on Wednesday: “My client was accused of covering up criticism of the police. What he in fact did was cut out criticism of the Liverpool fans, whose behaviour was perfectly appalling on the day, causing a riot that led to the gate having to be opened, that unfortunately let the people in and crushed to death the innocents as they were – complete innocents – who were at the front of the pens, who had arrived early and were not drunk and were behaving perfectly well.”

Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham, who has campaigned with the Hillsborough families, said: “There is no evidence of any riot outside that ground and the fact somebody who is a Queen’s Counsel should go on the media and make those statements, they are inaccurate statements.

“They are intended to smear the supporters of this football club all over again, they are intended to smear the people of this city all over again.”
So sad

Campaigner Margaret Aspinall, whose 18-year-old son James died in the disaster, said: “They tried to bring our fans into it again at this trial when we have already cleared their names and to me that is so sad.”

Fans were exonerated of causing any part in the disaster following the publication of the Hillsborough Independent Panel report in 2012.

Then prime minister David Cameron told the House of Commons: “A narrative about hooliganism on that day was created that led many in the country to accept that somehow it was a grey area.

“Today’s report is black and white: the Liverpool fans ‘were not the cause of the disaster’.”

However, less than two years later, at a preliminary hearing for the new inquests in 2014, lawyers representing police officers said they would make the suggestion that drunken fans contributed to the disaster.

In 2016, the inquests jury concluded the behaviour of supporters did not cause or contribute to the dangerous situation which built up outside the ground on April 15 1989.

Related: Liverpool: Hillsborough disaster trial collapses as judge rules no case to answer

TORY WAR CRIMES

REVEALED: UK military hardware used in Israel airstrikes on Gaza

A jet manufacturer said dozens of key components have “the fingerprints of British ingenuity”.

 by Andra Maciuca

LONDON ECONOMIC EYE
May 23, 2021
in News

Photo: PA

UK military components and hardware have been used by Israel during its Gaza bombardment, The Independent has reported.

The attacks started on 10 May and killed 232 people, included 65 children, before stopping on Friday.

An Israeli military spokesperson confirmed last week that F-35 warplanes are among military aircraft being used in the bombardment.


The jet’s manufacturer Lockheed Martin says that “the fingerprints of British ingenuity can be found on dozens of the aircraft’s key components”. The UK Defence Journal estimates them to be 15 per cent British-made.

Boris Johnson, visited a new British aircraft carrier on Friday and boasted that the warplane “shows how we’re driving investment right across the UK, levelling up the country with new technology and new skilled jobs”.

Israeli forces are also known to be using F-16 fighter jets and Apache helicopters, which the UK government has previously admitted “almost certainly” contain British-supplied components.


Human rights groups have asked for all military exports to Israel and Palestinian militants to be stopped, as part of a full review into UK arms sales to the conflict-hit region.
Humanitarian crisis

Andrew Smith of Campaign Against Arms Trade said: “The last two weeks of bombardment have killed hundreds of people and exacerbated the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.


“The government tells us that it’s concerned, but it has failed to do the bare minimum, and has consistently refused to provide clear answers to very basic questions about whether UK-made arms that it sold are being used or not.

“It wouldn’t be the first time. Time and again UK-made weapons and components have been used against Palestinians, and it looks like that is what has happened again.”

He added: “We are always told how robust arms export controls supposedly are, but nothing could be further from the truth. How many more abuses and atrocities will it take for Boris Johnson and his colleagues to finally change their policy and stop exporting violence and repression around the world?”

Official figures show that since the Conservative government was elected in May 2015, the UK has licensed over £400m worth of arms to Israeli forces, including aircraft, bombs, armoured vehicles, and ammunition.

Asked about the use of British-made components and arms in the conflict, a UK government spokesperson said: “The violence across Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories has been deeply concerning. The foreign secretary repeatedly called for de-escalation and welcomed the announcement last night of a ceasefire.

“The UK takes its arms export responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust arms export control regimes in the world. We consider all our export applications thoroughly against a strict risk assessment framework and keep all licences under careful review as standard.

“We will not grant an export licence if to do so would be inconsistent with the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria.

Israel suspected of war crimes in Gaza, UN says

“Air strikes in such densely populated areas resulted in a high level of civilian fatalities and injuries, and the widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure."

 by Andra Maciuca
May 27, 2021

LONDON ECONOMIC EYE
in News, Politics



Photo: PA

Israeli forces may have committed war crimes in the 11-day war with the militant group Hamas that rules the Gaza Strip, the UN human rights chief has said.

Michelle Bachelet also called on Israel to allow an independent investigation of military action in the latest deadly events, as required under international law.

The remarks were made as part of a one-day UN discussion of the “the grave human rights situation” in Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem.


Bachelet said Hamas’ indiscriminate rocket fire during the recent conflict was also a clear violation of war rules.


The UN high commissioner for human rights spoke to the Human Rights Council about the “most significant escalation of hostilities since 2014” before the cease-fire last week.

FALSE EQUIVALENCY
The war killed at least 248 in Gaza, including 66 children and 39 women.

 In Israel, 12 people died, including two children.

Civilian fatalities and destruction

“Air strikes in such densely populated areas resulted in a high level of civilian fatalities and injuries, and the widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure,” Bachelet said.

“Such attacks may constitute war crimes,” she added, if deemed to be indiscriminate and disproportionate in their impact on civilians.


Bachelet also criticised the tactics of Hamas that included locating military assets in densely populated civilian areas, and firing rockets from them.

She warned that unless the “root causes” of the violence are addressed, “it will certainly be a matter of time until the next round of violence commences with further pain and suffering for civilians on all sides.”

What Israel and Palestine say

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation has presented a resolution that, if passed by the United Nations Human Rights Council, would mark an unprecedented level of scrutiny authorised by the council. It would set up a permanent commission to report on human rights violations in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

Israel accuses the council of anti-Israel bias and has generally refused to cooperate with its investigators.

Israeli ambassador Meirav Eilon Shahar said Hamas — designated a terrorist organisation by the US and its allies — had fired 4,400 rockets at Israeli civilians from “from Palestinian homes, hospitals, and schools. Each one of these rockets constitutes a war crime”.

“What would you do if rockets were fired at Dublin, Paris, or Madrid?” she said.

Riad al-Maliki, the Palestinian foreign minister, sought to highlight years of suffering by Palestinians in the lands controlled or occupied by Israel.

“The Israeli war machinery and terrorism of its settlers continue to target our children who face murder, arrest and displacement, deprived of a future in which they can live in peace and security,” he said.

Explosive weapons in conflict mostly harm civilians, study shows

MAY 25, 2021 


Palestinians inspect their destroyed homes following the cease-fire between Gaza and Israel in Beit Hanun in the northern Gaza Strip on Sunday. Photo by Ismael Mohamad/UPI | License Photo

May 25 (UPI) -- Explosive weapons in populated areas have killed and injured civilians more than 90% of the time over the past 10 years, according to a study released Tuesday by a London-based organization calling for an end to their use.

The group Action on Armed Violence said in its Explosive Violence Monitoring Project that almost 240,000 civilians were killed or injured by such weapons between 2011 and 2020.

"When explosive weapons were used in populated areas, 91% of those killed and injured were civilians. This compares to 25% in other areas," the group said.

The group defines explosive weapons as including a variety of munitions, such as air-dropped bombs, mortars, improvised explosive devices and artillery shells.

RELATED Voices: Gaza's enhanced rocket technology challenges Israel's defenses

AOAV Executive Director Iain Overton pointed to the ongoing conflict in Israel, for example, where many Palestinians have been killed and injured in populated locations, like buildings and settlements.

The group also noted the conflict in Gaza, which has been under a cease-fire for less than a week after 11 days of Israeli bombardment.

"When explosive weapons are used in towns and cities, civilians will be harmed," Overton told The Guardian. "[It is] as true as it is today in Gaza as it was a decade ago in Iraq and beyond."

The group said it's documented close to 360,000 deaths and injuries overall by explosive weapons in 30,000 incidents in the past decade. It said civilians made up 73% of those deaths, or about 262,000.

"Since the monitor began, AOAV has recorded the appalling suffering caused across the globe by both manufactured and improvised weapons," the 55-page report states.

"We call on states and other users to commit politically to stop using explosive weapons with wide-area effects in populated areas."

DEMOCRACY NOW!
#NOTOKYOOLYMPICS
No Tokyo Olympics: As COVID Spikes in Japan, Calls Grow to Cancel Games. IOC Refuses. Who Profits?

STORY MAY 27, 2021
Watch Full Show
This is viewer supported news. Please do your part today. DONATE

TOPICS
Olympics
Coronavirus
Japan

GUESTS
Jules Boykoff
author and former Olympic athlete who played for the U.S. Olympic soccer team.
Satoko Itani
professor of sport, gender and sexuality studies at Kansai University.

LINKS
"Tokyo is learning that the only force stronger than a pandemic is the Olympics"

"A Sports Event Shouldn’t Be a Superspreader. Cancel the Olympics."

"NOlympians: Inside the Fight Against Capitalist Mega-Sports in Los Angeles, Tokyo and Beyond"

Image Credit: Viola Kam/SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters

Pressure is growing on organizers to cancel the Tokyo Olympics as Japan struggles to contain a fourth wave of COVID-19 cases. The games, which were delayed by a year due to the pandemic, are scheduled to begin July 23 even though less than 3% of the Japanese population has been fully vaccinated against COVID-19, one of the lowest rates in the developed world. Jules Boykoff, author and former Olympic athlete who played for the U.S. Olympic soccer team, says the “extremely lopsided” contracts the International Olympic Committee signs with host countries give the body ultimate authority over whether or not to cancel the event. “More than 80% of the people in Japan oppose hosting the Olympics this summer, and yet the IOC insists on pressing ahead,” says Boykoff. We also speak with Satoko Itani, professor of sport, gender and sexuality studies at Kansai University, who says there is growing public anger at the government and a “sense of unfairness” that the games are going ahead during a pandemic. “They feel that the people are not protected,” they say.

Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.


AMY GOODMAN: We begin today’s show in Japan, where COVID-19 is spiking amidst mounting opposition to the Tokyo Olympic Games, which were delayed by a year because of the pandemic and are scheduled to open July 23rd. This week, Japanese leaders extended a state of emergency in Tokyo and other major cities for several weeks into June because of the pandemic. On Tuesday, leading newspaper Asahi Shimbun, one of the Olympic sponsors, called for cancellation of the games in an explosive editorial, writing they’re, quote, “simply beyond reason to hold the Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics this summer.” Meanwhile, the head of a Japanese doctors’ union warned against bringing tens of thousands of people from more than 200 countries and territories to Japan, where less than 3% of the population is fully vaccinated.


NAOTO UEYAMA: [translated] In order to win the battle against the coronavirus, we need to stop preparing for the games. And that is why we are calling for the Tokyo Games to be canceled. … There is a possibility that the South African and the Indian variants could spread around the world through the Olympics. And we also cannot deny the possibility of a new variant being generated after the games. … If that were to happen, it would be called the Tokyo Olympics variant, and holding the games will be condemned in the next hundred years as a foolish act of mankind.

AMY GOODMAN: An open letter of over 6,000 doctors also called for the cancellation of the Olympics. Despite these concerns and ongoing protests, Japanese officials, Olympics organizers and the International Olympic Committee have all vowed the games will go ahead as a televised event with no foreign spectators. The IOC depends on selling broadcast rights for 75% of its income.

Meanwhile, an online petition with more than 350,000 signatures calling for the Tokyo Games to be canceled has been submitted to the International Olympic Committee and others. This is Misako Ichimura, a homeless activist and artist, who’s one of the founding members of the anti-Olympics group Hangorin No Kai in Tokyo.


MISAKO ICHIMURA: [translated] Amidst a spike in COVID-19 infections and an increasingly critical situation for people, the Olympic organizers have resumed preparation for the Olympic Games after a temporary pause. In the vicinity of the stadiums, they have begun setting up an exclusive zone, pushing out the houseless people who have been living there. Construction for the venues has contributed to serious deforestation of the local park. It is also pushing the users of the park into a small area, making it difficult for people to keep social distance. On the road where many ambulances are driving tirelessly, brand-new exclusive lanes for the Olympics are being built.


With 80% of the Japanese public reported to be opposed to the games, and the growing rallying cry to cancel the Olympics, the torch relay has faced protesters everywhere in Japan. It is not welcomed at all. In an attempt to silence the calls for cancellation, the organizers repeat the slogan “safe and secure,” but they have no grounds for it. They prioritize the people who are related to the Olympics. The fact that our lives and health are being taken lightly further angers people.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Misako Ichimura with the Tokyo anti-Olympics group.

For more, we’re joined by two guests. In Nishinomiya, Japan, Satoko Itani is with us, an associate professor of sports, gender and sexuality at Kansai University and a leading Japanese critic of the games. Also with us, from Portland, Oregon, is Jules Boykoff, scholar and former Olympic athlete who played for the U.S. Olympic soccer team from 1989 to 1991. He has published several pieces, his latest this morning in The Washington Post, “Tokyo is learning that the only force stronger than a pandemic is the Olympics.” His guest essay in The New York Times is headlined “A Sports Event Shouldn’t Be a Superspreader. Cancel the Olympics.” He’s written four books about the Olympics, his latest headlined NOlympians: Inside the Fight Against Capitalist Mega-Sports in Los Angeles, Tokyo and Beyond.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Jules, I want to begin with you. For people to understand, who decides if the Olympics in Japan are canceled? This may shock people. I mean, wouldn’t the country decide, the country of Japan? Talk about the power of the International Olympic Committee.

JULES BOYKOFF: Each time an Olympic host city gets ready to start the games, they need to sign a host city contract with the International Olympic Committee. Those contracts are extremely lopsided in favor of the International Olympic Committee, and it gives them — and only them — the power to cancel the Olympics in a case like this. So, when the prime minister of Japan states in public, under pressure from people in Japan and around the world to cancel the Olympics — when the prime minister states in public that he actually doesn’t have the power to cancel the Olympics, he’s absolutely correct.

And that’s part of a larger state of exception that comes into the Olympic city when the Olympics arrive on your doorstep. There are all sorts of special laws that are put into place, all sorts of special rules that are put into place. New technologies are secured for the Olympics. So, for example, in Tokyo, you see facial recognition systems being put in place at all Olympic venues, even though they’re known for having a racial bias. Security forces use the Olympics to get all the special weapons and funding they’d normally never be able to get during normal political times.

And so, that’s exactly what we’re seeing transpire here. The all-powerful IOC, that is really a privileged sliver of the global 1%, is exerting itself and forcing the games ahead against the will of the population. More than 80% of the people in Japan oppose hosting the Olympics this summer, and yet the IOC insists on pressing ahead.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Satoko Itani, if you could explain what the significance is of one of the key sponsors of the Olympics and a major newspaper, Asahi Shimbun, coming out against, saying that the Olympics should not be held? Was that a surprise in Japan? And are you expecting other sponsors to also come out in opposition?

SATOKO ITANI: Hi, Nermeen. And hi, Amy. First of all, thank you so much for having me today on your show.

In terms of the significance of The Asahi Shimbun speaking against the Olympics is that, well, I have to say first, it came too late. To me, now they are taking the side against the Olympics, because it is becoming very clear the public will not support this Olympics, and they will face — continue to face the harsh criticism after the Olympics are over.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: And what about the fact that there’s such widespread opposition? As Jules just mentioned, over 80% of the public in Japan are opposed to the Olympics taking place. How are they expressing their opposition? And what kind of response has the government in Japan given to the opposition?

SATOKO ITANI: Well, yes, so, there have been many protests, from many years ago. Ever since the beginning — ever since the game was awarded to Tokyo, which was 2013, there are small groups of anti-Olympic activists have been speaking tirelessly against the Olympics and pointing out many issues, way before the pandemic hit Japan. And after the torch relay began, not just these main groups that have been working for years, there are smaller groups of people popping out in many parts of the Japan against the torch relay and the Olympics itself.

AMY GOODMAN: Satoko Itani, can you talk about the level of protest? I mean, you have 6,000 doctors calling for the cancellation. You have the torch group, the ones that are running to ultimately light the torch in Tokyo; a number of them are now COVID-positive. You have thousands of athletes coming from around the world, many from countries that have not gotten vaccines — the countries themselves, let alone the athletes. And vaccines are not being required at the Olympics.

SATOKO ITANI: So, obviously, there is a great health risk, public health risks, not just to Japan, but around the world. And again, as you pointed out, Amy, there are less than 3% of the population in Japan currently has been vaccinated.

And going back to your earlier question, the government of Japan have only repeated that their decision — they don’t have a power to decide; the IOC has. And the only response the IOC has had to the people’s opposition or the people’s protests are that, no matter what, even if the Japan or the host city is under the state of emergency, the game will go on. And Dick Pound recently said that the Olympics will succeed and will be held, unless there is an unprecedented armageddon. And this is the voices that we’ve been hearing.

So, reasonably, people in Japan are increasingly angry and feeling the great sense of unfairness and the wrong priorities on the part of the IOC organizing committee and the Japanese government. They feel that the people are not protected.

But I have to emphasize, Amy, this did not just start after the beginning of the pandemic. When the game was awarded in 2013, it was only two years after the Japan experienced this triple disaster of a massive earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown. And we knew, the public knew, it was going to require a huge amount of money and resources to recover from that. But all these moneys and resources have been put towards the Olympics, and the recovery itself has been delayed.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Jules Boykoff, could you respond to the fact — I mean, a number of people have, of course, expressed dissatisfaction with the measures that the Olympic organizers in Tokyo have put in place. What are some of those measures? I mean, The New England Journal of Medicine came out saying that those measures are insufficient, but the article’s lead author suggested that appropriate and safe measures could be put in place and the games could go ahead. She did not say that it was necessary to cancel the Olympics.

JULES BOYKOFF: So, the International Olympic Committee, in conjunction with Tokyo organizers, have issued what they call playbooks for different groups of people that will be attending the Olympics, whether they’re athletes, whether they’re journalists, whether they’re volunteers. And these playbooks lay out in clear terms what is going to be in place in terms of these measures. And that New England Journal of Medicine article that you mentioned basically pointed out that a lot of what are in these playbooks is essentially hygiene theater, talking about cleaning off surfaces and things that everybody knows at this point, like wearing a mask and social distancing and so on.

The fact of the matter is, it’s incredibly difficult to pull that off with such a huge mega-event like the Olympics. We’re talking about 11,000 athletes for the Olympics. Eighty thousand people or so will be coming into the country from all around the world, as you mentioned, none of whom will be required to be vaccinated, none of whom will be quarantined, and many of whom can’t actually get a vaccination because they’re too young. Many Olympic sports have people in them who are not 15 years old. It depends on the sport, and they determine the age. So, there’s all sorts of complicating factors. And that’s not even to bring in the Paralympics, where you have many athletes who will be especially susceptible to coronavirus and all its variants. And so, the International Olympic Committee has come under all sorts of pressure about these playbooks.

One other thing about them, though, an athlete who is Tokyo-bound, who I’ve been in communication with, recently shared with me a waiver, basically, that they are being asked to sign in order to participate in the Olympics. And when I read this waiver, I found it brazen. It said explicitly in the waiver that if this individual were to contract coronavirus and, in fact, die, they would not hold liable the responsible parties for the Olympics. And this is something the individual is being asked to sign just to participate in the Olympics. Now, as an athlete, I’ve signed plenty of waivers in my life, but seeing just it spelled out in such terms, I found quite ghastly. And that’s what we’re really looking at here. We’re looking at the International Olympic Committee that seems to be perfectly willing to have people in Tokyo and Japan dying so that they can make a killing.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to the IOC, to play a clip of the IOC officials who held a news conference in Tokyo talking about — well, President Seiko Hashimoto tried to reassure reporters about the effectiveness of the organization’s protocols.


SEIKO HASHIMOTO: [translated] From February to mid-May, about a thousand people had been given a special grant to enter Japan, where Tokyo 2020 took the responsibility for their entry. There was one person that tested positive at the airport, but zero cases during the 14-day period where activities were restricted. This proved the coronavirus measures from the second version of the playbook actually worked.

AMY GOODMAN: So, Jules Boykoff, if you can talk about this remarkable situation where you have a country that’s spiking with COVID and you have this enormous pressure of the IOC? It could be that country IOCs will go bankrupt if, again, the Olympics aren’t held? If you can talk more about the big business of the IOC and also about the athletes? What happens to athletes who have been preparing for these years?

JULES BOYKOFF: Yeah, well, listening to the officials in Tokyo, as well as the International Olympic Committee, sounds a bit like a parrot enrolled in a repetition contest on Groundhog’s Day. They say the same thing over and over and over again about how we’re going to have a safe Olympics.

But you’re right: Money machinations are definitely happening behind the scenes, and that really animates why we’re seeing the Olympics press ahead under pandemic conditions. As you mentioned in the lead-in, the International Olympic Committee gets around 75% of its revenues from broadcasters in the United States, like NBC — almost 75%. Add to that another 18% from corporate sponsors, like Coca-Cola, Alibaba, etc., and you’re looking at more than $9 out of every $10 that lands in the International Olympic Committee’s coffers coming from those two sources. So, with that in mind, it makes a lot of sense that the International Olympic Committee would be willing to hold a made-for-TV event, with no people in the stands, if necessary, because if you can put the event on television, then you can have that money flowing into your coffers.

They make the argument that they spread the money out to the world. And that is true, to a certain degree. They do share quite a bit of the revenues to sporting groups, national Olympic committees around the world and international federations of sport. But whether that really means that we should go ahead with an Olympics under pandemic conditions is another matter. I guess I am just a little bit more willing to listen to the medical experts than I am to people who have a vested economic interest in pulling off these Olympics.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Satoko Itani, very quickly, before we conclude, could you explain what you think some of the reasons are that Japan has such a low rate of vaccination — in fact, the lowest of all OECD countries?

SATOKO ITANI: Well, I think the first is a failure of the diplomacy. During 2020, many countries made efforts to acquire the vaccine. Because Japan doesn’t make its own vaccination, it was essential, but the government failed to acquire them. And now the number seems to be available, but the distribution has been very poor. So, because of the poor distribution plan, the cities around the country are scrambling to figure out where to vaccinate, in what order, and how to transport. So, the government has majorly failed to create this distribution plan. And this is partly because of their failure to predict this pandemic. The China or the Korea have the experience of previous SARS epidemic, and they have set up, and they have prepared, since then, to respond to this situation. But the Japanese government haven’t. What they have done instead was reducing the number of hospital beds, reducing the number of funding for the public hospitals.

AMY GOODMAN: And also, if you could address this issue of the International Olympic Committee once again talking about politics and banning expression of politics, the Olympics banning Black Lives Matter apparel, and the recent vote to uphold a rule that prohibits any kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda? Today, in our headlines, we just reported on the death of Lee Evans, who, a few days after the world-renowned protest in the Mexico City Olympics of Tommie Smith and John Carlos, when they put up their hand in the Black Power salute, he did that very thing as the U.S. national anthem played, protesting for Black power in the United States, against poverty and for human rights. Can you talk about that power of the IOC to say no to those kinds of expressions, and what that means for Japan?

SATOKO ITANI: Well, the IOC has used this policy to really suppress and silence the opposing voices. And this is going to be a major issue in Japan, because if you look at — what the pandemic has shown is that this is a very political event. The decisions to protect the people in Japan have been even compromised because the IOC has such huge power and money interest. And yet to say that the people in Japan and the athletes cannot voice is only protect the IOC, and it shows that they do not care what happens to the people in the hosting countries and to the athletes.

AMY GOODMAN: Well —

SATOKO ITANI: So, this really speaks to the fallacy of the Olympic brand and Olympism.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank you so much for being with us. Just a comment, though this is not the Olympics: At the last U.S. Open, during the tournament, Naomi Osaka, who has a Japanese mother and a Haitian American father, donned seven masks, each bearing the name of a Black person who was killed by police: Breonna Tylor, Elijah McClain, Ahmaud Arbery, Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, Philando Castile and Tamir Rice.

Satoko Itani, I want to thank you for being with us, associate professor of sports, gender and sexuality at Kansai University, and also Jules Boykoff, former Olympic athlete, author of four books on the Olympics. We’ll link to your two pieces in The Washington Post and The New York Times, as you speak to us from Portland, Oregon.

Next up, President Biden has ordered U.S. intelligence agencies to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic to determine if the virus was accidentally leaked from a Chinese lab. We’ll look at this and other COVID issues with Dr. Monica Gandhi. Stay with us.
The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

‘War’ footing needed to correct economists’ miscalculations on climate change, says professor

UPDATED TUE, MAY 25 2021
Karen Gilchrist

CNBC

KEY POINTS

Economic forecasts predicting the potential impact of climate change grossly underestimate the reality and have delayed global recovery efforts by decades, a leading professor has said.

Mainstream economists “deliberately and completely” ignored scientific data and instead “made up their own numbers,” Steve Keen, a fellow at UCL, told CNBC.

Now, a “war-level footing” is required to have any hope of repairing the damage, he said.

WATCH NOW

VIDEO0 3:18

Economists’ climate change forecasts severely underestimate the true damage, says professor

Economic forecasts predicting the potential impact of climate change have grossly underestimated the reality and delayed global recovery efforts by decades, according to a leading professor.

Mainstream economists “deliberately and completely” ignored scientific data and instead “made up their own numbers” to suit their market models, Steve Keen, a fellow at University College London’s Institute for Strategy, Resilience and Security, told CNBC on Friday.

Now, a “war-level footing” is required to have any hope of repairing the damage, he said.

“Fundamentally, the economists have totally misrepresented the science and ignored it where it contradicts their bias that climate change is not a big deal because, in their opinion, capitalism can handle anything,” Keen told “Street Signs Asia.”

We are toying with forces far in excess of ones we can actually address.

Steve Keen

FELLOW, UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON

Keen said the repercussions of climate change were foretold in the 1972 publication “The Limits to Growth” — a divisive report on the destructive consequences of global expansion — but economists then and since failed to heed its warnings, preferring instead to rely on market mechanisms.

“If their warnings had been taken seriously and we’d done as they’d suggested, changing our trajectory from 1975 on, we could have done it gradually using things like carbon tax and so on,” he said. “Because economists have delayed it by another half century, we are, as a species, putting three to four times the pressure on the biosphere.”

Icebergs near Ilulissat, Greenland. Climate change is having a profound effect in Greenland with glaciers and the Greenland ice cap retreating.
NurPhoto | Getty Images

As a result, he said, “the only way we can (reverse) this is effectively a war level footing of motive mobilisation to reverse the amount of carbon we’ve put into the atmosphere to drastically reduce our consumption.”

Referring specifically to a report produced by economists at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was instrumental in outlining global climate targets including those presented at the Paris Agreement COP21, Keen said even their most severe estimates were a “trivial underestimate of the damage we expect.”

That is because they “completely and deliberately ignore the possibility of tipping points,” a point at which climate change can cause irreversible shifts in the environment.

“I think we should throw the economists completely out of this discussion and sit the politicians down with the scientists and say these are the potential outcomes of that much of a change to the biosphere; we are toying with forces far in excess of ones we can actually address,” he said.

Keen’s comments come as world leaders wrapped up their final day of meetings at the Arctic Council — an intergovernmental forum covering wide-ranging geopolitical issues from climate to trade.