It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Tuesday, May 10, 2022
UN says 'imminent' Yemen oil spill would cost $20 bn to clean up
A satellite image shows the FSO Safer oil tanker on June 19, 2020 off Yemen
(AFP/Handout) (Handout)
David Gressly Mon, May 9, 2022
The United Nations warned Monday that it would cost $20 billion to clean up an oil spill in the event of the "imminent" break-up of an oil tanker abandoned off Yemen.
"Our recent visit to (the FSO Safer) with technical experts indicates that the vessel is imminently going to break up," the UN humanitarian coordinator for Yemen, David Gressly, said ahead of a conference, hosted by the UN and The Netherlands, to raise funds for an emergency operation to prevent an oil spill.
The 45-year-old FSO Safer, long used as a floating oil storage platform with 1.1 million barrels of crude on board, has been moored off the rebel-held Yemeni port of Hodeida since 2015, without being serviced.
"The impact of a spill will be catastrophic," Gressly continued at a briefing in Amman. "The effect on the environment would be tremendous... our estimate is that $20 billion would be spent just to clean the oil spill."
The UN official had earlier announced on Twitter that the Netherlands would host on Wednesday a pledging conference for the international body's plan to avert the crisis.
Last month, the UN said it was seeking nearly $80 million for its operation. It warned of "a humanitarian and ecological catastrophe centred on a country already decimated by more than seven years of war".
It said that the emergency part of a two-stage operation would see the toxic cargo pumped from the storage platform to a temporary replacement vessel at a cost of $79.6 million.
Gressly estimated that a total of $144 million would be needed for the full operation, reiterating that $80 million was needed "to secure the oil safely in the initial phase".
Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed directly or indirectly in Yemen's seven-year war, while millions have been displaced in what the UN calls the world's biggest humanitarian crisis.
msh/jsa/it
Historic coalition marks paradigm shift for French left ahead of June legislative elections
France’s Socialist, Green, Communist and far-left parties have joined forces in an unlikely but historic alliance ahead of legislative elections on June 12 and 19. After a first-round presidential election that saw far-left leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon fall just short of a place in the final, France’s reinvigorated left wing has set its sights on winning a lower-house majority – and the cunning Mélenchon on the job of prime minister.
After days of sometimes heated debate, France’s leftist foes buried the hatchet last week, agreeing on a leftist coalition ahead of June’s parliamentary polls. The Greens (Europe Écologie-Les Verts or EELV), the French Communist Party (PCF) and the Socialist Party all signed off on a May 4 accord with Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s La France Insoumise (France Unbowed or LFI), with only the Trotskyist New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA) begging off from the deal.
The agreement sets out a joint slate of campaign proposals and apportions shares of constituency nominations to all the allied parties, who have pledged to field a single coalition candidate in each of France’s 577 legislative districts next month.
The deal marks the first time in 25 years that the French left has come together to contest the first round of the legislative elections in lockstep. In 1997, the so-called Plural Left joined forces to win a legislative majority, elevating Socialist heavyweight Lionel Jospin to the post of prime minister for five years while conservative rival Jacques Chirac held the French presidency, a power-sharing scenario known in France as “cohabitation”.
Next month’s election results will decide how the history books treat this new leftist coalition, but proponents are already eager to liken it to previous iterations: The Popular Front of 1936, for one, is still remembered fondly as a fount of social progress – including paid vacation, the 40-hour workweek (down from 48) – under leader Léon Blum. The Common Programme of 1972, another leftist meeting-of-the-minds, proved fundamental to Socialist François Mitterrand’s rise to the Élysée Palace nine years later. The next chapter for 2022’s leftist bloc has yet to be written – but the degree to which any union seemed unthinkable just three weeks ago has lent it the lustre of history in the making.
Ahead of April’s presidential election, Mélenchon’s main leftist rivals, Green candidate Yannick Jadot and Socialist candidate Anne Hidalgo, were scathing on the campaign trail. As Russia invaded Ukraine, Jadot accused Mélenchon of obliging Vladimir Putin. Hidalgo, meanwhile, went so far as to label the charismatic far-leftist an “agent”, an “ally” and a “supporter” of the Kremlin strongman.
But the presidential election’s April 10 first round had the effect of clarifying the balance of power on the French left. Mélenchon parlayed a mixture of genuine voter conviction and a persuasive pitch for tactical voting into a 21.95 percent score at the ballot box, just 422,000 votes behind far-right leader Marine Le Pen who won a place in the April 24 final duel against Emmanuel Macron. Mélenchon’s relative triumph relegated the other leftist forces to also-rans: the Greens’ Jadot scored a mere 4.63 percent, Communist candidate Fabien Roussel 2.28 percent and Paris Mayor Hidalgo, of the once mighty Socialist Party, garnered a miserly 1.75 percent of the vote. Those scores established Mélenchon and his La France Insoumise party as the pivotal force of France’s left wing – a kind of sweet political revenge for Mélenchon, himself a former Socialist who struck out on his own in 2008, not least over disagreements with party brass over the European Union.
“The presidential election really confirmed the status of La France Insoumise as the principal force on the left,” said political analyst Pascal Perrineau. “The situation was different in 2017, when Mélenchon already scored well (19.58 percent in the first round). His strategy then was to go it alone in the legislative elections while the Socialist Party still had a case to make and could at the time aspire to obtaining a parliamentary group under its own steam,” explained Perrineau, a professor at Sciences Po, the political science institute in Paris. Obtaining a parliamentary group in France’s National Assembly, key to a party’s influence in the lower-house chamber as well as to its financing, requires winning at least 15 seats nationwide.
Five years on, the state of play is very different. The 2022 presidential election opened the eyes of the leftist parties in two ways. For one, the appetite for unity among leftist voters is known to be high – 84 percent of left-wing sympathisers in a May 4 poll by the Elabe firm said they were in favour of an alliance between the top four left-wing parties. But also, for the Socialist and Green parties in particular, it became clear that there was consensus to be found in a programme that breaks with Macron and his neoliberal agenda.
Socialist Party turns its back on recent history
As such, the alliance agreed by the left-wing parties does give top billing to proposals from Mélenchon’s far-left LFI party: a €1,400 monthly minimum wage, a monthly allowance for young people, a price freeze on basic necessities, re-establishment of the wealth tax, the repeal of Macron’s flat tax on capital gains, the deployment of “ecological planning” to transition to a greener future, and a push for the establishment of a Sixth Republic, an institutional revamp meant to tip powers away from the executive and towards parliament and the people.
But the most remarkable aspect of the joint measures is surely the about-face made by the Socialists. In pushing for retirement at age 60 and consenting to the repeal of a labour code revamp that was pushed through under Socialist former president François Hollande, the party is clearly turning its back on Hollande’s 2012-2017 term in the Elysée Palace and his social-liberal line.
Hollande, for his part, says he “rejects the accord in substance and even on the [allocated] constituencies”, as he told regional daily La Montagne last week. The former French president had already warned that an accord between the Socialist Party and La France Insoumise would call into question “the very principles that are the foundations of socialist engagement”, telling France Info radio on April 28 that such an alliance would lead to the “disappearance” of the Socialist Party.
Among Socialist proponents of the coalition deal, the response to Hollande’s remarks was cutting. “I have trouble imagining that my main preoccupation today would be to listen to what François Hollande has to tell us about what the left is and what loyalty to socialism is,” Corrine Narassiguin, the party’s No. 2, told Radio J on April 29. “I’d prefer to listen to what the voters told us in the first round of the presidential election. That was a very strong and very clear message.”
While the Socialist, Green and Communist parties all agree that Mélenchon should become prime minister if the left wins a legislative majority in June, the accord inked last week is not certain to translate as a working agreement for a coalition government. Remarkably, the four left-wing parties didn’t see fit to issue a joint statement on the coalition they agreed, historic as it was; instead, each bilateral agreement gave rise to an ad hoc communiqué from the parties involved – allowing, conveniently, for different wordings tailored to suit each faction’s interests.
One issue in particular elicited plenty of debate throughout the coalition negotiations: The notion of willfully flouting European economic and budgetary treaties to suit the coalition’s agenda. Green party chief Julien Bayou – who authored a 2018 book entitled “Désobéissons pour sauver l’Europe” (Disobey to Save Europe) – was quick to sign on with LFI on that matter, as long as pulling France out of the EU was off the table. But the prospect of breaking with EU treaties gave the Socialist Party pause. The term “disobedience” was subject to intense debate, not least between Socialist chief Olivier Faure and LFI’s Mélenchon. In the end, the terminology the two parties settled on in their joint press release was oblique, to say the least.
“Some speak of ‘disobeying’ and others of temporarily contravening, but the objective is the same: The ability to fully apply our shared programme of governance and to thereby respect the mandate the French people will have given us,” the document affirmed.
The Socialists’ equivocations aren’t surprising. After all, the party’s agreement with Mélenchon’s far-left faction marks a major turning point in the French political landscape. By falling into step with Mélenchon, Socialist party leader Faure signed off on the leftward shift of his party’s centre of gravity – even veering to the extreme left, according to the deal’s most fervent critics.
The left’s changing of the guard
In so doing, the Socialist leader caught flak from what remained of the party’s veteran heavyweights, dubbed “the elephants”. Hollande was clear in his opposition while a former Socialist prime minister (Bernard Cazeneuve) and a former Socialist president of the National Assembly (Claude Bartolone) took the extra step of quitting the party to make their point. Former party chief Jean-Christophe Cambadélis, meanwhile, called on “the Socialists to reject this accord in every manner possible” and Socialist former cabinet minister Stéphane Le Foll positioned himself as “ready to lead the campaign” of potential Socialist dissidents in June.
“The reaction of the elephants is understandable,” said Perrineau. “With this accord, the Socialist Party will become an auxiliary to La France Insoumise. As such, it’s a total break with the history of the Socialist Party, which had previously been the central force. From now on, the left will redefine itself around the radical force that LFI represents,” the professor added.
Negotiations between LFI, the Greens, the Communists and the Socialist Party were also about divvying up constituencies (indeed, some opponents say that it was the deal’s overriding goal). Each party earned assurances that it could form an official group in the National Assembly – key to maintaining any political influence – with at least 15 lawmakers elected per party from surefire winnable districts. And despite initial reluctance from LFI, each party is certain to secure public financing as all four will run candidates in at least 50 legislative races – the threshold for unlocking state subsidies: The Greens got the coalition’s green light to stand in 100 districts, the Communists in 50 and the Socialists in 70. La France Insoumise gets the rest: More than 350.
LFI’s allies also got their way on the coalition’s new name. Mélenchon was pushing for the “Popular Union” but in the end they agreed to cover all bases by calling it the “New Ecological and Social Popular Union” (NUPES) to represent the assorted forces involved.
It remains to be seen how the alliance will do at the ballot box. The left has its sights set on winning a legislative majority, but that prospect appears highly optimistic under the circumstances. Since France made the shift to five-year presidential terms (down from seven) in 2002 and rejigged the calendar to have legislative elections follow the presidential vote, the country’s freshly elected leader has always won the legislative majority he needed for governing.
Still, Mélenchon is not to be underestimated after so far managing the political tour de force of maintaining his supporters’ hopes intact and keeping leftist mobilisation high, despite falling short in the presidential race. Even before ballots were cast in the April 24 run-off for France’s top job, Mélenchon was campaigning to be elected as the country’s prime minister – technically anathema in France, where it is the president who names the prime minister (although the nominee must enjoy the confidence of lower-house lawmakers). Mélenchon even managed to insinuate himself into the proceedings on election night, making a nationally televised speech some 20 minutes after polls closed.
“Jean-Luc Mélenchon has pulled off an extraordinary public relations operation,” Perrineau opined. “Asking the French to elect him as prime minister, even though it is nonsensical, is an extremely clever strategy that allowed him not only to take Marine Le Pen’s place as Emmanuel Macron’s No.1 opponent but also to become the central element of the French left.”
Indeed, while divisions persist on the far right, and while Macron has appeared at pains to recruit a new prime minister as his own allies spar over constituency arithmetic, the French left is enjoying its moment as the country’s most dynamic political force. And judging by the the attacks Macron’s outgoing legislative majority has levied of late, the left’s unforeseen alliance has rivals on edge.
This article has been translated from the original in French.
How the Taliban are 'eliminating women' in Afghanistan
The Taliban have further curbed women's rights with their latest veil compulsion decree. Afghanistan's civil society faces an uphill task to challenge the group without adequate support from the international community.
Instead of dealing with the economy, the Taliban have set up rules of conduct and dress codes for women
If there was any hope that the Taliban would pay heed to repeated calls from Afghanistan's civil society and the international community to uphold women's rights, the Islamic fundamentalist group's latest decree for women to cover their faces in public has dashed it.
The latest order to make veil compulsory is one of the harshest controls on women's lives in Afghanistan since the Taliban seized power in August last year. It is also reminiscent of the Islamist outfit's strict Shariah-based rule in the late 1990s.
"They [women] should wear a chadori [head-to-toe burqa] as it is traditional and respectful," Afghanistan's Supreme Leader Hibatullah Akhundzada said on Saturday.
The statement said the measure was introduced "in order to avoid provocation when meeting men who are not mahram [adult close male relatives]," adding that if women had no important work outside it was "better they stay at home."
From now on, if a woman does not cover her face outside the home, according to the decree, her father or closest male relative could be imprisoned or fired from government jobs.
Older women and young girls are exempt from the latest Taliban order. Decree condemned by civil society
Many Afghan women traditionally wear the hijab, but not all of them wear an all-covering burqa in public. The new order will restrict their mobility and access to employment.
Following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, Afghan women earned many rights, which the Taliban had taken away from 1996 to 2001. The hard-earned rights included the right to choose how they dress, and the right to employment and education.
Since they retook power, the international community has been urging the Taliban to allow girls to go to school and give them more freedom in society. Instead, the new Afghan rulers have done the contrary and backslided on women's rights.
Daud Naji, a former Afghan government official, wrote on Twitter that the Taliban have imposed a type of Hijab that is not suitable for working in office or in the field.
"The Taliban have imposed the burqa, which abolishes [a woman's] identity… The issue is not the hijab but the elimination of women," he said.
Nahid Farid, a former Afghan member of parliament and women's rights activist, has dubbed the veil mandate a "symbol of gender apartheid."
"The dress code for women, and putting men as executors of this plan, along with the Taliban's restrictions on girls' education, prove that the group seeks to control the body and mind of half of the population," she wrote on Facebook. A larger plan to subjugate women
Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan, rising living costs and unemployment have left many people with barely enough money to buy food. However, the Taliban government has no solution for stopping the collapse of the economy.
Instead, the Islamist militant group has decided to focus on setting up rules of conduct and dress codes for women based on a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam.
New, stricter rules are announced almost every day. For example, since the end of March, women are only allowed to board an airplane in the company of a man.
The Taliban also recently backtracked on a promise to allow girls to attend school. Secondary schools for girls will be opened once "appropriate dress codes" are agreed upon for students aged 12 and older, according to a statement issued last week by the Ministry for the "Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice."
This ministry was set up in place of the Ministry of Women's Affairs after the Taliban took power in August.
The war-torn country has not been able to stand on its own economically and has been highly dependent on payments from abroad in recent years. Western donors, however, turned off the money tap after the Taliban takeover.
LIFE IN AFGHANISTAN UNDER THE TALIBAN
New but old dress code
Although it is not yet mandatory for women to wear a burqa, many do so out of fear of reprisals. This Afghan woman is visiting a local market with her children. There is a large supply of second-hand clothes as many refugees have left their clothes behind.
Humanitarian aid intended to reach the suffering population directly through international organizations continues to be provided, but not in sufficient quantities.
In order to be recognized by the international community as a legitimate government, the Taliban would have to make certain changes, including accepting demands from Western donors, for example, on gender equality.
The radical forces in the Taliban have indicated that they will not accept this.
"The new restrictions were created by old and uncompromising Taliban leaders," Afghanistan expert Tariq Farhadi told DW.
Farhadi, who was also an adviser to former Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, believes that the radical wing of the Taliban has prevailed in an internal power struggle.
"For them, ideology is more important than the welfare of the citizens. They have no interest in the Taliban's rule being recognized by the world community," he said. A bargaining chip?
Soraya Peykan, a former professor at Kabul University, told DW that the limited and informal exchanges between the international community and the Taliban may break down if the Taliban continue to increase pressure on society.
Peykan said the Taliban had deliberately turned basic rights such as the right to education for girls into a bargaining chip in talks with the international community.
"They want to use the granting of this right as leverage to gain a better position in negotiations," said Peykan.
But the Afghan conflict is no longer receiving the international spotlight that it did last year. With the West currently dealing with the Ukraine war, Afghan civil society has practically been left on its own to confront the Taliban's harsh decrees.
Sardar Mohammad Rahman Ughelli, Afghanistan's former ambassador to Ukraine, says the world is already "forgetting" about the Afghanistan crisis.
"Even the international media is not covering the crisis in Afghanistan," he said, adding that the Taliban are now free to implement their regressive policies in the country.
Additional reporting by: Ahmad Hakimi
Edited by: Srinivas Mazumdaru
Freed Taiwan activist recounts 'fascist circus' of Chinese court
Lee Ming-che spent more than four years in a Chinese prison under national security laws, saying authorities there operated 'a total slavery sweatshop'
(AFP/Sam Yeh) Sam YehMore Amber WANG Tue, May 10, 2022
A Taiwanese democracy activist, jailed in China for five years, on Tuesday described the court proceedings as a "fascist circus" and said he was told he might be released if he admitted to bei Lee said he bought books and supplies and donated money to some Chinese political prisoners and their families, as well as visiting them on the mainland.
"My actions are very normal in Taiwan or any democratic society... I didn't expect China would view my humanitarian acts as grossly as subverting state power," he said.
He was sent to Chishan Prison in Hunan province where Lee said he initially had to work 11 to 12 hours daily all year round, except for a four-day lunar new year break.
Food often smelt "rotten" when it cooled and he was initially without hot water during Hunan's bitter winters.
"Chishan is like a big factory... It's a total slavery sweatshop," Lee said, adding the prison produces gloves, shoes, bags and backpacks.
China's prisons have long deployed forced labour programmes for inmates, something that has received increased international scrutiny following the construction of a vast detention system in western Xinjiang province.
Lee was accompanied Tuesday by his wife Lee Ching-yu who campaigned hard for her husband's release.
Lee said he believed that campaign kept public focus on his case and helped improve his treatment.
Asked if he had anything to say to the Chinese government, Lee replied with a pro-independence slogan in Taiwan: "Taiwan, China, one country on each side".
China claims self-ruled democratic Taiwan as its own and vows to seize it one day, by force if necessary.
Beijing has ramped up pressure on Taiwan since President Tsai Ing-wen came to power on the island in 2016, as she views Taiwan as an "already independent" sovereign nation and not part of Chinese territory.
aw/jta/aha/reb
Anti-feminist security hawk: South Korea's new president Yoon
Yoon Suk-yeol is a political novice who shot to public attention as a prosecutor for his uncompromising investigations into some of the country's most high-profile corruption scandals (AFP/JUNG YEON-JE) (JUNG YEON-JE) Claire LEE Mon, May 9, 2022
South Korea's incoming president Yoon Suk-yeol is a political novice who shot to public attention as a prosecutor for his uncompromising investigations into some of the country's most high-profile corruption scandals.
He looks set to take the world's 10th-largest economy in a different foreign policy direction -- vowing to abandon years of delicate diplomacy and get tough on North Korea.
After winning a close election by the narrowest margin ever, he has already backed off his most controversial pledges on the campaign trail -- including abolishing the Ministry of Gender Equality.
But his lack of legislative experience could prove costly as he faces a Democratic Party-controlled National Assembly that will likely scrutinise his policies.
Born in Seoul in 1960, Yoon studied law and went on to play a key role in convicting former president Park Geun-hye for abuse of power.
As the country's top prosecutor in 2019, he also indicted a top aide of outgoing President Moon Jae-in over fraud and bribery in a case that tarnished the administration's upstanding image.
This brought Yoon to the attention of the conservative opposition People Power party, which began courting him. He eventually won the party's primary and became its presidential candidate.
Yoon became the conservatives' "icon" because he was "seen as the best person to beat the Democratic Party candidate, despite his lack of political leadership experience," Gi-Wook Shin, a sociology professor at Stanford, told AFP.
"That does not bode well for Korean democracy as we may expect further polarisation," he added. - Adversarial politics -
South Korean politics is famously adversarial, analysts say, where presidents serve just a single term of five years.
Every living former leader has been jailed for corruption after leaving office.
Despite his role in Park's ousting, Yoon fired up support among disgruntled conservative voters by offering a chance at "revenge" against Moon -- going so far as to threaten to investigate Moon for unspecified "irregularities".
Even Yoon's wife claimed his critics would be prosecuted if her husband won because that is "the nature of power", according to taped comments released after a court battle.
This suggests "he and his spouse are more than willing to engage in retaliatory legal investigations into political opponents", Keung Yoon Bae, a Korean studies professor at Georgia Institute of Technology, told AFP.
The outgoing administration's last order of business was to pass a reform bill stripping prosecutors of some of their power, in a move widely seen as a bid by officials to avoid being targeted after leaving office.
Local media have reported that Yoon is particularly inspired by British wartime prime minister Winston Churchill.
Despite his limited experience in politics, Yoon still managed to "consolidate support of a huge chunk of the country's elite", Vladimir Tikhonov, professor of Korean studies at the University of Oslo, told AFP. - Pre-emptive strike? -
On nuclear-armed North Korea, Yoon has threatened a pre-emptive strike if needed, a claim analysts say is wildly unrealistic.
Just last month, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said he would take measures to develop "the nuclear forces of our state at the fastest possible speed", in what analysts said was a response to Yoon's hawkish stance.
Yoon also once said he wants to buy an additional THAAD US missile system to counter the North, despite risks that it could prompt new economic retaliation from China, South Korea's biggest trade partner.
His "lack of political skill will spill over to the foreign policy realm", Minseon Ku, a political science scholar at the Ohio State University, told AFP.
So far, Yoon's camp "looked as though they were simply copying and pasting foreign policy phrases from the US Republican presidents' speeches," she added.
He also made a string of gaffes on the campaign trail, from praising one of the country's former dictators to belittling manual labour and Africans.
"The next presidency is coming at a time of transition for the world," especially following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Karl Friedhoff of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs told AFP.
"That will mean making tough challenges about trade-offs that South Korea hasn't had to make in the past. Is Yoon up to that task?"
cdl/ceb/qan
Yoon Suk-yeol sworn in as South Korea's new president
Posted : 2022-05-10
President Yoon Suk-yeol takes the oath of office during his inauguration ceremony at the National Assembly Plaza in Seoul, May 10.
Yonhap
President Yoon Suk-yeol took the oath of office Tuesday, vowing to rebuild the nation on the foundation of a liberal democracy and market economy, while offering to revive North Korea's economy with an "audacious plan" should it take steps to denuclearize.
Yoon made the remarks in his inauguration address at the National Assembly Plaza, outlining various challenges facing the country and the world from pandemics and rearrangements in global supply chains to record-low growth and rising unemployment here at home.
"It is our generation's calling to build a nation that espouses a liberal democracy and ensures a thriving market economy, a nation that fulfills its responsibility as a trusted member of the international community, and a nation that truly belongs to the people," he said before some 41,000 people gathered at the ceremony, noting that he was mindful of his "solemn duty to rebuild this great nation."
Yoon said he was looking forward to working together with other nations to resolve common challenges and stressed the importance of defending political and economic freedoms to ensure their success.
"We, as global citizens, must make a stand against any attempt that aims to take away our freedom, abuse human rights or destroy peace," he said.
Yoon also offered North Korea an olive branch amid its increased saber rattling.
"While North Korea's nuclear weapon program is a threat not only to our security and that of Northeast Asia, the door to dialogue will remain open so that we can peacefully resolve this threat," he said.
"If North Korea genuinely embarks on a process to complete denuclearization, we are prepared to work with the international community to present an audacious plan that will vastly strengthen North Korea's economy and improve the quality of life for its people," he added.
President Yoon Suk-yeol's inauguration ceremony is held at the National Assembly Plaza in Seoul, May 10. Yonhap
Yoon's inauguration marks the start of a tough battle to avert an economic crisis, win the cooperation of an opposition-controlled National Assembly and rein in an increasingly menacing North Korea.
Yoon kicked off his five-year term at midnight in the underground bunker of the new presidential office building in Yongsan by receiving a briefing from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
To usher in the new administration, a bell-ringing ceremony was held at the stroke of midnight in downtown Seoul.
The inauguration ceremony was attended by 41,000 people, including foreign envoys such as U.S. second gentleman Douglas Emhoff and Chinese Vice President Wang Qishan, a gathering of a size that was impossible until recently due to COVID-19 restrictions.
Following the ceremony, Yoon will head straight to the new presidential office he fought hard to launch as a demonstration of his will to draw closer to the public.
Cheong Wa Dae, the former presidential office built on a majestic compound at the foot of a mountain, was viewed by Yoon as a "symbol of imperial power."
Yoon takes over at a time when South Korea is struggling to deal with economic challenges stemming from the pandemic, the war in Ukraine and other factors resulting in the phenomenon of "three simultaneous highs" ― inflation, and interest and exchange rates.
The incoming government has championed "economic security" amid the growing competition between the United States and China to secure supply chains in batteries, semiconductors and other key sectors.
The threat of North Korea's nuclear and missile programs looms larger than ever, as the isolationist nation appears set to carry out a seventh nuclear test as early as this month, shortly after North Korean leader Kim Jong-un threatened to proactively use nuclear weapons, rather than possessing them only as a war deterrent if anyone attempted to violate the country's "fundamental interests."
Both economic security and North Korea are expected to feature high on the agenda of Yoon's first summit with U.S. President Joe Biden in Seoul, May 21.
Biden's visit, set for May 20 to 22, will come only 10 days after Yoon takes office, and their planned meeting will mark the earliest-ever Korea-U.S. summit to take place following a South Korean president's inauguration.
Yoon also faces the daunting task of repairing deeply fractured ties with Japan.
During the campaign, he indicated his determination to build a future-oriented relationship with the neighboring country despite unresolved disputes over wartime sex slaves, forced labor and territory stemming from Tokyo's 1910-45 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula.
Last month, he sent a policy consultation delegation to Japan with a letter for Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.
With China, Yoon faces a tough balancing act, as Beijing's cooperation is key to reining in North Korea's nuclear ambitions and maintaining a robust bilateral trade relationship, while the president has pledged to deploy additional units of the U.S. THAAD antimissile system in South Korea ― a major irritant for Beijing ― and seek South Korea's gradual entry into the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, a U.S.-led forum regarded as countering China's rise.
President Yoon Suk-yeol delivers his inauguration address during a ceremony at the National Assembly Plaza, May 10. Yonhap
On the domestic front, Yoon faces a hostile National Assembly controlled by the main opposition Democratic Party.
With 168 out of 300 seats, the DP has delayed confirmation procedures for Yoon's Cabinet nominees, forcing the new government to hold its first Cabinet meeting this week with several members of the outgoing administration.
The legislative hurdles were demonstrated clearly in the transition team's decision to postpone its government reorganization, including whether to keep Yoon's campaign promise to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family.
With the June 1 local elections only weeks away, the new government also wants to avoid a scenario where Yoon's ruling People Power Party loses the elections or the seven parliamentary by-elections being held concurrently so early in its term.
On Sunday, Yoon's election rival, Lee Jae-myung, declared an earlier-than-expected comeback to politics by announcing a run for one of the parliamentary seats up for grabs in the by-elections.
Yoon's popularity ratings have been just around 50 percent, one of the lowest levels for a president-elect, which underscores the deep political divisions in South Korean society.
Until a little over a year ago, Yoon, 61, was the nation's top prosecutor with a reputation for conducting high-profile investigations into powerful figures, such as former President Park Geun-hye and former Justice Minister Cho Kuk.
The probes earned him the wrath of first the conservatives and then the liberals. In the end, it was the conservatives who summoned him into politics and elected him into the top office, marking the first time the government had changed hands between liberals and conservatives after a single, five-year term.
The gap between Yoon and his main rival was a mere 0.73 percentage points. (Yonhap)
Troops rescue outgoing Sri Lanka PM as houses torched in deadly night of unrest
Mahinda Rajapaksa rescued in a pre-dawn military operation after day of protests in which five people were killed
Sri Lankan troops have conducted a dramatic pre-dawn operation to rescue the prime minister, firing warning shots in the air to disperse thousands of anti-government protesters who had stormed his official residence in Colombo.
Five people were killed and nearly 200 were wounded on Monday in the worst violence in weeks of protests over an unprecedented economic crisis, and demonstrations continued on Tuesday.
In an attempt to placate the protesters, the prime minister, Mahinda Rajapaksa, resigned on Monday, but that did little to calm public anger.
Protesters who forced their way into the capital’s “Temple Trees” residence attempted to storm the main two-storey building where Rajapaksa was holed up with his family. Advertisement
Rajapaksa’s evacuation to an undisclosed location followed a day of violent protests in which five people, including a lawmaker, were killed and nearly 200 wounded.
The security official said police kept up a barrage of teargas and fired warning shots in the air to hold back protesters at all three entrances to the colonial-era building, a key symbol of state power.
Dozens of homes of top Rajapaksa loyalists were torched elsewhere in the curfew-bound country, which has been under a state of emergency since Friday.
The emergency order from President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the outgoing premier’s younger brother, gave sweeping powers to the military as protests demanding the duo’s resignation escalated over the country’s worst-ever economic crisis.
Protesters and Sri Lankan religious leaders blamed the former prime minister for instigating the family’s supporters to attack unarmed protesters on Monday, sparking retaliatory attacks.
Rajapaksa’s resignation follows months of protests over the country’s deepening economic crisis, as once-peaceful demonstrations turned violent. Turmoil began to engulf the country on Monday after violence at a major protest site in Colombo, where pro-government supporters attacked demonstrators and police responded with teargas and water cannon.
In one incident just outside Colombo, a politician from the ruling party opened fire on anti-government protesters blocking his car, killing a 27-year-old, and then later took his own life. According to police, another ruling party politician opened fire on protesters in the southern town of Weeraketiya, killing two and wounding five.
Mahinda Rajapaksa had been asked to resign by his brother at a special meeting on Friday, in an attempt to appease demonstrators who have been taking to the streets in their thousands since March.
Protesters have been calling for both members of Sri Lanka’s powerful Rajapaksa political dynasty to be removed from office for mishandling the economy and plunging the country into the worst financial crisis since independence.
Mahinda Rajapaksa, who was president for a decade between 2005 and 2015, had reportedly been resistant to stepping down, but on Monday submitted his letter of resignation to the president.
“Multiple stakeholders have indicated the best solution to the present crisis is the formation of an interim all-party government. Therefore, I have tendered my resignation so the next steps can be taken in accordance with the constitution,” he wrote.
The resignation is the latest concession made by the Rajapaksas in the face of protracted anger and protests. The president recently agreed to repeal an amendment to the constitution that had concentrated power in his hands and hand power back to the parliament. Other members of the Rajapaksa family who had previously held seats in the cabinet have also stepped down, with the president the only remaining member of the political family still in power.
Gotabaya Rajapaksa, known widely as Gota, has repeatedly said he will not resign as president, despite the clarion call of the protests being “Gota go home”.
The Rajapaksas have largely controlled Sri Lankan politics for two decades, but the economic crisis has rattled their grip on power in the face of mass unrest from those who had previously been supporters of their brand of chauvinist nationalist politics, which pandered to the country’s Sinhalese Buddhist majority.
Pro-government supporters hold outgoing prime minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s portrait while demonstrating outside his residence in Colombo.
Photograph: Ishara S Kodikara/AFP/Getty Images
Sri Lanka’s foreign reserves have dropped so low that the country cannot afford to import basic essentials, leading to shortages of fuel, food and medicines. People have been forced to endure daily power cuts of up to 10 hours, fuelling mass protests across the country since March.
Over the weekend, the president declared a state of emergency in the country, the second in recent weeks, in a bid to regain control over the streets.
However, Monday marked a violent shift in the demonstrations when hundreds of pro-government supporters gathered outside the prime minister’s residence in Colombo and urged Mahinda Rajapaksa not to resign. The group, some armed with sticks and wooden bars, then launched an attack on an anti-government protest camp nearby, with police reportedly looking on as the clashes began.
Sri Lanka deploys troops to enforce curfew after day of deadly unrest
FRANCE 24 4 hrs ago
Sri Lanka deployed thousands of troops and police Tuesday to enforce a curfew after five people were killed in the worst violence in weeks of protests over an unprecedented economic crisis.
Nearly 200 were also wounded Monday as prime minister Mahinda Rajapaksa resigned, but that did little to calm public anger.
He had to be rescued in a pre-dawn operation by the military Tuesday after thousands of anti-government protesters stormed his official residence in Colombo overnight, with police firing tear gas and warning shots to keep back the crowd.
"After a pre-dawn operation, the former PM and his family were evacuated to safety by the army," a top security official told AFP. "At least 10 petrol bombs were thrown into the compound."
The Rajapaksa clan's hold on power has been shaken by months of blackouts and shortages in Sri Lanka, the worst economic crisis since it became independent in 1948.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa remains in office, however, with widespread powers and command over the security forces.
After weeks of overwhelmingly peaceful anti-government demonstrations, violence broke out Monday when Mahinda Rajapaksa's supporters -- bussed into the capital from the countryside -- attacked protestors with sticks and clubs.
"We were hit, the media were hit, women and children were hit," one witness told AFP, asking not to be named.
Police fired tear gas and water cannons to disperse crowds and declared an immediate curfew in Colombo, a measure later widened to include the entire South Asian nation of 22 million people.
Authorities said the curfew will be lifted Wednesday morning, with government and private offices, as well as shops and schools, ordered to remain shut on Tuesday.
US Ambassador Julie Chung tweeted that Washington condemned "the violence against peaceful protestors" and called on the Sri Lankan "government to conduct a full investigation, including the arrest & prosecution of anyone who incited violence".
Shot dead
Despite the curfew, anti-government protesters defied police to retaliate against government supporters for the attacks late into Monday night.
Outside Colombo, ruling party lawmaker Amarakeerthi Athukorala shot two people -- killing a 27-year-old man -- after being surrounded by a mob of anti-government protestors, police said.
"He then took his own life with his revolver," a police official told AFP by telephone.
Athukorala's bodyguard was also found dead at the scene, police said.
Another ruling party politician who was not named opened fire on protesters, killing two and wounding five in the deep south of the island, police added.
Angry crowds set alight the homes of more than a dozen pro-Rajapaksa politicians, along with some vehicles, while buses and trucks used by the government loyalists in and around Colombo were also targeted.
Several Rajapaksa homes were torched in different parts of the country, while a family museum in their ancestral village was trashed.
Doctors at the main Colombo National Hospital intervened to rescue wounded government supporters, with soldiers breaking open locked gates to ferry in the wounded.
"They may be murderers, but for us they are patients who must be treated first," a doctor shouted at a mob blocking the entrance to the emergency unit.
Unity government
Mahinda Rajapaksa, 76, said he was resigning to pave the way for a unity government.
But it was unclear if the opposition would join any unity administration, having before refused to govern with any members of the Rajapaksa family.
Under Sri Lanka's political system, even with a new unity government, the president will have the power to appoint and fire ministers as well as judges, and enjoy immunity from prosecution.
"Unless President Rajapaksa steps down, no one -- whether the masses in the streets or key political stakeholders -- will be appeased," analyst Michael Kugelman from the Wilson Center told AFP.
The protests came after the coronavirus pandemic hammered the island's vital income from tourism and remittances, which starved the country of foreign currency needed to pay off its debt.
This forced the government to ban many imports, leading to severe shortages, inflation and lengthy power blackouts.
In April, Sri Lanka announced it was defaulting on its $51 billion foreign debt.
It is unclear what President Rajapaksa's next move will be in the face of the protests, according to Akhil Bery of the Asia Society Policy Institute.
Aside from following his brother in resigning, he could appoint a caretaker government -- before then quitting -- deploy the military and police to suppress the protests, or try to wait for them to "die down naturally", Bery told AFP.
But whatever happens, the next government will have to take "unpopular decisions" to repair the devastated economy, he said.
Any bailout from the International Monetary Fund -- currently under negotiation -- would mean "higher taxes and less government spending, which is a politically toxic combination", he added.
(FRANCE 24 with AFP)
Sri Lanka's ex-PM will not flee country after deadly clashes: son At least three people were killed and more than 150 wounded in a wave of violence between government supporters and demonstrators
(AFP/ISHARA S. KODIKARA)More
Amal JAYASINGHE
AFP Tue, May 10, 2022,
Sri Lanka's Mahinda Rajapaksa -- who resigned as prime minister after his supporters attacked anti-government protesters and sparked a day of violence -- will not flee the country, his son told AFP on Tuesday.
The 76-year-old heads a political clan whose hold on power has been shaken by months of blackouts and shortages in the island nation, which is suffering its worst economic crisis since independence in 1948.
Mahinda had to be evacuated by the military from his official residence on Monday night after it was besieged by an angry crowd.
But his son Namal, himself once touted as a future national leader, said the Rajapaksa family had no plans to leave Sri Lanka despite weeks of protests demanding they relinquish power.
"There are a lot of rumours that we are going to leave. We will not leave the country," he said, describing the surge of national anger against his family as a "bad patch".
He added that Mahinda would not step down as a lawmaker and wanted to play an active role in choosing his successor.
Mahinda was taken to an undisclosed location after protesters on Monday night breached the compound fence at Temple Trees, his official residence in the capital Colombo.
"My father is safe, he is at a safe location and he is communicating with the family," said Namal, who served as the country's sports minister until a cabinet shake-up last month.
The Rajapaksa clan has dominated Sri Lanka's politics for much of the past two decades.
Mahinda's younger brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa remains in office as president, with extensive executive powers and command over the security forces.
Weeks of overwhelmingly peaceful protests against the government's mismanagement of the crisis turned violent on Monday when supporters of Mahinda were bussed into the capital from the countryside and attacked demonstrators.
Anti-government crowds defied a nationwide curfew to retaliate against government supporters for the attacks late into the night.
They set alight the homes of dozens of pro-Rajapaksa politicians, while a controversial museum dedicated to the family was razed to the ground in the country's south.
Namal said his family believed that Sri Lankans had a right to protest.
"We will always stand by our people," he added.
aj/gle/ssy
With Marcos Jr. tipped to win, Philippines at tenuous moment
Sunday, May 8,2022 The Canadian Press
MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Filipinos stood in long lines to choose a new president Monday, with the son of an ousted dictator and a champion of human rights the top contenders in a tenuous moment in a deeply divided Asian democracy.
Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the son and namesake of the strongman ousted in a 1986 army-backed “People Power” uprising, held a seemingly insurmountable lead in pre-election surveys. But his closest challenger, Vice President Leni Robredo, has tapped into shock and outrage over the prospect of a Marcos recapturing the seat of power and harnessed a network of campaign volunteers to underpin her candidacy.
Eight others are in the presidential race, including former boxing star Manny Pacquiao, Manila Mayor Isko Moreno and former national police chief Sen. Panfilo Lacson.
Long lines of voters turned up early across most of the country, with the start of voting delayed by a few hours in a few areas due to malfunctioning vote machines, power outages, bad weather and other problems.
Thousands of police and military personnel were deployed to secure election precincts, especially in rural regions with a history of violent political rivalries and where communist and Muslim rebels are active. In Maguindanao province, a security hotspot in the south, three village guards were killed by gunmen outside an elections center in Buluan town, briefly disrupting voting. Nine would-be voters and their companions were wounded separately Sunday night when unidentified men fired five rifle grenades in the Datu Unsay town hall, police said.
The election winner will take office on June 30 for a single, six-year term as leader of a Southeast Asian nation hit hard by two years of COVID-19 outbreaks and lockdowns.
Still more challenging problems include a pandemic-battered economy, deeper poverty and unemployment and decades-long Muslim and communist insurgencies. The next president is also likely to hear demands to prosecute outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte for thousands of killings during his anti-drug crackdown — deaths already under investigation by the International Criminal Court.
Duterte's daughter, southern Davao city Mayor Sara Duterte, has topped surveys as Marcos Jr.’s vice-presidential running mate in an alliance of the scions of two authoritarian leaders who concern human rights groups. The tie-up has combined the voting power of their separate northern and southern political strongholds, boosting their chances but compounding worries of human rights activists.
“History may repeat itself if they win,” said Myles Sanchez, a 42-year-old human rights worker. “There may be a repeat of martial law and the drug killings that happened under their parents.”
Sanchez said the violence and abuses that marked the martial-law era under Marcos and Duterte’s drug war more than three decades later victimized loved ones from two generations of her family. Her grandmother was sexually abused and her grandfather tortured by counterinsurgency troops under Marcos in the early 1980s in their impoverished farming village in Southern Leyte province.
Under Duterte’s crackdown, Sanchez’s brother, a sister and a sister-in-law were wrongfully linked to illegal drugs and separately killed, she told The Associated Press in an interview. She described the killings of her siblings as “a nightmare that has caused unspeakable pain.”
She begged Filipinos not to vote for politicians who either openly defended the widespread killings or conveniently looked away.
Marcos Jr. and Sara Duterte have avoided such volatile issues in the campaign and steadfastly stuck instead to a battle cry of national unity, even though their fathers' presidencies opened some of the Philippines' most turbulent divisions.
“I have learned in our campaign not to retaliate,” Sara Duterte told followers Saturday night on the final day of campaigning, where she and Marcos Jr. thanked a huge crowd in a night of rap music, dance shows and fireworks near Manila Bay.
At her own rally, Robredo thanked her supporters who jammed her star-studded sorties and waged a house-to-house battle to endorse her brand of clean and hands-on politics. She asked them to fight for patriotic ideals beyond the elections.
“We’ve learned that those who have awoken will never close their eyes again,” Robredo told a crowd that filled the main avenue in the capital's Makati financial district. “It’s our right to have a future with dignity and it’s our responsibility to fight for it.”
Aside from the presidency, more than 18,000 government posts are being contested, including half of the 24-member Senate, more than 300 seats in the House of Representatives, as well as provincial and local offices across the archipelago of more than 109 million Filipinos.
More than 67 million people have registered, including about 1.6 million Filipinos overseas, to cast their ballot. When voting centers close after the 13-hour day, thousands of counting machines will immediately transmit the results to be tallied. In the 2016 contest, Duterte emerged as the clear winner within a few hours and his key challengers quickly conceded. The vice presidential race that year was won narrowly by Robredo over Marcos Jr., and the outcome was slower to become known.
___
Associated Press journalists Joeal Calupitan, Aaron Favila and Cecilia Forbes in Manila, Philippines, and Kiko Rosario in Bangkok contributed to this report.
Jim Gomez, The Associated Press
Shh! Don’t Ask Canadian Conservatives about Abortion
Right-wing politicians aren’t great at hiding their views against reproductive rights.
People take part in the anti-abortion March For Life rally on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, May 9, 2019.
Photo by Sean Kilpatrick, the Canadian Press.
Canada’s conservative political parties are desperately trying to declare discussion of the leaked United States Supreme Court draft ruling on abortion a political no-fly zone.
‘We can’t just plug everything up and act like there’s not going to be ramifications.’
The powerful and extensive influence of radical social conservative opponents of women’s reproductive rights on the Conservative Party of Canada and the United Conservative Party of Alberta is the dirty little open secret of this country’s conservative movement.
With the leak of the shocking/not shocking plan by the Republican-packed majority on the now thoroughly politicized U.S. Supreme Court to allow American states to ban abortions outright and speed the republic toward theocracy, Canadian conservatives who drink from the same ideological well would very much like to shut down any inconvenient discussion of that topic here.
Albertans and Canadians who support women’s right to bodily autonomy are already being offered anodyne assurances that Canada’s Conservatives have no plans to change anything and the law in Canada is a settled matter. Let’s just talk about something else, we’re told, presumably something more to their own political advantage.
Of course, this assurance will only hold true until it doesn’t hold true — just like the nearly identical promises by all those American Supreme Court justices at their Senate confirmation hearings — at which point it will be too late to stop them.
It would be naive to imagine the so-called right-to-lifers who pack the ranks of Canadian conservative parties are any less determined to achieve their political and cultural goals than their ideological fellow travellers south of the world’s longest undefended border.
Count on conservatives to get nastier about this in the next hours and days if other Canadians refuse to knuckle under to their demands to talk about something else.
At the same time, legislative caucuses of elected conservatives have been instructed to keep their lips zipped — especially those of them who want to destroy reproductive rights.
When the orders to zip it went out from acting federal Conservative leader Candice Bergen, they were justified on the ludicrous grounds the question was before the court — never mind that the court in question is thoroughly politicized and located in another country.
Still, the challenge was too much for some.
“I am proud to be one of the MPs who believes in the immutable dignity of the human person, regardless of gender, age, level of development, sexual orientation, disability, or any other characteristic,” dog-whistled Sherwood Park-Fort Saskatchewan MP Garnett Genuis Tuesday evening.
Like Bergen, Genuis is on the list of the 39 MPs who have received a “green light” stamp of approval from the anti-abortion organization Campaign Life.
In addition to Genuis, the other 12 Alberta MPs on the list of the most committed parliamentary opponents of Canadians’ reproductive rights: Blaine Calkins, Red Deer-Lacombe; Michael Cooper, St. Albert; Tom Kmiec, Calgary Shepherd; Damien Kurek, Battle River-Crowfoot; Mike Lake, Edmonton-Wetaskiwin; Dane Lloyd, Sturgeon River-Parkland; Glen Motz, Medicine Hat-Cardston-Warner; Jeremy Patzer, Cypress Hills-Grasslands; Shannon Stubbs, Lakeland; Rachael Thomas, Lethbridge; Arnold Viersen, Peace River-Westlock and Chris Warkentin, Grande Prairie-Mackenzie.
That’s 43 per cent of the Conservative Party’s Alberta caucus in the House of Commons!
As for the UCP, it’s no secret that anti-abortion MLAs are found in considerable numbers in its caucus, although the party and its backers play the actual number of such MLAs close to their vests. Certainly Premier Jason Kenny is among them, notwithstanding his past promises not to reopen the debate on the topic. Education Minister Adriana LaGrange and Peace River MLA Dan Williams share their views.
But even before the UCP was elected in 2019, Cameron Wilson, political director of the misleadingly named anti-abortion group, the Wilberforce Project, proclaimed: “If the UCP wins the upcoming election we will have the most pro-life legislature in decades, maybe ever.”
He would know. His group was busy in the lead-up to the 2019 election recruiting anti-abortion candidates, covert and overt, to seek UCP nominations.
Meanwhile, the former Alberta Social Credit party, seemingly taken over by anti-abortion activists, changed its name to the Pro-life Alberta Political Association, rather patriarchally abbreviated to PAPA.
In recent Elections Alberta political contributions reports, the party has come third after the NDP and UCP. Challenged in the legislature by Opposition leader Rachel Notley to condemn the attack on reproductive rights in the U.S. courts, Kenney adopted a rope-a-dope defence, saying the questions are for the American legal system, nothing to do with us, under federal jurisdiction in Canada, yadda yadda.
He refused to be pinned down.
But the unavoidable conclusion — desperate Conservative diversion tactics notwithstanding — is that who gets elected matters, and it’s important to pay attention to what the candidates in your electoral district believe.
Canadian voters have a right — no, a duty — to ask every candidate for elected office, including those contesting party leadership races, to clearly state their position on this fundamental issue. Fudging and evasion should be taken as confirmation of opposition to Canadians’ reproductive rights.
David J. Climenhaga is an award-winning journalist, author, post-secondary teacher, poet and trade union communicator. He blogs at AlbertaPolitics.ca. Follow him on Twitter at @djclimenhaga.
No room for cynicism in Alberta's abortion discourse
posted by Jim Storrie | 13RTs May 06, 2022
The top story in Alberta politics this week wasn’t in Alberta at all: in the United States, a leak revealed that the Supreme Court is about to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark ruling that had prevented bans on abortion in the U.S. (and from which a number of policies to protect privacy and bodily autonomy derive, too.)
But taking the path of evil on women’s rights is a canny career move for a Tory. Anti-choice activism is a powerful strain in North American conservatism, and that includes the Canadian bits. If you want to secure a nomination as the conservative candidate for an MP or MLA race, a friendly relationship with an anti-choice group like RightNow is a good way to get it—and a good share of the UCP back bench, like Michaela Frey (formerly Glasgo) and Dan Williams, can attest to that. The UCP are so cozy with these folks that RightNow were recruiting interns for them in the days after they formed government.
When the topic of abortion comes up in Canada, a lot of folks’ instinct is to be cynical. After all, we wouldn’t make it illegal up here, would we? And isn’t it a bit cheeky for the Democrats to keep promising to codify Roe v. Wade into law—as Presidents Obama and Biden both swore they’d do—but then delay eternally and hold people hostage for votes, like Lucy with the football?
That’s a frame of mind the Canadian anti-choice politicians would really like you to stay in, right until they get the opportunity to pull the rug out from under you. Here in Canada, the game isn’t so much legality as access, and conservative governments have been ruthless about putting the squeeze on access wherever they can. You can’t just go to your family doctor, get a referral, and go to a hospital; elective abortion surgery in this province is only available in Edmonton or Calgary. An Action Canada report in 2019 found that Alberta has some of the worst abortion access in the country, including by far the worst ratio of clinics to population.
Your Premier is a former anti-choice activist. Your Education Minister is a former anti-choice activist. The political director of the Wilberforce Project boasted in 2019 that the UCP slate was going to be “the most pro-life legislature in decades.”UCP backbenchers are already trying to chip away at bodily autonomy. And we’ve already got ample evidence from the sham panels on safe supply and supervised consumption sites that these guys are happy to inflict medical misery on thousands if it fits their culture-war playbook. So no, it’s not naive to think they’re up to something.
And—and this is something I don’t get to say all that often—it doesn’t seem overly naive to believe that the Alberta NDP are genuine about fighting back, unlike their American counterparts. During their one term in government, and in the face of organized opposition, the ANDP did in fact enact policies to improve access, including public funding for Myfegismo and legislation to keep harassers away from abortion clinics.
That’s not to say the ANDP comms people aren’t giddy for the opportunity to pick up the issue and beat Jason Kenney’s ass with it. Jason Kenney’s leadership review results are due on the 18th, and you can be sure he’s tense as a coiled spring as he feels the squeeze from his anti-choice allies on one side, and broad public opinion on the other.
ALBERTA
Inside the Kenney Government’s System of Secrecy
Staff is told to delete emails, use apps and personal phones to avoid scrutiny, insiders reveal. A Tyee investigation.
‘“Records management” was code for deleting emails,’ a former UCP government senior staffer told The Tyee. Efforts to hide daily operations, ordered by the premier’s office, far exceed previous Alberta governments, say sources.
From the moment it assumed power in Alberta, the United Conservative government of Premier Jason Kenney has been criticized for secretive, anti-democratic practices that limit access to information about how the government operates.
‘We can’t just plug everything up and act like there’s not going to be ramifications.’
The most high-profile example is the so-called Energy War Room, created as a private corporation to evade public scrutiny through freedom of information and protection of privacy. The Progress Report recently revealed Invest Alberta, with its multimillion-dollar budget, is also not subject to FOIP.
Now three former and current senior UCP political staffers have told The Tyee that the Kenney government’s attempts to stymie transparency and accountability extend to everyday operations — and are unlike anything they have seen in their many combined years working for other governments.
In interviews, the staffers described an enforced system designed to evade FOIP requests and limit the potential for leaks by deleting emails, communicating through Slack and WhatsApp channels that are regularly wiped, and using personal phones to conduct government business.
“The directive would come from the premier’s office staff during regular weekly and daily meetings, reminding everyone to ensure that they’re up to date on their ‘records management,’” one former senior staffer said.
“‘Records management’ was code for deleting emails.”
Another senior staffer described their understanding of the premier’s office directive.
“To delete everything, to have no records,” they said. “So that nobody could get any of our information.”
“There was no rationale given. It was, ‘Manage your records, delete your stuff, make sure you have nothing. Use Slack for communication. Don’t use your work phones.’”
Another current senior staffer said the premier’s office generally encourages staff not to create records so that they can’t be obtained through FOIP.
“There is always encouragement from the premier’s office to pick up the phone, because there are no records,” the staffer said.
Another staffer said the unwritten directive applies to all UCP political staff, which includes ministers, press secretaries, chiefs of staff, issues managers and advisors.
They said WhatsApp is used by chiefs of staff while press secretaries and other staffers communicate with Slack, which is deleted at least once a week by a staffer in the premier’s office.
A former staffer said ministers and MLAs also often use their personal phones for government business.
Kenney’s press secretary, Justin Brattinga, declined an interview request and instead provided an emailed statement that did not address the specific allegations.
“Staff are given training by the FOIP office in management and records keeping. Staff are expected to manage their records in accordance with the Government of Alberta Records and Information Management policies.
“There is no legal obligation or requirement to maintain transitory records once they are no longer required. Transitory records contain information in any format that is of temporary or limited usefulness — for example, a response to media.”
But Sean Holman, a University of Victoria journalism professor and freedom-of-information expert, said, “It appears that at the very least those people operating at that level are stretching the definition of what constitutes a transitory record in a way that is politically advantageous in terms of keeping government information secret from the public.”
FOIP requests trigger orders to delete says former insider
The staffers spoke on condition of anonymity because it could affect their current and future employment.
All three independently said it was clear the deletions were specifically to thwart FOIP and to ensure politically damaging or embarrassing information could never be released. Two former staffers said they had seen FOIP requests, including from the media, that did not yield responsive records because they had been deleted under this unwritten policy.
One former staffer described how ministers, and chiefs of staff, would manipulate the release of information through FOIP to appear as if they were complying with the legislation while purposely excluding information that didn’t fit a predetermined government narrative.
“When it is an issue where there obviously should be some sort of record, the ministers’ chiefs of staff will orchestrate having certain emails to demonstrate that there is an actual paper trail. But it is orchestrated in a way that it is not embarrassing for the minister’s office or the minister.”
This same staffer said ministers’ offices are often given 24 hours’ notice that a FOIP request has been filed.
“So everyone has 24 hours to delete all their emails, as well, and it is because not everyone does it all the time.”
Holman said the deletion, and selective release, of documents is contrary to the very purpose of FOIP.
“The entire point of freedom of information is so government doesn’t have discretionary power to choose what information the public has and what information the public doesn’t have about its operations,” he said.
Holman said he was not shocked by the Kenney government’s attitude toward freedom of information because governments always have sought to circumvent the laws.
“We have seen a steady erosion of the spirit of those laws ever since those laws were passed,” he said. “So this is part and parcel of an overall trend, both in Alberta and across Canada, as governments have become more secretive, less open — and by extension, less democratic.”
Holman said Alberta’s information commissioner should conduct a thorough review of how political staffers manage records.
A spokesperson for commissioner Jill Clayton said her office was unaware of the allegations.
‘These are the public’s records’
In British Columbia, a 2015 investigation by that province’s information commissioner found the BC Liberal government of former premier Christy Clark had behaved in ways very similar to the Kenney government of 2022.
Former commissioner Elizabeth Denham found Clark’s deputy chief of staff, Michele Cadario, had deleted all her emails every day. Cadario had claimed the legislation allows “transitory” emails to be deleted and she maintained every email was transitory.
But commission investigators recovered emails that should have been disclosed.
Two of the former Alberta staffers told The Tyee there is often no distinction between transitory emails and emails that should be retained: all are deleted.
Alberta has a long history of freedom-of-information scandals, especially under the long-governing Progressive Conservatives.
Documents released in 2013 showed that then-deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk directed press secretaries to gather information about FOIP requests that had the potential to embarrass the government. During a subsequent investigation by Alberta’s information commissioner, many ministries simply refused to hand over responsive records, citing solicitor-client privilege. Months Before Albertans Were Told, Australian Miners Knew Plans to Axe Coal Policy
Internal emails also showed former Executive Council deputy minister Peter Watson, the government’s most senior civil servant at the time, personally directed several ministries to submit FOIP requests to his office so it could dictate what information could be released.
And, as Clayton has repeatedly said publicly, successive provincial governments have chronically underfunded FOIP, pushing the system — and her office, which handles request appeals — to the breaking point.
The Alberta staffers, however, said the Kenney government directive is essentially a policy of wholesale exclusion and suppression of public information.
All three Alberta staffers said they decided to speak out because they consider the directive to be anti-democratic.
“This is a democracy and people should know what the hell their government is doing and how they arrive at these decisions,” one said.
“These are the public’s records. They are not the government’s records; they belong to the people.”
TheTyee.ca Charles Rusnell and Jennie Russell are independent investigative reporters based in Edmonton. They specialize in political accountability reporting and their award-winning journalism has forced transparency and democratic change in Alberta.
