USA Tries to Pound Lebanon Into Submission

By Craig Murray

November 19, 2024

Source: Craig Murray

Image by Craig Murray

Israel has intensified its air strikes on Lebanon and in particular on Beirut, ahead of a visit on Tuesday or Wednesday by US envoy Hochstein, at which he will press Lebanon to accept a US/Israeli ceasefire plan.

This plan is touted as being based on UNSCR 1701, but in fact represents its abnegation.

You may have noted that neoliberal politicians and media pundits, who ignore and denigrate every other UN Resolution on the Middle East, are suddenly very enthusiastic about UNSCR 1701. This is because it mandates withdrawal of Hezbollah forces to the north of the river Litani.

But it also mandates, at operative paragraph 3, that the Government of Lebanon must have full sovereignty over Southern Lebanon and that only the Lebanese Army and UNIFIL might operate there.


3. Emphasizes the importance of the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory in accordance with the provisions of resolution 1559 (2004) and resolution 1680 (2006), and of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, for it to exercise its full sovereignty, so that there will be no weapons without the consent of the Government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the Government of Lebanon;

The US/Israeli ceasefire proposal directly contradicts this, by giving Israel the right to invade Southern Lebanon with ground forces whenever Israel considers it necessary, and by giving Israel permanent military overflight rights.

The US/Israeli proposal is therefore incompatible with UNSCR 1701.

These are direct intrusions on the sovereignty emphasised by UNSCR 1701. They are of course terms no self-respecting nation could possibly accept.

In order to try to force Lebanon to accept these humiliating terms, Israel has substantially intensified its bombing campaign throughout Lebanon these last two days. Yesterday in Beirut alone there were nineteen waves of airstrikes, in addition to airstrikes in Tyre, Baalbek and throughout the South.

A new development in Beirut today was a definite move to bomb in Christian, as well as Muslim, areas. If you take one thing away from this article today, I want you to understand this.

The narrative portrayed in Western media, that Lebanese Christians support Israel and are egging on the destruction of the Shia community, is completely false. Only a very small and unrepresentative minority of Christians, related to the thankfully declined fascist movement, think in this way.

The large majority of Christians, including the major Christian political parties and politicians, are as horrified as the rest of the world by the genocide in Gaza and still more horrified by Israel’s genocidal attack on Lebanon.

I have spent the last three weeks living among the Christian communities here and I have found this same view, from wealthy businessmen, to students, to shopkeepers, to the families of very senior politicians.

I should acknowledge that I have met a couple of young men in a bar who were pro-Israel, but that really is it. It is also the case that, certainly in Beirut, the large majority of Sunni Muslims, including the large Syrian refugee population, are extremely horrified by the genocide mostly of their fellow Sunni Muslims in Gaza and the West Bank, and they are very anti-Zionist indeed.

I understand that in the far northern areas and along the Jordanian border there are pockets of Saudi-influenced Salafist anti-Shia sectarians who do support Israel against Hezbollah, but I am happy to say I have not come across them and it is not an important viewpoint in Beirut. These are the ISIS/Al-Nusra/Al-Qaeda/FSA crowd of CIA puppets.

Extreme fringes aside, the overwhelming majority of the people of Lebanon are no different to the majority of people the world over, horrified by the scale and depravity of the Israeli assaults.

In attacking Lebanon, far from reigniting civil war as they intended, Israel and the US have helped to forge a strengthened multicultural Lebanese identity.

Israel is simply unable to make meaningful progress on the ground against Hezbollah or to hold border villages for longer than a brief orgy of looting and destruction. In consequence we will see a repeat of the genocide in Gaza, with the great bulk of massacres carried out by bombs and long-range artillery.

Plainly the Gaza template is already being followed. Over 220 medics and paramedics have been killed in Lebanon – a deliberate massacre of healthcare providers that repeats Israeli actions in Gaza and testifies to genocidal intention.

The United States has a huge amount of influence within Lebanon. The economy is thoroughly dollarised; there are McDonalds, Dominos and Dunkin’ Donuts everywhere you go; there is a massive General Motors dealership, and indeed the Lebanese seem to have a higher propensity to buy US vehicles and other US-manufactured goods, than Americans themselves do.

The United States is building its second-largest Embassy complex in the world in Lebanon, a country of only 5 million people. Plainly that is not what is seems – why does Lebanon need a much bigger US Embassy than Germany or Japan or Russia?

It is due to US influence that the Lebanese army remains neutral as its own country is both bombed and invaded, which is a unique way for an army to behave. The bombs falling today on Lebanese children are not only US-manufactured, but the US has paid for those bombs and given them to the Israelis to kill Lebanese with.

Hochstein arrives here as his country carries out mass killing of civilians through its colonial settler proxy. The Lebanese should throw shoes at him en masse.

I hope and trust that the dignity of Lebanon is to be upheld by its politicians and outweighs personal corruption, and that a sharp answer is given to this vicious charlatan Hochstein pretending to talk peace.

US Congressional Leadership Remains United in Devotion to Israel After Selection of New Senate Republican Leader

by Adam Dick  Posted onNovember  20, 2024

Some things changed in politics in Washington, DC last week when Republican United States senators via a secret ballot vote selected Sen John Thune (R-SD) to become Senate Republican leader, replacing Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in the position. One of the things that remained the same, though, was that the Senate Republican leader position, along with the other three top leadership positions — Republican and Democrat — in the Senate and House of Representatives, remains held by a politician espousing devotion to the government of Israel and its war effort.

In July of 2022, I wrote about the peculiar situation where these top congressional leaders were then as well lined up in adamant support for the Israel government despite the fact that Americans’ views regarding the Middle East nation were roughly evenly divided between favorable and negative views. Of the people then holding the four top Republican and Democratic leadership positions in Congress, only Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) remains in the group. Nonetheless, the unanimity in over-the-top support for Israel persists, irrespective of how out of step it is with the thinking of the American people, even as over the last year Americans have increasingly opposed the US government’s unwavering supplying of military and intelligence support for Israel waging its expanding war with catastrophic consequences.

In January of 2023, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), a die-hard supporter of the Israel government, became the top Democratic leader in the House. Then, when Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) was ousted from the House speaker position in the fall of 2023, something astounding happened: All 11 candidates to succeed him as speaker — including ultimate winner Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) — had expressed both their devotion to Israel and their devotion to the US supporting Israel in Israel’s war.

Continuing the trend, all three Senate majority leader candidates — Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), and Sen. John Thune (R-SD) — competing last week were express devotees of the US government supporting Israel generally, as well as supporting Israel’s war effort.

Cornyn made his devotion to Israel and its war crystal clear in an October 3 Dallas Morning News editorial titled “America’s Next Commander in Chief Must Unapologetically Support Israel.” In the editorial, he declared:

Support for Israel ought to transcend party lines, religion, race and ethnicity. This is not an issue of opinion; this is a battle of right and wrong, of good and evil. Israel is our most steadfast ally in the Middle East, and it deserves our full support, both in words and action.

I was honored to visit Israel earlier this year, and I was also extremely proud to have voted for widely-supported legislation that sent critical aid and military resources to Israel.

Scott in, of all places, his America First plank of his Rescue America plan put succinctly his dedication to supporting Israel. “We will always defend our allies, starting with Israel,” Scott’s plan declares. Further, Scott made this promise in a September speech at the Republican Jewish Coalition Annual Summit: “And, as Senate leader, you can count on support for Israel and protection for our Jewish communities being top priorities.” In the speech, Scott also declared:

We need to show up for our friends and family in Israel right now. We need them to know we are with them, we will show up and we will fight with them.

Thune, the winner of the Senate Republican leader race, is on the same page as his Senate Republican leader race opponents in regard to Israel. Thune wrote an editorial last month titled “America Must Support Israeli Victory.” In the editorial, the senator criticized the Biden administration for not doing enough for Israel. This is the administration that has been pumping out weapons, intelligence, and military support to Israel at an incredible pace to aid Israel’s pursuit of its expanding war. After criticizing what he refers to as the Biden administration’s “tepid support for Israel at a time when it needs a strong ally in the United States,” Thune declared the US “needs to stand strongly with Israel as it faces enemies from every side that threaten its very existence.” And what did Thune do upon winning the leadership race? Thune called the prime minister of Israel, posting at Twitter for all to see a picture of Thune on the phone along with this message: “Spoke with Prime Minister @netanyahu and reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to standing with Israel, our closest friend and ally.”

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Adam Dick is a senior fellow at The Ron Paul Institute.  He worked from 2003 through 2013 as a legislative aide for Rep. Ron Paul. Previously, he was a member of the Wisconsin State Board of Elections, a co-manager of Ed Thompson’s 2002 Wisconsin governor campaign, and a lawyer in New York and Connecticut.  Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute with permission.

Palestinians Displaced From Northern Gaza Fear This New Nakba

By Motasem A Dalloul

November 19, 2024   
Source: Middle East Monitor

Motasem A Dalloul is the correspondent in the Gaza Strip for the Middle East Monitor.

The most well-known football stadium in the Gaza Strip is chaotic, with masses of people flooding the pitch and seating. Everyone is carrying a bag on their back and some clothes. Some are helping sick people or carrying wounded relatives, while others are walking alone, struggling along on bare feet.

“We left the bodies of our children killed in Israeli air strikes either under the rubble or on the street,” an old man explains. He fled northern Gaza under heavy Israeli bombing.

Today, the people are not rushing to take their seats and enjoy a football match or a circus. They look for an empty place to rest after fleeing relentless Israeli bombing. The stadium is an encampment for displaced persons.

“Thanks be to Allah, we are safe,” said 72-year-old Hassan Abu Wardeh, who arrived in the stadium along with his sick wife and 13 children and grandchildren. “After the start of the third Israeli ground incursion into our area, we remained 25 days in our home,” he told me. “They were the worst days I have ever lived.”

That started on 6 October, when the Israeli occupation forces attacked Jabalia, concentrating on its refugee camp. Then the incursion was extended to the other north Gaza cities, including Beit Hanoun in the east and Beit Lahiya in the west.

“Since the start of their incursion, the Israeli occupation forces have been targeting homes and refugee shelters in Jabalia refugee camp, the beating heart of the city, clearly to put pressure on the inhabitants to run away,” explained Abu Wardeh. “However, most people persisted and stayed in their homes. We know that there is an Israeli plan to force us out of our land.”

Day after day, the Israeli occupation forces have targeted homes and refugee shelters alike, killing and wounding hundreds of people. The intensity of the bombardment meant that all rescue teams in the north had to suspend their services, including the Civil Defence and Ambulance teams.

Putting further pressure on Palestinian civilians to force them to leave, the occupation state has also targeted the three major hospitals in northern Gaza. Anyone seeking medical assistance and treatment has to go south to Gaza City.

Not content with dropping bombs and missiles on northern Gaza, said Abu Wardeh, the occupation forces have also used barrel bombs in the streets to displace the local population.


They detonate them without warning.

The sheer cruelty and brutality of the occupation forces saw Abu Wardeh ask his sick wife, his children and grandchildren to leave the house and move to Gaza City. His brother, who lived next door, moved 19 members of his family north to Beit Lahiya.

“I stayed at home along with two of my children and one of my grandchildren,” he said. “Five hours after the evacuation of the house, an Israeli missile turned it into rubble. It was a miracle that we survived.” It took another five hours for volunteers and neighbours to pull him and his children out from under the rubble.

“My grandson suffered from light bruises. I was happy that we were alive, but was very sad to hear that seven homes in our neighbourhood were bombed at the same time and 27 neighbours were killed. Only seven bodies were retrieved; the rest are under the rubble.”

This is how the Israeli occupation regime has been forcing the displacement — “evacuation” — of the northern Gaza Strip. People are killed, wounded or abducted. Hospitals have been destroyed, medical staff have been killed or arrested, and humanitarian aid is stopped from reaching the area. At the same time, the regime destroys entire residential compounds and is building massive sand barriers to separate northern Gaza from Gaza City.

Abu Wardeh, whose parents were forced out of Al-Majadal during the 1948 Nakba, is afraid that he is facing a new Nakba. The regime drops leaflets telling the people that they must leave their homes because they are in the middle of an “operation area”.

Then the occupation forces destroy their homes and destroy their refugee shelters.

During the ongoing incursion, the Israeli forces have killed more than 2,200 people in northern Gaza alone. A further 6,300 have been wounded while more than 1,000 have been detained — basically abducted — including children.

Spokespersons for the Israeli occupation army have declared several times that they will not allow the Palestinian residents of northern Gaza to return to their homes. According to Haaretz, the Israeli regime is carrying out ethnic cleansing as part of the “Generals’ Plan” laid out by one of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s military aides. Fanatical Jewish settlers are waiting expectantly to build illegal settlements in the Palestinian territory.

“I am afraid that we will never return to Jabalia,” added Abu Wardeh. “In any case, I am still hoping to return not to Jabalia, but to Al-Majdal.”

The right of return upon which his hope depends is entirely legitimate. It still seems a long way from happening though.

Motasem A Dalloul is the correspondent in the Gaza Strip for the Middle East Monitor.

Palestine: Islamophobia and resistance to the Israeli occupation

Monday 18 November 2024, by Louisa D

‘There was no such thing as Palestinians… They did not exist.’ This statement by Golda Meir in 1969 is the essence of what, fifty years later, would lead to the genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza. Despite live media coverage by its victims and a solidarity movement organised in many countries, it has continued unabated for a year

Anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia in the imperialist North, an ally of Israel, explains not only how consent to the genocide was created but also why the solidarity movement has not been on a mass scale. Anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia structure the consent to genocide

Genocide requires the dehumanisation of its victims. Israeli society is deeply racist towards Palestinians. Adherence to the Zionist project of colonisation requires this dehumanisation, which today is evolving into a widely shared feeling of genocide

The signs of this were visible before October 2023. Moreover, since 7 October, expressions of support for the Palestinians have been only very marginal in the demonstrations that began against Netanyahu and a reform of the Supreme Court and have continued for the release of the hostages.

It is this racist and supremacist dimension of Zionism that manufactures the consent to genocide abroad. In the discourse of the dominant classes, the struggle of the Palestinians is described as an expression of religious fanaticism and associated with international Islamist terrorism. The internalisation of a racial hierarchy enables Western countries to identify with the Israeli victims and, at the same time, make the murder of Palestinians invisible.

In this respect, Israeli bi-nationals benefit from repatriations and even tributes for those who died on 7 October, while Palestinian bi-nationals have the greatest difficulty escaping the massacres and repatriating their loved ones. And so, Israel and above all Netanyahu are supported not only by extreme right-wing regimes and far right regimes and parties, but also by all governments that see themselves in this culturalist interpretation of the ‘war of civilisations’, which is transposed into hostility towards Arabs, Muslims and those racialised as such. Systemic racism and a rise in Islamophobia common to the imperialist North have allowed such an alignment of discourse to take place instantly. Such is only possible because of our own colonial unthinking and the construction of the state on the ethnic homogenisation of the nation and supremacism.

Finally, the picture would not be complete without the Zionist government’s misuse of the fight against anti-Semitism, which maintains that the resistance of the Palestinian people is not motivated by their persecution as a colonised people but by anti-Semitism. In serving as a blank cheque for other racist regimes, Israel exonerates each of them of any anti-Semitism and in return allows them, under the pretext of fighting anti-Semitism, to target Muslims. Moreover, following the theory of the ‘new anti-Semitism’, contemporary anti-Semitism is said to emanate from Arabs and is therefore ‘imported’.

This discourse immediately places supporters of the Palestinian people in the camp of the enemies of the state, with the following fallacy: to support the Palestinian people would be to support terrorism against the Jews.

The erasure of the colonial dimension in favour of a civilisational discourse is echoed in the mainstream media, which have largely amplified it. The media treatment has dehumanised Palestinian lives, with the number of deaths put into perspective and the brutality of the Israeli offensive has been euphemised. Newsrooms have been forbidden from using terms that make visible the colonial context in which it takes place. The media also played a major role in demonising of the solidarity movement. It was accompanied by unabashed racist and Islamophobic expression.

Islamophobia: cornerstone of repression of the French solidarity movement

State-sponsored Islamophobia in France, which has its own colonial history, combines perfectly with Israeli propaganda. This is precisely what happened during the anti-Semitism demonstration on 12 November 2023, in which the anti-Semitic French far right took part. In the appeal, the link was made between ‘the Republic and the fight against anti-Semitism’ and ‘defence of secularism in the face of Islamism’. Very quickly, the attacks of 7 October were compared to the Bataclan attacks and the racist vocabulary of savagery was used to characterise Palestinian resistance.

While the racialised popular classes were quick to mobilise, state repression took a turn against any form of expression of support. General bans on demonstrations were motivated by the risk of anti-Semitic remarks during demonstrations and expressions of support for Hamas. It was this expression by Muslims and generations of racialised people from post-colonial immigration that the ruling class first sought to make invisible in the public arena by presenting it as an inherent threat to public order.

The imposition of the Israeli narrative had an impact on the solidarity movement. It was structured in conjunction with anti-racist and anti-imperialist struggles, and the emergence of Urgence Palestine, formed around Palestinians, enabled more radical demands to be made; at the same time, the historic front of support organisations fractured over the condemnation of Hamas. This may explain why the solidarity movement found itself more easily criminalised, because it was more isolated. This criminalisation was particularly strong in France, where prosecutors were asked to respond ‘firmly and quickly’ to anti-Semitism and apologies for terrorism in a total confusion between denouncing the crimes of the Israeli state and terrorism. The autonomy of the offence of apology for terrorism, which is no longer solely covered by the law on freedom of the press, has served as a basis for immediate appearance procedures. There were already more than 600 prosecutions for apology for terrorism in April, with a maximum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment.

A large-scale crackdown targeted mosques: several imams and heads of places of worship had their residence permits withdrawn and were deported because of remarks made in support of the Palestinian people. The most high-profile case was that of Abdourahman Ridouane, president of the Pessac mosque, who is due to be expelled after his appeal to the Council of State was rejected. This crackdown is obviously part of a more widespread attack by the state on organised Muslim cultural communities (the Pessac mosque had already been the subject of four attempts at administrative closure). Another example is Imam Ismaïl of the Bleuets mosque, who had to withdraw to avoid closure. The direct effect of this offensive is the destruction of communities and the demobilisation of people politicised through Islam. It has been greatly facilitated by the dissolutions of many anti-Islamophobia groups in recent years.

Palestinian voices and their allies have been intimidated, in particular Mariam Abu Daqqa, who has been expelled, Rima Hassan, who has been subjected to violent harassment, and Elias d’Imzalène, a member of Perspectives musulmanes, who is about to be tried for apology for terrorism after having taken up the Intifada slogan.

Because it denounces genocide and has refused to condemn armed resistance, la France insoumise (LFI) has been the target of an unprecedented attack designed to discredit it. The smear campaign combining accusations of anti-Semitism and clientelism towards pro-Palestinian voters was undeniably racist and Islamophobic because it was based on the following logic: only this clientelism towards voters racialised as Arabs and Muslims could explain LFI’s support for the Palestinian people (and therefore only other Arabs could have empathy for the Palestinians); and criticism of Israel can only be explained by anti-Semitism and not by real support for the Palestinians’ anti-colonial struggle.

Lastly, the French media’s approach was eminently racist and Islamophobic and was denounced as such by the association of anti-racist journalists. The structuring Islamophobia in France has encouraged the acceptance of this level of repression in society against pro-Palestinian supporters with patterns of domination specific to racist oppression.

Abroad, mobilisation constrained by racism

This observation of an increase in the level of repression against the pro-Palestinian solidarity movement can be extended to most of the imperialist countries allied with Israel: obstacles to the right to demonstrate, harassment and defamation of supporters, control of public expression, cancellation of cultural events, dismissals, criminalisation, stigmatisation of foreigners and so on. Palestinians in the diaspora have been particularly targeted. There were similar dynamics: a link with anti-racist and anti-colonial struggles, in particular due to the strong participation of racialised people, and pro-Palestinian activism perceived as threatening and, by default, anti-Semitic. Above all, there has been a sharp increase in Islamophobic acts (hate speech, stigmatisation, attacks on places of worship, but also physical violence and murders).

In Germany, censorship of the solidarity movement is very strong because of support for Israel, described as a ‘reason of state’. State racism has developed around the belief that anti-Semitism is imported by foreigners of the Muslim faith. Spain and Britain are exceptions, with a high level of mobilisation due to widespread public support for Palestine. The unconditional support of the British political class for Israel was offset by the strong mobilising role of Muslim and Palestinian community organisations. The university occupation movement that began in the United States had the potential to change the balance of power. Here too, the students mobilised were intimidated and defamed, accused of anti-Semitism and complacency towards Hamas.

While these mobilisations have been significant in places, they have not been able to sufficiently influence the support of the ruling classes for Israel, even if ‘unconditional’ support is now more timid. By importing the rhetoric of a civilisational conflict in which Israel is seen as a Western bastion against the Islamic threat, the ruling classes are using the expression of support for the Palestinian resistance to target Arabs and Muslims.

In the space of a year, we can take stock of an international mobilisation that has failed to rise above the ceiling of anti-Arab racism and a profound contempt for Palestinian lives. This racist portrayal of the Palestinian experience is not new, nor is the criminalisation of their support or the conflation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. On the other hand, unconditional alignment with Israeli propaganda has marked acceleration in general trend towards fascism, fuelled by a normalisation of the dehumanisation of Arabs and a deepening of authoritarianism. In this, we bear a collective responsibility to look into the mirror held up to us by Israel.

Attached documents

• palestine-islamophobia-and-resistance-to-the-israeli_a8744.pdf (PDF - 916 KiB)
  Extraction PDF [->article8744]

International Viewpoint is published under the responsibility of the Bureau of the Fourth International. Signed articles do not necessarily reflect editorial policy. Articles can be reprinted with acknowledgement, and a live link if possible.

Palestinians, Both Civilian and Military, Are Transcending the Horror We’ve Unleashed

By Stan Cox

November 19, 2024

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Image by Muhammad Sabah, Creative Commons 4.0



In February, the public health specialist Muna Abed Alah published a paper in the journal Current Psychology titled “Shattered Hierarchy: How the Gaza Conflict Demolished Maslow’s Pyramid of Needs.” The idea of a hierarchy of needs—first published by the psychologist Abraham Maslow in 1943 and subsequently modified in various ways by Maslow and others—has long been pervasive in the world of pop psychology, while some in academia have poked holes in Maslow’s logic. Now, Alah suggests that the Palestinians of Gaza have rendered the hierarchy of needs wholly obsolete.

Briefly, Maslow and others who followed have identified universal human needs—including but not limited to basic physiological requirements, safety, cognition, self-actualization, and transcendence—and listed those needs along with others in a precise order. They maintain that an individual’s physiological needs (food, water, shelter, etc.) must be satisfied first and that each subsequent need can be fulfilled only after the needs that precede it in the list have been at least partially fulfilled.

Well, Alah writes, the people of Gaza have torn up and thrown away Maslow’s blueprint.

Regarding non-fulfillment of physiological needs, Alah of course cited Israel’s campaigns depriving Palestinians of food, water, fuel, shelter, sleep, and other necessities. Safety was being totally erased by Israel’s relentless bombing throughout Gaza. Endlessly repeated destruction of hospitals, assassination of medical personnel, and targeting of trucks and people that gather at food-distribution locations has prevented the satisfaction of both physiological and safety needs. With serial displacement of millions of people, separation of family members, and deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians, the need for esteem has been swamped; people’s sense of dignity and control over their lives has been wrecked. Israel’s intentional bombing of schools and universities has blocked their pursuit of cognitive needs. Regarding the need for self-actualization, Alah wrote, “The relentless focus on mere survival in the face of constant threat overshadows any opportunity for self-fulfillment . . . In such an environment, where safety and basic needs are a daily struggle, the luxury of realizing personal potential becomes nearly impossible.”

But what about transcendence, the peak of the hierarchy of needs? In Alah’s words, it “involves connecting with something larger than oneself, including spiritual experiences, deep connections with others, and contributions to the broader society.” With none of the prerequisites being satisfied, transcendence should have receded completely out of reach months ago, according to Maslow’s thesis. Instead, Alah, observed, transcendence is the one need that was being realized:

“Amidst ongoing conflict and siege, achieving transcendence is notably difficult, yet it manifests itself in unique and meaningful ways. Despite the limitations in aid and resources, many people in Gaza have started to help each other, fostering a strong sense of community and solidarity. This mutual assistance not only addresses immediate needs but also serves as a powerful form of transcendence, allowing individuals to connect with and contribute to something greater than themselves.”

The coordinated service, heroism, and sacrifice personified by Palestinian journalists, taxi drivers, first responders, and health care professionals during the war is by now legendary. But countless other people in all walks of life have demonstrated similar degrees of transcendence. In his article, Alah focused on the resilience of Gaza’s civilian population. Here, I’ll just add that the armed resistance forces in Gaza—encompassing the al Qassam Brigades (Hamas’s armed wing) and others—also have transcended unbearable hardship by mounting an extraordinary collective effort.
“Something Greater than Themselves”

A report released in August by Ground Truth Solutions and Arab World for Research and Development (AWRAD) revealed the extent of mutual aid occurring in Gaza over the past year. Conducted in June and July, the survey of 1,200 civilians confirmed that none of the fundamental needs at the base of Maslow’s hierarchy were being fulfilled in Gaza. As expected, when asked about their most immediate priorities, 90 to 99 percent of the respondents listed Maslow’s basic needs: food, water, shelter, and safety.

But more than 90 percent also listed priorities such as “care for marginalized groups” and “doing something to contribute or support.” A large share of people also provided food, water, help with daily affairs, electric power, housing, childcare, or psychosocial support to others in the community—and received such help from others. Community volunteer groups organized early in the conflict, and about one-third of respondents told interviewers they had benefited from support provided by these groups.

Displaced families or communities taking refuge in a new location said they’d found plenty of help. Local leaders and committees helped them set up tent encampments or “find other housing arrangements in host families.” Furthermore, “When asked about the most important resources available to them, people often mention community kitchens, which provide a means through which local aid groups can provide support and residents can pool resources to try and reach those in greatest need.”

At the time Ground Truth Solutions and AWRAD were conducting these interviews, the Israeli onslaught and aid blockade had been going on for nine months. When families and communities are forced to live with constant hunger and thirst, to go without medical care, to watch family members and compatriots die all around them for months on end, sustaining a functional society can become physically impossible. As a result, the report noted, “During in-depth discussions, both aid providers and community volunteers mentioned the erosion of mutual aid within communities as resources become scarcer.”

Burdens of scarcity, displacement, and death-risk accumulate over time. There’s only so much that people can take, however brave and generous they are. But that doesn’t mean the Palestinians are giving up. One woman told Ground Truth interviewers, “We are a mighty people who have dignity and we will prevail. We’ll die standing like palm trees and we will not kneel.” It may be that colonized people just don’t fit Maslow’s model. Alah himself noted that its “Western-centric origins may not adequately reflect the collective experiences of trauma and resilience that significantly influence societal dynamics in regions like Gaza, where cultural heritage plays a pivotal role in shaping communal responses to adversity.”
No Choice but to Fight

The Palestinian armed resistance too is exemplifying transcendence. As part of a great tradition established by wars of liberation throughout history, they have held their own against a far larger, more powerful army—one equipped and supported by the world’s biggest military-industrial complex, that of the United States and other Western powers.

Gaza’s fighters have so far thwarted the occupiers’ efforts to depopulate Gaza. They are mounting fierce resistance against the army’s attempt to drive all Palestinians from northern Gaza into the South, annex and resettle the North with Israelis, and let the South become one big, uninhabitable “deportation camp” (somehow inhabited by millions of Palestinians until they are pushed out).

The Palestinians are fighting with antitank weapons, rifles, and mortars that they designed and manufactured themselves. In so-called “return to sender” missions, they’re blowing up IDF tanks and troops using “barrel bombs” filled with explosives they’ve recycled from the Israeli “dud” munitions that litter Gaza’s landscape. They’ve also gained remote control of Israeli drones, landed, reprogrammed, and armed them, and then sent them back out to attack IDF sites. In these and many other ways, the resistance forces have shown great resourcefulness.

They’ve shown not only ingenuity but great courage as well. In resistance videos (starting at the 2 hr 6 min mark in this one), we can see fighter after fighter dash from a bombed-out building across dozens of meters of open ground, highly exposed to drone fire, lugginga 45-pound, locally manufactured explosive device. They place them just a few feet behind an IDF tank, dash back across the open ground, and take cover just before the bomb explodes.

The resistance fighters attack only military targets that threaten the people of Gaza. After they strike, and IDF ambulances and medevac helicopters arrive to carry away the wounded and dead, the resistance fighters film from a distance but do not attack them.

Some readers might object to the inclusion of resistance fighters among examples of how people of Gaza are rising above their demolished hierarchy of needs. But focus on the than 2 million-plus people who have lived through more than 13 months of unspeakable horrors—preceded by 18 years of open-air imprisonment and a blockade that has deprived them of fundamental human needs, a siege punctuated by deadly IDF bombing campaigns in 2006, 2008-9, 2012, 2014, and 2021, along with massacres of nonviolent protesters in 2018. (And Israel’s unlawful occupation of Gaza goes back another four decades, to 1967.) No population that’s been under deadly siege and bombing for two decades would accept an open-ended continuation of such savagery without fighting back.

The death and destruction that occurred during the Palestinian resistance’s October 7, 2023 military action could never justify Israel’s attempted eradication of an entire society—even if one chose to believe every one of the now-debunked claims that the Israeli military, government, and press have made about that day.

Even if on that day the resistance had committed every act of which the Israelis have falsely accused them, the latter’s genocidal campaign of the past 13 months (and counting) is a monumentally extreme violation of two fundamental principles of international conflict: proportionality (retaliation must not be disproportionately more severe that the acts being retaliated against) and distinction (military targets may be attacked, but civilians or civilian targets must not).
In Gaza, Nonviolence Is a Nonstarter

My friend Justin Podur, author of the 2019 Gaza novel Siegebreakers, points to the 2018 mass protest known as the Great March of Return as conclusive evidence that nonviolence had no chance of ending the Israeli occupation of Gaza—that, indeed, nonviolence has never freed a people from a violent colonial power.

Every Friday for a year starting in March, 2018, Palestinians, by the tens of thousands on some days, carried out nonviolent actions at various points along the giant fence that (along with a sea and air blockade), separates Gaza from the rest of the world. The groups protested on their own land, along their own side of the barrier. By sticking to wholly nonviolent resistance, March of Return protesters did what many around the world are constantly urging the people of Gaza to do. But starting on the very first Friday, Israeli forces on the other side of the fence fired with abandon at the unarmed protesters. Over the next twelve months, the troops shot and wounded 30,000 people, killing 266. The dead included dozens of children. Though a horrific massacre, it was just a peek-preview of the crimes Israel would commit against Gaza’s civilian population during this genocide half a decade later.

The Israeli regime will use any excuse at any time to kill, maim, or displace Palestinians. The regime, not the resistance, is the driving force behind the conflict. In Podur’s words, “the slaughter of Palestinians at the Great March of Return was not the fault of the nonviolent protesters any more than the genocide in 2023-24 was the fault of the Palestinian armed groups.”

Recently, the Palestinian journalist Abubaker Abed, who reports from Deir al-Balah in central Gaza, was asked if he has a message for Westerners who demand that those of us protesting the genocide answer the question, “But do you condemn Hamas?” He responded,

“Regardless of political affiliations, do you really condemn someone who defends you and has your back against a terrorist state? Israel has been butchering, dehumanizing, torturing, and bombing us for 76 years. And has imposed a strict siege on us in Gaza for 17 years. In this context, where does this question even fit? It’s incredibly enraging that people are trying to justify Israel’s genocide by asking such silly questions.”

Those of us who live in a country that’s supplying unlimited support for Israel’s all-out military assault and starvation campaign have no right to demand that the Palestinians refrain from fighting back. Our time is better spent demanding a total embargo on the provision of arms, money, or anything else to Israel. We too are responsible for bombing Gaza’s people out of access to their basic Maslow needs. Now, to do nothing more than celebrate the valiant perseverance into which we ourselves have forced them would be a hollow gesture indeed. And to engage in pious tut-tutting over their armed resistance would be immeasurably worse.


ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.  Donate

Stan Cox began his career in the U.S. Department of Agriculture and is now the Ecosphere Studies Research Fellow at the Land Institute. Cox is the author of Any Way You Slice It: The Past, Present, and Future of Rationing, Losing Our Cool: Uncomfortable Truths About Our Air-Conditioned World (and Finding New Ways to Get Through the Summer) and Sick Planet: Corporate Food and Medicine.

Activists at U.N. Climate Talks Push Rich Countries to Pay for Green Transition

By Asad Rehman, Amy Goodman

November 19, 2024

Source: Democracy Now!

We are broadcasting live from the COP29 climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, which has entered its second and final week, and already there is frustration over a lack of progress on the key issue of financing the energy transition and climate adaptation in Global South countries. Asad Rehman, executive director of War on Want and lead spokesperson for the Climate Justice Coalition, says this year’s summit is supposed to be “the finance COP” and calls for about $5 trillion a year in financing, but “rich, developed countries are putting pennies on the table.” He also addresses the overwhelming presence of industry lobbyists at the annual summits and calls from some activists to boycott the talks. “If we, as civil society, weren’t here also holding the feet of Global North governments to the fire, we would see much worse outcomes than we are seeing already,” says Rehman.

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

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

We’re broadcasting live from the United Nations climate summit here in Baku, Azerbaijan, which has entered its second and final week. There’s already frustration over a lack of progress on the key issue of financing the energy transition and climate adaptation in Global South countries. This comes after last year’s climate summit, COP28 in Dubai, where world leaders agreed to transition away from fossil fuels, after past summits just called for restrictions.

We just heard voices of protest. Now we’re joined by one of those people, Asad Rehman. He’s executive director of War on Want and lead spokesperson for the Climate Justice Coalition.

Well, another COP, another interview with you, Asad.

ASAD REHMAN: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re here in Azerbaijan, a leading petrostate in the world, following last year’s COP summit in another petrostate, in the United Arab Emirates. Can you talk about, for people who aren’t familiar with these U.N. gatherings, the significance of this, what you expect to come out of it, and what you’re seeing actually happen through this last week?

ASAD REHMAN: Well, Amy, the last time we spoke, I think it was in Dubai. The bombs were dropping on Gaza. We, as civil society, were standing in solidarity with our colleagues who were dying in Gaza, and saying, “We must stand up for human rights.” And a year later, of course, we have now the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, countless human rights reports all talking about war crimes, crimes against humanity, a genocide taking place, genocide taking place in Gaza — and, of course, all with impunity and active complicity of some of the most powerful countries in the world — the United States, United Kingdom and the European Union. And the very rules of war — rules of the international rules system, multilateralism is being burnt to the ground. So we came in here with a very heavy heart. Our colleagues are still being killed. We see food being used as a weapon of war. The importance of human rights propelled us to, of course, use this moment to raise our voice and still call for a ceasefire and, of course, call for end to complicity.

But the negotiation themselves, it’s often been called the finance COP. And the reason why it’s called the finance COP is this COP is meant to agree what the next quantum, which is the collective goal of money that is meant to be provided from the Global North to the Global South because of the responsibility of the Global North for causing this crisis — and what that figure will be, what the quality of that money will be. Will it be in public finance, or will it be in debt-created loans? Will it be in private finance? All of these things are being thought out over here in week one and in week two.

AMY GOODMAN: So, I want to ask why you’re here and why so many thousands of people have come to this climate summit. Prominent climate activist Greta Thunberg announced last week she’s not attending this COP summit over Azerbaijan’s climate and human rights record. She spoke Friday in Yerevan, Armenia.


GRETA THUNBERG: I think we have to stop pretending that conferences like the COP, that currently are not leading to any even close to meaningful climate action that we need — for example, last year, we saw an all-time high of greenhouse gas emissions, and 2024 is set to be the hottest year ever recorded. These COP processes are failing us. … Having these conferences as greenwash platforms for politicians to pretend that they’re taking action, of course, it’s also greenwashing the human rights abuses that these countries are committing. So, it’s both greenwashing and greenwashing the climate action and greenwashing their ethnic cleansing.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s Greta Thunberg, the well-known Swedish climate and human rights activist. Asad Rehman, you made a different decision.

ASAD REHMAN: Yes, because I see these spaces as fundamentally being about a question about power. We know that the rich and powerful have got way more power than ordinary people, and this is a contested space. And we have to build our power, make sure our politicians act in our interests, in the interests of the planet, and not of the rich and the elite and big business. And that’s true at national level as in a global level.

But it is important that we’re here, because we’re the ears, eyes and voice of those on the frontlines. Many people come here with the hard evidence to try and influence these negotiations. And knowing the imbalance of power that exists between the richest nations and developing countries, if we, as civil society, weren’t here also holding the feet of Global North governments to the fire, we would see much worse outcomes than we are seeing already.

AMY GOODMAN: So, I wanted to play another clip. This is of Azerbaijan’s minister of ecology and natural resources. Mukhtar Babayev is COP29’s president. Previously, he spent 26 years at the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan Republic, known as SOCAR. Ahead of the summit, the group Global Witness released covert recordings of Azerbaijan’s COP29 chief executive, Elnur Soltanov, promoting possible fossil fuel deals with someone, well, posing as an investor. The fake investor told Soltanov they were considering sponsoring COP29 in exchange for deals with Azerbaijan’s state energy firm SOCAR. This is Soltanov.


ELNUR SOLTANOV: As I said, we have a lot of pipeline infrastructure. We have a lot of gas fields that are to be developed. We have a lot of green projects that SOCAR is very interested in. There are a lot of joint ventures that could be established, potential joint ventures. Our SOCAR trading is trading oil and gas all over the world, including in Asia. So, to me, these are the possibilities to explore.

AMY GOODMAN: So, while it’s so critical — again, that was Soltanov thinking he was talking to a fossil fuel exec. In fact, it was someone from Global Witness. But you have at this COP — you could consider them a delegation — the largest delegation here, and that’s of fossil fuel lobbyists. And you have this chief executive making fuel and oil deals while he’s here. So, why do you think you can have an effect, as you talk about the imbalance of power, Asad?

ASAD REHMAN: Well, those very same lobbyists are, of course, affecting our decisions of government at national level as they are at global level. They, of course, want to turn this climate negotiations into a trade fair. They’re coming here to try and strike deals, make bargains and, of course, propose their solutions. You see these lobbyists here calling for carbon capture and storage — unproven, deadly and dangerous technologies — as solutions to the climate crisis.

It’s up to us to be opposing them, to put forward real solutions, to be supporting governments who do want to do the right thing, and say, “We are going to amplify your voice. We’re going to support you. We’re going to raise these issues.” And we’re going to build our movement’s power and make sure we’re making the right call.

AMY GOODMAN: So, the theme is financing. I was just talking to a Kenyan journalist who said Africa is faring very badly here. You’re not wearing the regular COP lanyard. You’re wearing one that says “pay up”?

ASAD REHMAN: “Pay up.” Global civil society came together, and we looked at what the true costs of supporting developing countries to be able to grow cleanly, what the cost of adapting to the climate crisis was, how much the damages were already overwhelming countries in the Global South, and we calculated that that is about $5 trillion a year that the Global North would need to provide to the Global South. That’s just a down payment in the overall cost.

And so, we came here and say, “Look, the only way we’re going to be able to transition fairly, cleanly, the only way that people in the Global South will have the same right to live with dignified lives as people in the Global North, if we have finance and technology being provided.” We made the call for $5 trillion. Developing countries came here and said, “At a base level, the lowest number, we must have $1.4 trillion a year.”

Rich, developed countries are putting pennies on the table. They’re not even talking about billions. They’re talking the private sector will provide this finance. “Open your economies to our big corporations. They will be the answer.” And we know they deliver nothing, nothing in terms of climate action. And, of course, their only goal is to make profit.

AMY GOODMAN: Asad Rehman, we want to thank you for being with us, executive director of War on Want, lead spokesperson for the Climate Justice Coalition.

Asad Rehman is executive director of War on Want and lead spokesperson for the Climate Justice Coalition.

House Again Moves to Pass “Nonprofit Killer” Bill Giving Trump “Unchecked Power”

By Sharon Zhang

November 19, 2024

Source: Truthout

Image by 42-BRT, Creative Commons 4.0


Lawmakers in the House are once again moving to pass a dangerous bill, nicknamed the “nonprofit killer” by opponents, that would give Donald Trump and future presidents wide leeway to attack nonprofit groups that the presidential administration views as ideological foes.

The bill, H.R. 9495, is slated for a markup in committee on Monday that will likely be followed by a floor vote requiring a simple majority vote to pass, potentially this week.

Numerous advocacy and rights groups have warned that the bill is extremely dangerous as it would give the Treasury Secretary the power to revoke the tax-exempt status of any nonprofit that it deems a “terrorist supporting organization,” with little need for evidence.

This could be ruinous for many groups — especially those who advocate for Palestinian rights — and damaging to free speech and press rights, as any nonprofit, including news outlets and civil rights groups, could be targeted under the legislation. Arab and Muslim advocacy groups in particular have long been plagued by racist “terrorist” labels that serve solely to suppress such voices, often violently.

“This bill would increase the powers of the president at the expense of all of our freedoms, and could impact not only organizations like Oxfam, but other non-profits, news outlets, or even universities who dare to dissent,” Oxfam America President and CEO Abby Maxman said in a statement on Friday.

“This bill follows the same playbook Oxfam has seen other governments around the world use to crush dissent. Now we are seeing it here at home,” Maxman went on.

Last week, the bill failed to pass a two-thirds majority vote when Republicans tried to push the legislation through under a suspension of the House rules. The vote failed with 256 in favor, including 52 Democrats, and 145 against; under a simple majority vote, the bill would have easily passed. The pro-Israel lobby has pushed for the bill’s passage.

Some Democrats had opposed the bill because of Trump’s reelection, fearing that it would give the administration even more power amid the right’s planned executive power grab under Trump. However, the bill could be dangerous in the hands of any administration, Republican or Democrat, considering Democrats’ embrace of fascist language and repression of dissent that has been on full display amid Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Rights groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have urged lawmakers to vote against the bill. In September, the ACLU and over 150 other tax-exempt groups wrote to Congress to oppose the bill, and last week, in a joint statement released after the bill failed to pass, a coalition of Arab and Muslim advocacy groups urged lawmakers to continue opposing the bill’s passage.

On Friday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) put out a call for Americans to contact their representatives and ask them to vote “no” on the bill — especially if their representative was one of the 52 Democrats who voted “yes.“ CAIR has warned that the bill would give “unchecked power“ to presidents.

“Opponents of H.R. 9495 — the ‘nonprofit killer’ bill — are ready for round two. This bill threatens not only American Muslim and Palestinian nonprofits, but any civic or faith-based organization or house of worship advocating for politically-sensitive issues,” said the group’s government affairs director, Robert S. McCaw. “Monday’s vote is critical — every American must urge their lawmakers to reject this dangerous attack on free speech and due process.”

Liberation Is Not Propaganda

By James Granelli, Raíra Fróes 

November 19, 2024

Source: Africa Is A Country

Image by Africa Is a Country

In the same week known climate denialist and convicted felon Donald Trump was re-elected to the White House, Africa Energy Week took place in Cape Town. Both spin lies, half-truths, and hypocrisy, claiming the benefits of fossil fuels for the poor, a sovereign state, and the key to self-determined development.

The argument against oil and gas due to their carbon emissions and resulting extreme weather across the continent has been regularly made and is now playing out materially in the form of droughts and floods that have wiped out 80 percent of Zimbabwe’s harvest and affected hundreds of thousands in Sudan respectively. However, what is missing is a rebuttal to the industry’s co-option of liberatory language and sustainable development critiques. Co-option is not unique to the African continent. As cases from Brazil show, the appropriation of sovereignty discourse by oil and gas companies never leads to equal benefits and, instead, continues to defend private (and mostly Western) interests.

Africa Energy Week, hosted by the Africa Energy Chamber, was a congregation in the supposed search for solutions to Africa’s energy crises. However, with the number of fossil fuel corporations, speakers from the African Petroleum Producers Organisation (APPO) and Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and the number of energy ministers from across the continent, it was clearly a gathering on how to hook the continent on the false promises of oil and gas as transition fuels and argue that the environmental goals of the Global North were standing in the way of Africa’s development.

In his opening address, NJ Ayuk, the Executive Chairman of the African Energy Chamber and a convicted fraudster in the US, remarked on the importance of oil and gas for job creation and the continent’s right to energy sovereignty and economic growth. Disguised in the language of hope for Africa’s liberation and development is a new form of climate denial that appropriates progressive rhetoric in service of fossil fuel companies.

Researcher and activist Dr Alex Lenferna details in a recent publication how the appropriation of progressive causes, such as racial justice, decolonization, and anti-imperialism, was used as propaganda by Shell and Gwede Mantashe, South Africa’s Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, to attack critiques and local opponents to Shell’s seismic surveys on the west coast of the country.

Although not as explicit as Mantashe calling environmental activism “colonialism and apartheid of a special type,” the language of oil and gas giants and their critique of northern interference is used to enable the extraction of Africa’s resources with minimal protest.

Dr Lenferna classifies this language appropriation as propaganda, specifically arguing that it classifies as undermining demagoguery propaganda. He writes: “Echoing colonizers before them, the neocolonial push for oil and gas extraction comes masked as being good for the people who are trying to resist it.” As the propaganda echoes the colonial narratives of “development,” so too do the extractive practices as the profits and products are shipped offshore.

Calling out this appropriation of language is not a disagreement with the progressive claims themselves. Yes, we need energy. Yes, the continent needs to break from the neo-colonial chains imposed by structural adjustment and other “development” initiatives. But implying that oil and gas, an industry drenched in the colonial practices of extraction, destruction, resource appropriation, violence, and racial capitalism, is the way forward is hypocritical and an insult to those who wish and work for African sovereignty on Africa’s terms.

If the industry was genuine in its message on African sovereignty and liberation perhaps they might read the likes of anti-colonial leader Amilcar Cabral, agreeing with his quote: “we can affirm, without fear of contradiction… that, to defend the Earth is the most efficient process to defend Humankind.” However, this may sit uncomfortably with the ecocidal realities of oil extraction in the Niger Delta or plans to build an oil pipeline through national parks in East Africa.

In a similar fashion to the economic liberation rhetoric, Ayuk also pointed out that Africa should not compromise its development goals to fall in line with wealthier countries’ environmental standards—another tactic to justify fossil fuel expansion on the continent.

Here we are pointed to the valid critiques of sustainable development that highlight the injustices of the climate crisis and its multilateral solutionism, whereby rich countries dictate the playbook while the Global South suffers.

Even sustainable development conferences on the continent, such as the 2023 African Climate Summit, have offered little hope of change from the status quo—brimming with corporate solutions from the global North, including loans and carbon credit schemes, and relegated civil society voices to the background. These financialised solutions rehash histories of carbon colonialism and sideline local communities dealing with crop failures, flooding, pollution, and intense cyclones.

Likewise, we must also be attentive to green colonialism already unfolding in North Africa, where people are being displaced from the land for solar mega projects that serve European energy use and the current prospectors of green hydrogen, continuing relations of extraction and resource appropriation on the continent.

Notwithstanding these notable critiques of profiteering environmental policy, to claim that oil and gas are aligned with the climate justice critiques is a disservice to Global South activists, communities, and researchers who continue to counter climate solutions that perpetuate resource appropriation and skirt the issue of reparations from colonial plunder. Simply put, oil and gas are not part of the deep and radical Just Transition needed to avert climate catastrophe and ensure African prosperity.

The appropriation of Africa’s right to development subverts real concerns and aspirations about what kind of development we want. The case of TotalEnergies gas exploration in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique is a perfect example of the type of “development” the industry wishes to bring. Displacement, radicalization, war, suppression of the press, human rights violations, thousands killed, and a French corporation eventually pulling out of its “development” plans after leaving a region in chaos. This is by no means the radical, African-led, development that the likes of Kwame Nkrumah and others spoke about in their opposition to neocolonial development in the 1960’s and 70s. The “development” of Cabo Delgado, and many other places on the frontlines of extraction, is not the revolution the fossil fuel industry spins it to be.

Africa Energy Week 2024 had the slogan: “Making energy poverty history by 2030.” Energy poverty is a timely issue on the continent, and it needs solutions and infrastructure that ensure sovereignty as well as security. However, we have seen time and time again that fossil fuels are not aligned with such democratic or riotous principles. Betting on oil and gas, predominantly explored and extracted by foreign companies, for African energy sovereignty is like betting on the colonizer’s cannons to sink its ships. This bet is not unique to the continent and there are lessons to be learned from others in the Global South who have made these fairytales a reality.

Brazil’s Petrobras was founded in 1953 and conceived under the “Oil is ours” slogan – a movement focused on resource and financial sovereignty. The oil company was key to the Brazilian industrialization movement and held a monopoly over oil extractivism for a few decades as a state-owned company.

After decades of toe-dipping in international markets, a neoliberal shift turned it into a mixed capital enterprise in the 1990s, pushing Brazil’s oil economy into the murky waters of profit accumulation. Since then, its scope has expanded to oil, natural gas, and petrol derivatives. Truth be told, great efforts were made to maintain petrol economies outside of the hands of Western giants, but within a highly commodified market escaping its claws is a hard task.

Decades after its birth, Petrobras has been the protagonist of corruption scandals, has failed to meet sustainability goals, and kept profit margins high. Between 2014 and 2015, Operation Car Wash became globally known for its uncovering of one of the world’s largest corruption scandals—the accompanying media coverage was later captured by polarized political discourse, pushing community interests and ecological impacts to the background of the conversation once more.

This neoliberal turn was also felt by the national electricity provider, Eletrobras, where the privatization of service providers marked its lack of commitment to community interests. Although the company strives to be known for its role in expanding the Brazilian electricity grid and bringing affordable power to urban and rural areas alike, recent research shows that over 45% of Brazilian households spend at least half of their income to keep the lights on.

Today, Brazil faces climate disasters almost daily, including soaring deforestation rates, destructive wildfires, droughts, and floods. Ongoing developments may worsen this crisis: Petrobrás is currently expanding plans for deep-sea drilling off the Brazilian equatorial coast, closing in on the Amazon river mouth and dozens of indigenous communities who strongly oppose the project. The dangers of deep-sea extractivism are growing in South Africa; both oil and gas licenses continue to be negotiated in the Orange Basin, their ongoing efforts hard to track. Multinationals continue to pull in and out of contracts, while the majority of South Africans remain out of the loop when it comes to control of the country’s natural resources.

As yet another climate conference begins in the petro-state of Azerbaijan, the lessons from Brazil should be front and center of the Global South delegations displeased with the Global North’s reluctance to pay up for loss and damage while demanding shifts in energy regimes across the South. The fossil fuel industry will continue to spin its “solutions” as anti-imperial and for the people. However, like in Brazil, the industry will never be revolutionary but will forever be tied to a business model that places profit over habitability. We must ask what kind of development we want and need, implementing solutions from and for the continent that improve habitability for all.

James Granelli  is a MPhil candidate with Environmental Humanities South at the University of Cape Town, researching multi-species politics and relations in the Cape Town critical zone.

Pentagon Fails Seventh Straight Audit as Annual US Military Budget Nears $1 Trillion

By Jake Johnson

November 19, 2024

Source: Common Dreams


Image in public domain



The Pentagon announced late last week that it failed its seventh consecutive audit as the sprawling, profiteering-ridden department wasn’t able to fully account for its trillions of dollars in assets.

As with its past failures to achieve a clean audit, the U.S. Defense Department attempted to cast the 2024 results in a positive light, with the Pentagon’s chief financial officer declaring in a statement that “momentum is on our side.”

The Pentagon is the largest U.S. federal agency and is responsible for roughly half of the government’s annual discretionary spending, with its yearly budget approaching $1 trillion despite long-standing concerns about the department’s inability to account for vast sums of money approved by lawmakers and presidents from both major parties.

The latest financial assessment published Friday by the Defense Department’s inspector general office estimates that the Pentagon has $4.1 trillion in assets. It is the only major federal agency that has never passed a clean audit, as required by law.

“Of the 28 reporting entities undergoing stand-alone financial statement audits, nine received an unmodified audit opinion, one received a qualified opinion, 15 received disclaimers, and three opinions remain pending,” the Pentagon said Friday.

Since the department’s first failed audit in 2018, Congress has authorized trillions of dollars in additional military spending. According to the Costs of War Project, more than half of the department’s annual budget “is now spent on military contractors” that are notorious for overbilling the government.

“The Pentagon’s latest failed audit is a great signal to the incoming administration for where they can start their attempts at slashing government spending,” Lindsay Koshgarian, director of the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, told Common Dreams. “Instead of gutting veterans’ benefits or the Department of Education as planned, they should start with the one major government agency that has never passed an audit, the Pentagon.”

Progressive watchdogs and lawmakers have long cited the Pentagon’s failure to pass a clean audit as evidence of the department’s pervasive waste and fraud. The Pentagon buried a 2015 report identifying $125 billion in administrative waste out of concern that the findings would be used as a justification “to slash the defense budget,” as The Washington Post reported at the time.

Last year, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) introduced an amendment to the annual National Defense Authorization Act that would have required the Pentagon to return a portion of its budget to the Treasury Department’s general fund as a penalty for failing audits.

“Year after year the establishment on both sides of the aisle have prevented these amendments from receiving a single roll call vote,” Warren Gunnels, Sanders’ staff director, wrote on social media over the weekend.

This story has been updated to include comment from Lindsay Koshgarian of the National Priorities Project.

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