Massive Russian Forces Redeployment Started

russia
Share this
Share

As pre-announced by Russian President Vladimir Putin Saturday, Russian troops have begun relocating to designated areas, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense Sunday. The statements of the Russian Ministry of Defense on the massive redeployment were reported by RIA Novosti.

“In the process of checking the combat readiness of troops… the military units have started large-scale relocation to designated areas,” said the Russian Ministry of Defense.

Massive Russian Forces Redeployment Started (2)In particular, tank and anti-aircraft missiles were loaded onto railway platforms, airborne units were moved to airfields, and some military units were moved.

Putin had announced his intentions to redeploy the units Saturday as part of what Putin called a comprehensive review of sudden alertness.

The review is expected to involve approximately 65,000 troops, 180 aircraft, 60 helicopters and over 5,500 units of weaponry and other military equipment.

Additionally, the Russian side of the Gokuvo checkpoint in the Rostov region has been closed due to shooting in Ukraine, the Russian Border Guard told RIA Novosti.

However, two other checkpoints, Kujbyshevo and Novoshahtisnk have been opened. Novoshahtinsk had reportedly been hit by mortar fire from Ukraine Friday, destroying buildings and utilities and injuring one employee of the customs post.

By James Haleavy

 

RIA Novosti

RIA Novosti

Mali Begins Radio-Based Health Education

Health Radio
Share this
Share

Radio remains the dominant form of media in Africa, where most people do not have access to televisions and cannot always read newspapers, and the West African country of Mali has begun a new health program to educate people through the country’s most popular radio station.

“Innovation doesn’t always come in the form of the latest, cutting-edge technology,” said the Mali Health Organization Project’s Executive Director Kris Ansin, “We see radio as the ideal vector for health change among the poorest of the poor.”

Kibera-SlumsIn suburban slums–where populations are the fastest growing on the planet–crowding, land use and sanitation have created health challenges.

Health Radio was created with the intention of sparking discussion and acion in the homes and neighborhood in such slum areas, where health issues are most pressing. The radio program purposes to engage and organize slum communities to create positive change.

Some of the topics featured on the program are trash disposal, clean water and improved sanitation. The program also broadcasts crucial health information to empower users and inspire communities, with the intentions of promoting early detection of common maladies, lowering costs and saving lives.

tumblr_liizk5XM9y1qdcasso1_500Local businesses also play a part in the program, leveraging publicity and interest by distributing health supplies to participants.

Radio is a broadcast tool that is both low cost and scalable. By broadcasting Mali’s Health Radio into the daily lives of Malians, health has beem improved among the poor and the program has become a platform for better health.

 

By Day Blakely Donaldson

Sustania

Mali Health

Dying US Iraq War Army Veteran Attacks Bush and Cheney in Letter 

iraq war
Share this
Share
Dying US Army Veteran Attacks Bush and Cheney in Letter  (2)
Credit Claudia Cuellar

Recently, a letter penned by a dying Iraq War veteran has been garnering publicity. The letter, written by Thomas Young and addressed to Former US President George W. Bush and Former US Vice President Dick Cheney, criticizes the former American leaders for their role in the 2003-2011 Iraq War.

The letter was written as Young resided in hospice care. The 33-year-old Young was paralyzed in 2004 in Iraq.

The letter, Young wrote, was authored on behalf of the 4,500 dead Iraq war soldiers and Marines and the hundreds of thousands of veterans wounded in that war, as well as their families, and criticizes the “hallowness of character,” “cowardice” and “selfishness” of Bush and Cheney, who themselves, Young writes, dodged the Vietnam draft (Cheney) and went AWOL from a National Guard unit (Bush).

Young said he wrote the letter not because he thought Bush and Cheney would “grasp the terrible human and moral consequences of your lies, manipulation and thirst for wealth and power,” but because Young wanted before his death to “make it clear that I, and hundreds of thousands of my fellow veterans, along with millions of my fellow citizens, along with hundreds of millions more in Iraq and the Middle East, know fully who you are and what you have done.”

tomas-and-claudia“You may evade justice,” Young wrote, “but in our eyes you are each guilty of egregious war crimes, of plunder and, finally, of murder, including the murder of thousands of young Americans—my fellow veterans—whose future you stole.”

Young pointed out that preemptive war–such as the Iraq War–is “illegal under international law,” and stated that he did not sign up to fight in a war like the war in Iraq. Young considered that the war “obliterated the balance of power in the Middle East,” “installed a corrupt and brutal pro-Iranian government,” and “left Iran as the dominant force in the region.” Young wrote that the war was, on “every level—moral, strategic, military and economic,” a failure, and blamed Bush and Cheney for starting the war.

Young, who wrote that he and other soldiers were used, betrayed and abandoned, “would not have to lie in my bed, my body filled with painkillers, my life ebbing away, and deal with the fact that hundreds of thousands of human beings, including children, including myself, were sacrificed by you for little more than the greed of oil companies, for your alliance with the oil sheiks [sic] in Saudi Arabia, and your insane visions of empire.”Dying US Army Veteran Attacks Bush and Cheney in Letter  (1)

Young called on Bush and Cheney to find the moral courage to face what they had done and apologize to the American and Iraqi publics before they themselves died.

 

The full text of the letter (Spanish: (El Molino Online))

To: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
From: Thomas Young

I write this letter on the 10th anniversary of the Iraq War on behalf of my fellow Iraq War veterans. I write this letter on behalf of the 4,488 soldiers and Marines who died in Iraq. I write this letter on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of veterans who have been wounded and on behalf of those whose wounds, physical and psychological, have destroyed their lives. I am one of those gravely wounded. I was paralyzed in an insurgent ambush in 2004 in Sadr City. My life is coming to an end. I am living under hospice care.

I write this letter on behalf of husbands and wives who have lost spouses, on behalf of children who have lost a parent, on behalf of the fathers and mothers who have lost sons and daughters and on behalf of those who care for the many thousands of my fellow veterans who have brain injuries. I write this letter on behalf of those veterans whose trauma and self-revulsion for what they have witnessed, endured and done in Iraq have led to suicide and on behalf of the active-duty soldiers and Marines who commit, on average, a suicide a day. I write this letter on behalf of the some 1 million Iraqi dead and on behalf of the countless Iraqi wounded. I write this letter on behalf of us all—the human detritus your war has left behind, those who will spend their lives in unending pain and grief.

I write this letter, my last letter, to you, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. I write not because I think you grasp the terrible human and moral consequences of your lies, manipulation and thirst for wealth and power. I write this letter because, before my own death, I want to make it clear that I, and hundreds of thousands of my fellow veterans, along with millions of my fellow citizens, along with hundreds of millions more in Iraq and the Middle East, know fully who you are and what you have done. You may evade justice but in our eyes you are each guilty of egregious war crimes, of plunder and, finally, of murder, including the murder of thousands of young Americans—my fellow veterans—whose future you stole.

Your positions of authority, your millions of dollars of personal wealth, your public relations consultants, your privilege and your power cannot mask the hollowness of your character. You sent us to fight and die in Iraq after you, Mr. Cheney, dodged the draft in Vietnam, and you, Mr. Bush, went AWOL from your National Guard unit. Your cowardice and selfishness were established decades ago. You were not willing to risk yourselves for our nation but you sent hundreds of thousands of young men and women to be sacrificed in a senseless war with no more thought than it takes to put out the garbage.

I joined the Army two days after the 9/11 attacks. I joined the Army because our country had been attacked. I wanted to strike back at those who had killed some 3,000 of my fellow citizens. I did not join the Army to go to Iraq, a country that had no part in the September 2001 attacks and did not pose a threat to its neighbors, much less to the United States. I did not join the Army to “liberate” Iraqis or to shut down mythical weapons-of-mass-destruction facilities or to implant what you cynically called “democracy” in Baghdad and the Middle East. I did not join the Army to rebuild Iraq, which at the time you told us could be paid for by Iraq’s oil revenues. Instead, this war has cost the United States over $3 trillion. I especially did not join the Army to carry out pre-emptive war. Pre-emptive war is illegal under international law. And as a soldier in Iraq I was, I now know, abetting your idiocy and your crimes. The Iraq War is the largest strategic blunder in U.S. history. It obliterated the balance of power in the Middle East. It installed a corrupt and brutal pro-Iranian government in Baghdad, one cemented in power through the use of torture, death squads and terror. And it has left Iran as the dominant force in the region. On every level—moral, strategic, military and economic—Iraq was a failure. And it was you, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, who started this war. It is you who should pay the consequences.

I would not be writing this letter if I had been wounded fighting in Afghanistan against those forces that carried out the attacks of 9/11. Had I been wounded there I would still be miserable because of my physical deterioration and imminent death, but I would at least have the comfort of knowing that my injuries were a consequence of my own decision to defend the country I love. I would not have to lie in my bed, my body filled with painkillers, my life ebbing away, and deal with the fact that hundreds of thousands of human beings, including children, including myself, were sacrificed by you for little more than the greed of oil companies, for your alliance with the oil sheiks in Saudi Arabia, and your insane visions of empire.

I have, like many other disabled veterans, suffered from the inadequate and often inept care provided by the Veterans Administration. I have, like many other disabled veterans, come to realize that our mental and physical wounds are of no interest to you, perhaps of no interest to any politician. We were used. We were betrayed. And we have been abandoned. You, Mr. Bush, make much pretense of being a Christian. But isn’t lying a sin? Isn’t murder a sin? Aren’t theft and selfish ambition sins? I am not a Christian. But I believe in the Christian ideal. I believe that what you do to the least of your brothers you finally do to yourself, to your own soul.

My day of reckoning is upon me. Yours will come. I hope you will be put on trial. But mostly I hope, for your sakes, that you find the moral courage to face what you have done to me and to many, many others who deserved to live. I hope that before your time on earth ends, as mine is now ending, you will find the strength of character to stand before the American public and the world, and in particular the Iraqi people, and beg for forgiveness.

By Sid Douglas

Time Travel Simulated by Australian Physicists

Physicists at University of Queensland, Australia have simulated time travel using particles of light. The researchers achieved this by simulating the behavior of a single piece of light–a particle of energy–traveling on a closed timelike curve (CTC)–a closed path in space-time. The work may help to understand the longstanding problem of how time-travel could be possible in the quantum world and how the theory of quantum mechanics might change in the presence of closed timelike curves.

The work also shows how many effects, forbidden in standard quantum mechanics, may be possible inside a CTC and how light would behave differently depending on how it was created.

Martin Ringbauer
Martin Ringbauer

In the study, the research team simulated the behavior of a single photon that travels through a wormhole and interacts with its older self. This was achieved, PhD student Martin Ringbauer told The Speaker, by making use of a mathematical equivalence between two cases. In the first case, photon 1 “travels trough a wormhole into the past, then interacts with its older version.” In the second case, photon 2 “travels through normal space-time, but interacts with another photon that is trapped inside a CTC forever” (as shown in the illustration at top of the article).  “Using the (fictitious second case) and simulating the behavior of photon 2, we were able to study the more relevant case 1,” said Ringbauer.

“We used single photons to do this,” said UQ Physics Professor Tim Ralph, “but the time-travel was simulated by using a second photon to play the part of the past incarnation of the time travelling photon.”

The paper, “Experimental Simulation of Closed Timelike Curves,” was completed by University of Queensland’s Dr Matthew Broome, Dr Casey Myers, Professor Andrew White, in addition to Professor Ralph and Martin Ringbauer, supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Engineered Quantum Systems and Centre of Excellence for Quantum Computation and Communication Technology, and was published in Nature Communications.

In the team’s press briefing, Ringbauer commented on the relationship between the theory of general relativity and another important–but conflicting–theory, quantum mechanics. Time travel is thought to potentially help understanding the gap between the two schools of thought.

“The question of time travel features at the interface between two of our most successful yet incompatible physical theories – Einstein’s general relativity and quantum mechanics,” said Ringbauer.

Time travel in the quantum world may avoid general relativity paradoxes such as the grandparents paradox–a timetraveller preventing his grandparents from meeting and so preventing his own time travel.

The authors of the study believe that such paradoxes can be resolved in a quantum regime, because a quantum model of closed timelike curves–such as traversable wormholes–can be formulated consistently with relativity”

Ringbauer explained the concept to The Speaker this way: “General relativity predicts the existence of closed timelike curves (e.g. by following a path through a wormhole that connects two different temporal locations in space-time). This would allow travel back in time. In the classical world this is unlikely to be possible, since it causes paradoxes, such as the grandfather paradox. In the quantum world, however, these paradoxes are resolved and time-travel can be formulated in a self-consistent way.”

Part of the reason time travel could be freed from such paradoxes in the quantum world is that the properties of quantum particles are “fuzzy” and “uncertain,” and therefore there is “wriggle room” to avoid inconsistencies in such situations, according to Professor Ralph.

Tim Ralph
Tim Ralph

Although Ralph said that there was no evidence that nature behaved differently than the laws of standard quantum mechanics, it had not been tested in vastly different environments, such as near black holes, where the extreme effects of general relativity play a role.

This is the value of the study, said Ralph. “Our study provides insights into where and how nature might behave differently from what our theories predict.”

“We see in our simulation (as was predicted in 1991),” Ringbauer stated, “how many effects become possible, which are forbidden in standard quantum mechanics. For example it is possible to perfectly distinguish different states of a quantum system, which are usually only partially distinguishable. This makes quantum cryptography breakable and violates Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. We also show that photons behave differently, depending on how they were created in the first place.”

Nature Communications

Press Release

University of Queensland

Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has “Amazing” Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent

iron ore
Share this
Share

In 2012, California businessman Russ George illegally dumped 120 tons of iron sulfide over a 25,000 kilometer (15,000 mile) square area off the British Columbia coast in order to create a massive algae bloom to feed Pacific fish and increase catches. Now, salmon runs are setting a new records to the tune of an added 100,000 tons, and the results have been hailed a “a stunningly over-the-top success” in addition to being criticized by more wary environmental groups.

Russ George
Russ George

Russ George initiated the precedent-setting iron sulfide test in July 2012. The test involved a geoengineering technique called ocean fertilization, whereby plankton are nourished with carbon dioxide–a source of nutrition which has decreased by 25 percent in recent decades. Russ George hoped to gain lucrative carbon credits from the project.

Iron commonly reaches offshore algae by being blown into the sea by dust storms on land, and sometimes iron enrichment occurs naturally, such as after the 2008 eruption of the Kasatochi volcano in Alaska, which spewed mineral-rich ash into the Northeast Pacific Ocean salmon pasture, causing the 2010 “volcano miracle salmon run.”

Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (1)Iron nourishes the marine food cycle from the ground up, directly feeding zooplankton, which feed young salmon, which in turn feed larger fish and sea mammals.

Some of the waters that George seeded with iron, in the words of Timothy Parsons, professor emeritus of fisheries science at the University of British Columbia, were so nutrient-poor as to be a “virtual desert dominated by jellyfish.”

The iron sulphide was applied thinly from a fishing boat in an eddy 370 kilometers (200 miles) off the HaidaIllegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (15) Gwaii/Queen Charlotte Islands, after George convinced the Old Masset village council to establish the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation (HSRC) and offered to fund the Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (2)project with $1 million of his own money. The corporation was also funded by $2.5 borrowed money from a Canadian credit union. The area covered by the dump was 25,657 km square, roughly the size of Lake Erie.

Evidence of the massive artificial plankton bloom has been provided by satellite images. The bloom is as large as 10,000 km square–10 times larger than any previous test.Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (1)

Although the dump was illegal under Canadian Law (due to its scale) and United Nations resolutions (See herehere and here) , and although the Canadian government raided the headquarters of the offices of HSRC and George was compelled to resign from the HSRC presidency, recent evidence has suggested that the Canadian government may have known about the geoengineering scheme, but not stopped it.

George said of the project, “Let’s not make this a story all about CO2 and Carbon… it’s really about whether the ocean pastures come back to the abundance of life that they and we enjoyed 100 years ago. My hypothesis is that if we can help replenish and restore the ocean pastures we will see the results in the one thing that mankind is most connected to the ocean by, it’s FISH!

“Indeed my experiment, which at a size of 30,000+ sq. km. is perhaps the largest single experiment of its kind ever conducted, has demonstrated that the fish come back in incredible abundance, quickly… All species of fish have responded but the best data comes from those fish who swim back to us instead of making us go hunt them down.”

It appears that fish catches in the area have increased massively. It is estimated that the dump boosted catches by over 100,000 tons.

The largest run of Pink salmon–which take two years to mature–occurred 12-20 months after the iron seeding project took place.Salmon are able to grow bigger in rich environments and more frequently reach catchable size. In a rich ocean environment, salmon can gain more than one pound per month, it has been reported.

Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (7)In the northeast Pacific Ocean, salmon catches more than quadrupled–from 50 million to 226 million–and in BC’s Fraser River, where catches only once exceeded 25 million, 72 million fish were caught.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game recently completed an assessment of the 2013 commercial salmon fishery. With the record pink salmon harvest of 219 million fish, the 2013 harvest ranks as the second most valuable on record. In 2013 the value of the Pink harvest was $691.1 million, below only the 1988 harvest value of $724 million. The total number of salmon harvested also set a new record at 272 million fish, well above the expected 50
million. .

Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (10)This years Fraser River Sockeye salmon run is projected to be at a record high as well–twice the previous record set in 1900. Up to 72 million Sockeye are expected. In history, the number has not exceeded 45 million.

Some have hailed the project as a boon, such as leading sustainability media outlet Treehugger, who said George’s results “had truly amazing, positive impact,” and Robert Zubin, who in a piece for the National Review called the experiment “a stunningly over-the-top success.”

Other environmentalists have targeted the Haida First Nations and George for tampering with the marine environment.

“It appears to be a blatant violation of two international resolutions,” said senior high-seas adviser for the International Union for Conservation of Nature Kristina Gjerde. “Even the placement of iron particles into the ocean, whether for carbon sequestration or fish replenishment, should not take place, unless it is assessed and found to be legitimate scientific research without commercial motivation. This does not appear to even have had the guise of legitimate scientific research.”

Illegally Dumping Iron Ore Into Pacific Coast Water Has Amazing Positive Impact, Increases Fish 400 Percent (14)
George with algae bloom

“It is now more urgent than ever that governments unequivocally ban such open-air geoengineering experiments,” said Silvia Ribeiro, of the international anti-technology watchdog ETC Group. “They are a dangerous distraction providing governments and industry with an excuse to avoid reducing fossil-fuel emissions.”

One of the witnesses to an unprecedented 2012 orca group sighting commented, “If Mr. George’s account of the mission is to believed, his actions created an algae bloom in an area half of the size of Massachusetts that attracted a huge array of aquatic life, including whales that could be ‘counted by the score.’ . . . I began to wonder: could it be that the orcas I saw were on the way to the all you can eat seafood buffet that had descended on Mr. George’s bloom? The possibility . . . provides a glimpse into the disturbing repercussions of geoengineering: once we start deliberately interfering with the earth’s climate systems — whether by dimming the sun or fertilizing the seas — all natural events can begin to take on an unnatural tinge. . . . a presence that felt like a miraculous gift suddenly feels sinister, as if all of nature were being manipulated behind the scenes.”

Specific criticisms of the project include an idea of “ocean dead zones,” which result from too much plankton. George has responded to this criticism by saying that iron seeding “can only work in regions of the ocean far out to sea and where the water is miles deep… such locations are as different from the shallow near shore regions where ocean dead zones exist as are grasslands and mountain tops… .”

Another criticism is that the nourishment may create toxic blooms and “domoic acid.” George has responded to this criticism by saying that previous blooms in many areas did not cause such a feature in the ocean.

By James Haleaby

Alaska Department of Fish and Game

Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation/Simon Fraser University

Treehugger

Lions Bay

US Fish and Wildlife Services

Russ George

Next Big Future

National Review

iO9

Morales Delivers “Indispensable” Speech at 77 Plus China Meeting

evo morales
Share this
Share

During the 50 years since the first meeting of the group that would become today’s 77 plus China (which now comprises 133 countries plus China), the participating nations have moved past a trade group that advances collective interests toward “a new world economic order, a responsible approach to climate change, and economic relations based on preferential treatment,” within which “the peoples’ self-determination and sovereignty over their natural resources must be highlighted, Bolivian President Evo Morales said in a speech addressing the 77 Plus China meeting.” Morales said that people must create a new economic world because it was not only possible, but indispensable.

Morales Delivers Indispensable Speech at 77 Plus China Meeting (2)

In the speech, Morales pointed out that not only is the vastly unequal distribution of humanity’s assets unfair, but it is also “generating a structural crisis that is becoming unsustainable over time.

“We are also faced with an energy crisis that is driven by excessive consumption in developed countries, pollution from energy sources and the energy hoarding practices of the transnational corporations,” Morales said. “The climate crisis is caused by the anarchy of capitalist production… .”

Morales noted the massive inflation of greenhouse gasses to 400 ppm and the scarcity of water. “The water shortage in many parts of the planet is leading to armed conflicts and wars that further aggravate the lack of availability of this non-renewable resource.”

Morales also spoke of the impending food crisis expected to be caused by the increase in population and decrease in food-producing lands.

“As a result of all these developments” said Morales, “peoples’ social rights are endangered. The promise of equality and justice for the whole world becomes more and more remote and nature itself is threatened with extinction. We have reached a limit, and global action is urgently needed to save society, humanity and Mother Earth.”

Morales detailed efforts Bolivia has made to turn the tide from environmental catastrophe, and the Vivir Bien philosophy and policy.

“It means placing Nature at the core of life and regarding the human being as just another creature of Nature,” Morales stated. “Comprehensive development is only viable if applied worldwide, if the states, in conjunction with their respective peoples, exercise control over all of their energy resources.”

Morales advised sovereignty exercised over natural resources and strategic areas, well-being for everyone and the provision of basic services as a human right, emancipation from the existing international financial system and construction of a new financial architecture, the building of a major economic, scientific, technological and cultural partnership among the members of the group of 77 plus China, eradication of hunger among the world’s peoples, the strengthening of the sovereignty of states free from foreign interference, intervention and/or espionage, the democratic renewal of our states, and for the Southern Hemisphere to increase its presence and status in the world.

“Only we can save the source of life and society,” said Morales. “Mother Earth, our planet is under a death threat from predatory and insane capitalism. Another world is not only possible, it is indispensable, because, otherwise, no world will be possible.”

 

Full text of speech, translated by Richard Fidler 

For a Global Brotherhood Among the Peoples

Evo Morales Ayma

Fifty years ago, great leaders raised the flags of the anticolonial struggle and decided to join with their peoples in a march along the path of sovereignty and independence.

The world superpowers and transnationals were competing for control of territories and natural resources in order to continue expanding at the cost of impoverishing the peoples of the South.

In that context, on June 15, 1964, at the conclusion of an UNCTAD [United Nations Conference on Trade and Development] meeting, 77 countries from the South (we are now 133 plus China) met to enhance their trade bargaining capacities, by acting in a bloc to advance their collective interests while respecting their individual sovereign decisions.

During the past 50 years, these countries went beyond their statements and promoted resolutions at the United Nations and joint action in favor of development underpinned by South-South cooperation, a new world economic order, a responsible approach to climate change, and economic relations based on preferential treatment.

In this journey the struggle for decolonization as well as for the peoples’ self-determination and sovereignty over their natural resources must be highlighted.

Notwithstanding these efforts and struggles for equality and justice for the world’s peoples, the hierarchies and inequalities in the world have increased.

Today, 10 countries in the world control 40% of the world’s total wealth and 15 transnational corporations control 50% of global output.

Today, as 100 years ago, acting in the name of the free market and democracy, a handful of imperial powers invades countries, blocks trade, imposes prices on the rest of the world, chokes national economies, plots against progressive governments and resorts to espionage against the inhabitants of this planet.

A tiny elite of countries and transnational corporations controls, in an authoritarian fashion, the destinies of the world, its economies and its natural resources.

The economic and social inequality between regions, between countries, between social classes and between individuals has grown outrageously.

About 0.1% of the world’s population owns 20% of humanity’s assets. In 1920, a business manager in the United States made 20 times the wage of a worker, but today he is paid 331 times that wage.

This unfair concentration of wealth and predatory destruction of nature are also generating a structural crisis that is becoming unsustainable over time.

It is indeed a structural crisis. It impacts every component of capitalist development. In other words, it is a mutually reinforcing crisis affecting international finance, energy, climate, water, food, institutions and values. It is a crisis inherent to capitalist civilization.

The financial crisis was prompted by the greedy pursuit of profits from financial capital that led to profound international financial speculation, a practice that favored certain groups, transnational corporations or power centers that amassed great wealth.

The financial bubbles that generate speculative gains eventually burst, and in the process they plunged into poverty the workers who had received cheap credit, the middle-class savings-account holders who had trusted their deposits to greedy speculators. The latter overnight went bankrupt or took their capital to other countries, thus leading entire nations into bankruptcy.

We are also faced with an energy crisis that is driven by excessive consumption in developed countries, pollution from energy sources and the energy hoarding practices of the transnational corporations.

Parallel with this, we witness a global reduction in reserves and high costs of oil and gas development, while productive capacity drops due to the gradual depletion of fossil fuels and global climate change.

The climate crisis is caused by the anarchy of capitalist production, with consumption levels and unharnessed industrialization that have resulted in excessive emissions of polluting gases that in turn have led to global warming and natural disasters affecting the entire world.

For more than 15,000 years prior to the era of capitalist industrialization, greenhouse gases did not amount to more than 250 parts per million molecules in the atmosphere.

Since the 19th century, and in particular in the 20th and 21st centuries, thanks to the actions of predatory capitalism, this count has risen to 400 ppm, and global warming has become an irreversible process along with weather disasters the primary impacts of which are felt in the poorest and most vulnerable countries of the South, and in particular the island nations, as a result of the thawing of the glaciers.

In turn, global warming is generating a water supply crisis that is compounded by privatization, depletion of sources and commercialization of fresh water. As a consequence, the number of people without access to potable water is growing apace.

The water shortage in many parts of the planet is leading to armed conflicts and wars that further aggravate the lack of availability of this non-renewable resource.

The world population is growing while food production is dropping, and these trends are leading to a food crisis.

Add to these issues the reduction of food-producing lands, the imbalances between urban and rural areas, the monopoly exercised by transnational corporations over the marketing of seeds and agricultural inputs, and the speculation in food prices.

The imperial model of concentration and speculation has also caused an institutional crisis that is characterized by an unequal and unjust distribution of power in the world in particular within the UN system, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.

As a result of all these developments, peoples’ social rights are endangered. The promise of equality and justice for the whole world becomes more and more remote and nature itself is threatened with extinction.

We have reached a limit, and global action is urgently needed to save society, humanity and Mother Earth.

Bolivia has started to take steps to address these issues. Up to 2005, Bolivia applied a neoliberal policy that resulted in concentration of wealth, social inequality and poverty, increasing marginalization, discrimination and social exclusion.

In Bolivia, the historic struggles waged by social movements, in particular the indigenous peasant movement, have allowed us to initiate a Democratic and Cultural Revolution, through the ballot box and without the use of violence. This revolution is rooting out exclusion, exploitation, hunger and hatred, and it is rebuilding the path of balance, complementarity, and consensus with its own identity, Vivir Bien.

Beginning in 2006, the Bolivian government introduced a new economic and social policy, enshrined in a new community-based socio-economic and productive model, the pillars of which are nationalization of natural resources, recovery of the economic surplus for the benefit of all Bolivians, redistribution of the wealth, and active participation of the State in the economy.

In 2006, the Bolivian government and people made their most significant political, economic and social decision: nationalization of the country’s hydrocarbons, the central axis of our revolution. The state thereby participates in and controls the ownership of our hydrocarbons and processes our natural gas.

Contrary to the neoliberal prescription that economic growth ought to be based on external market demand (“export or die”), our new model has relied on a combination of exports with a domestic market growth that is primarily driven by income-redistribution policies, successive increases in the national minimum wage, annual salary increases in excess of the inflation rate, cross subsidies and conditional cash transfers to the neediest.

As a consequence, the Bolivian GDP has increased from $9.0 billion to over $30.0 billion over the past eight years.

Our nationalized hydrocarbons, economic growth and cost austerity policy have helped the country generate budget surpluses for eight years in a row, in sharp contrast with the recurrent budget deficits experienced by Bolivia for more than 66 years.

When we took over the country’s administration, the ratio between the wealthiest and poorest Bolivians was 128 fold. This ratio has been cut down to 46 fold. Bolivia now is one of the top six countries in our region with the best income distribution.

It has been shown that the peoples have options and that we can overcome the fate imposed by colonialism and neoliberalism.

These achievements produced in such a short span are attributable to the social and political awareness of the Bolivian people.

We have recovered our nation for all of us. Ours was a nation that had been alienated by the neoliberal model, a nation that lived under the old and evil system of political parties, a nation that was ruled from abroad, as if we were a colony.

We are no longer an unviable country as we were described by the international financial institutions. We are no longer an ungovernable country as the US empire would have us believe.

Today, the Bolivian people have recovered their dignity and pride, and we believe in our strength, our destiny and ourselves.

I want to tell the entire world in the most humble terms that the only wise architects who can change their future are the peoples themselves.

Therefore, we intend to build another world, and several tasks have been designed to establish the society of Vivir Bien.

First: We must move from sustainable development to comprehensive development [desarrollo integral] so that we can live well and in harmony and balance with Mother Earth.

We need to construct a vision that is different from the western capitalist development model. We must move from the sustainable development paradigm to the Bien Vivir comprehensive development approach that seeks not only a balance among human beings, but also a balance and harmony with our Mother Earth.

No development model can be sustainable if production destroys Mother Earth as a source of life and our own existence. No economy can be long-lasting if it generates inequalities and exclusions.

No progress is just and desirable if the well-being of some is at the expense of the exploitation and impoverishment of others.

Vivir Bien Comprehensive Development means providing well-being for everyone, without exclusions. It means respect for the diversity of economies of our societies. It means respect for local knowledge. It means respect for Mother Earth and its biodiversity as a source of nurture for future generations.

Vivir Bien Comprehensive Development also means production to satisfy actual needs, and not to expand profits infinitely.

It means distributing wealth and healing the wounds caused by inequality, rather than widening injustice.

It means combining modern science with the age-old technological wisdom held by the indigenous, native and peasant peoples who interact respectfully with nature.

It means listening to the people, rather than the financial markets.

It means placing Nature at the core of life and regarding the human being as just another creature of Nature.

The Vivir Bien Comprehensive Development model of respect for Mother Earth is not an ecologist economy for poor countries alone, while the rich nations expand inequality and destroy Nature.

Comprehensive development is only viable if applied worldwide, if the states, in conjunction with their respective peoples, exercise control over all of their energy resources.

We need technologies, investments, production and credits, as well as companies and markets, but we shall not subordinate them to the dictatorship of profits and luxury. Instead, we must place them at the service of the peoples to satisfy their needs and to expand our common goods and services.

Second: Sovereignty exercised over natural resources and strategic areas.

Countries that have raw materials should and can take sovereign control over production and processing of those materials.

Nationalization of strategic companies and areas can help the state take over the management of production, exercise sovereign control over its wealth, embark on a planning process that leads to the processing of raw materials, and distribute the profit among its people.

Exercising sovereignty over natural resources and strategic areas does not mean isolation from global markets; rather, it means connecting to those markets for the benefit of our countries, and not f the benefit of a few private owners. Sovereignty over natural resources and strategic areas does not mean preventing foreign capital and technologies from participating. It means subordinating these investments and technologies to the needs of each country.

Third: Well-being for everyone and the provision of basic services as a human right

The worst tyranny faced by humankind is allowing basic services to be under the control of transnational corporations. This practice subjugates humanity to the specific interests and commercial aims of a minority who become rich and powerful at the expense of the life and security of other persons.

This is why we claim that basic services are inherent to the human condition. How can a human being live without potable water, electrical energy or communications? If human rights are to make us all equal, this equality can only be realized through universal access to basic services. Our need for water, like our need for light and communications, makes us all equal.

The resolution of social inequities requires that both international law and the national legislation of each country define basic services (such as water, power supply, communications and basic health care) as a fundamental human right of every individual.

This means that states have a legal obligation to secure the universal provision of basic services, irrespective of costs or profits.

Fourth: Emancipation from the existing international financial system and construction of a new financial architecture

We propose that we free ourselves from the international financial yoke by building a new financial system that prioritizes the requirements of the productive operations in the countries of the South, within the context of comprehensive development.

We must incorporate and enhance banks of the South that support industrial development projects, reinforce regional and domestic markets, and promote trade among our countries, but on the basis of complementarity and solidarity.

We also need to promote sovereign regulation over the global financial transactions that threaten the stability of our national economies.

We must design an international mechanism for restructuring our debts, which serve to reinforce the dependence of the peoples of the South and strangle their development possibilities.

We must replace international financial institutions such as the IMF with other entities that provide for a better and broader participation of the countries of the South in their decision-making structures that are currently in the grip of imperial powers.

We also need to define limits to gains from speculation and to excessive accumulation of wealth.

Fifth: Build a major economic, scientific, technological and cultural partnership among the members of the group of 77 plus China

After centuries under colonial rule, transfers of wealth to imperial metropolises and impoverishment of our economies, the countries of the South have begun to regain decisive importance in the performance of the world economy.

Asia, Africa and Latin America are not only home to 77% of the world’s population, but they also account for nearly 43% of the world economy. And this importance is on the rise. The peoples of the South are the future of the world.

Immediate actions must be taken to reinforce and plan this inescapable global trend.

We need to expand trade among the countries of the South. We also need to gear our productive operations to the requirements of other economies in the South on the basis of complementarity of needs and capacities.

We need to implement technology transfer programs among the countries of the South. Not every country acting on its own can achieve the technological sovereignty and leadership that are critical for a new global economy based on justice.

Science must be an asset of humanity as a whole. Science must be placed at the service of everyone’s well-being, without exclusions or hegemonies. A decent future for all the peoples around the world will require integration for liberation, rather than cooperation for domination.

To discharge these worthy tasks to the benefit of the peoples of the world, we have invited Russia and other foreign countries that are our brothers in needs and commitments to join the Group of 77.

Our Group of 77 alliance does not have an institution of its own to give effect to the approaches, statements and action plans of our countries. For this reason, Bolivia proposes that an Institute For Decolonization and South-South Co-operation be established.

This institute will be charged with provision of technical assistance to the countries of the South, as well as further implementation of the proposals made by the Group of 77 plus China.

The institute will also supply technical and capacity-building assistance for development and self-determination, and it will help conduct research projects. We propose that this institute be headquartered in Bolivia.

Sixth: Eradicate hunger among the world’s peoples

It is imperative that hunger be eradicated and that the human right to food be fully exercised and enforced.

Food production must be prioritized with the involvement of small growers and indigenous peasant communities that hold age-old knowledge in regard to this activity.

To be successful in hunger eradication, the countries of the South must lay down the conditions for democratic and equitable access to land ownership, so that monopolies over this resource are not allowed to persist in the form of latifundia. However, fragmentation into small and unproductive plots must not be encouraged either.

Food sovereignty and security must be enhanced through access to healthy foods for the benefit of the people.

The monopoly held by transnational corporations over the supply of farm inputs must be eliminated as a way to foster food security and sovereignty.

Each country must make sure that the supply of the basic food staples consumed by its people is secured by enhancing productive, cultural and environmental practices, and by promoting people-to-people exchanges on the basis of solidarity. Governments have an obligation to ensure the supply of power, the availability of road connections and access to water and organic fertilizers.

Seventh: Strengthen the sovereignty of states free from foreign interference, intervention and/or espionage

Within the framework of the United Nations, a new institutional structure must be promoted in support of a New World Order for Vivir Bien.

The institutions that emerged after World War II, including the United Nations, are in need of a thorough reform today.

International agencies that promote peace, eliminate global hegemonism and advance equality among states are required.

For this reason, the UN Security Council must be abolished. Rather than fostering peace among nations, this body has promoted wars and invasions by imperial powers in their quest for the natural resources available in the invaded countries. Instead of a Security Council, today we have an insecurity council of imperial wars.

No country, no institution and no interest can justify the invasion of one country by another. The sovereignty of states and the internal resolution of the conflicts that exist in any country are the foundation of peace and of the United Nations.

I stand here to denounce the unjust economic blockade imposed on Cuba and the aggressive and illegal policies pursued by the US government against Venezuela, including a legislative initiative offered at the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee designed to apply sanctions to that country to the detriment of its sovereignty and political independence, a clear breach of the principles and purposes of the UN Charter.

These forms of persecution and internationally driven coups are the traits of modern colonialism, the colonial practices of our era.

These are our times, the times of the South. We must be able to overcome and heal the wounds caused by fratricidal wars stirred by foreign capitalist interests. We must strengthen our integration schemes in support of our peaceful coexistence, our development and our faith in shared values, such as justice.

Only by standing together will we be able to give decent lives to our peoples.

Eighth: Democratic renewal of our states

The era of empires, colonial hierarchies and financial oligarchies is coming to an end. Everywhere we look, we see peoples around the world calling for their right to play their leading role in history.

The 21st century must be the century of the peoples, the workers, the farmers, the indigenous communities, the youth and the women. In other words, it must be the century of the oppressed.

The realization of the peoples’ leading role requires that democracy be renewed and strengthened. We must supplement electoral democracy with participatory and community-based democracy.

We must move away from limited parliamentary and party-based governance and into the social governance of democracy.

This means that the decision-making process in any state must take into consideration its parliamentary deliberations, but also the deliberations by the social movements that incorporate the life-giving energy of our peoples.

The renovation of democracy in this century also requires that political action represents a full and permanent service to life. This service constitutes an ethical, humane and moral commitment to our peoples, to the humblest masses.

For this purpose, we must reinstate the codes of our ancestors: no robar, no mentir, no ser flujo y no ser adulón [do not steal, do not lie, do not be weak and do not flatter].

Democracy also means distribution of wealth and expansion of the common goods shared by society.

Democracy means subordination of rulers to the decisions of the ruled.

Democracy is not a personal benefit vested in the rulers, nor is it abuse of power. Democracy means serving the people with love and self-sacrifice. Democracy means dedication of time, knowledge, effort and even life itself in the pursuit of the well-being of the peoples and humanity.

Ninth: A new world rising from the south for the whole of humanity

The time has come for the nations of the South.

In the past, we were colonized and enslaved. Our stolen labour built empires in the North.

Today, with every step we take for our liberation, the empires grow decadent and begin to crumble.

However, our liberation is not only the emancipation of the peoples of the South. Our liberation is also for the whole of humanity. We are not fighting to dominate anyone. We are fighting to ensure that no one becomes dominated.

Only we can save the source of life and society: Mother Earth. Our planet is under a death threat from the greed of predatory and insane capitalism.

Today, another world is not only possible, it is indispensable.

Today, another world is indispensable because, otherwise, no world will be possible.

And that other world of equality, complementarity and organic coexistence with Mother Earth can only emerge from the thousands of languages, colours and cultures existing in brotherhood and sisterhood among the Peoples of the South.

(Santa Cruz, 14 June 2014)

By Sid Douglas

In 1988 When Al Qaeda was Formed There Were Three Jihadist Groups; in 2001 There Were 22; Today There Are 49

al qaeda
Share this
Share

Since the founding of al Qaeda in 1988 by Osama bin Laden and two other foreign nationals in Pakistan, the terrorist organization has been successful in creating new branches and offshoots. A new study from RAND Institute says that in 1988 when al Qaeda was founded, there were three jihadist groups. In 2001 there were 22. Today there are 49.

The RAND report, “A Persistent Threat The Evolution of al Qa’ida and Other Salafi Jihadists,” was written by Seth Jones, the associate director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at RAND for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The report aimed to gauge the state of al Qa’ida and other Salafi-Jihadist groups, and based its finding on thousands of unclassified and declassified documents.

The report found that the US faces a serious and growing challenge overseas, although al Qaeda still kills many more Muslims thanIn 1980 When Al Qaeda was Formed There Were Three Jihadist Groups; in 2001 There Were 22; Today There Are 49 (13) non-Muslims, as the number of Salafi-Jihadists (characterized by attempting to emulate the earliest Muslims [salaf – “ancestors”]) groups has steadily increased, particularly in North Africa and the Levant. The number of Salafi-Jihadists has also risen steadily, and jumped markedly in 2010. The number of fighters doubled between 2010 and 2013, In 1980 When Al Qaeda was Formed There Were Three Jihadist Groups; in 2001 There Were 22; Today There Are 49 (12)according to both high and low estimates.

The number of differentiated–and sometimes separated–groups has surprised many in the West, who conceive of al Qaeda as a single group tied almost exclusively to terrorist actions. This is a misunderstanding, according to foremost experts in the field.

Tom Joscelyn, senior editor at the Long War Journal whose expertise is terrorism, commented on the Western misunderstanding.

Read more: Fascinating Look at ISIS by Analyst Before the Takeover, Reveals Predictions and Warnings

“I think there’s an intellectual confusion about what Al Qaeda is and how it operates,” Joscelynn recently said in an interview. “We still define–here in the West–we still define al Qaeda as a terrorist organization. We think big spectacular terrorist attacks are what they’re all about. They do do that. They are a terrorist organization. But they’re much more than that: they’re political revolutionaries who use terrorism as a tactic. And when you properly understand them in those terms, you understand they have designs on Libya, they have designs on Syria, they have designs on Yemen, Somalia, and other countries. They want to take control. They want power for themselves. That’s a very different dynamic than someone who’s just interested in flying planes into buildings.”

Al Qaeda members today have careers going back decades, building up their cadres of supporters–trained fighters–establishing training camps, and pushing their agendas forward.

The RAND study details examples of how Salafi-Jihadists have moved up and on from origins in al Qaeda, and become successful in many regions of the world.

One such example is the Egyptian Muhammad Jamal, who trained in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan in the late 1980s before returning to his home country to become a top military commander for Islamic Jihad in Egypt. Jamal was released from prison in 2011, and took advantage of the permissive climate following the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak, to strengthen his position among a network of militants he had met before and during his prison time. With support from his relations within al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the Arabian Peninsula, Jamal and his group have been committing attacks against Egyptian, US and Western targets.

In countries such as Mali, Nigeria, Libya and Syria Salafi-Jihadists have similarly moved up the ranks and consolidated power and influence, and have also used customary political tactics to increase their authority. For example, a jihadist group that receives sanctuary in Libya, Ansar al-Sharia, has used a portrayal as a local movement to gain popular support. The groups has described their fighters as “our brave youth [who] continue the struggle,” provided security at a local hospital, publicized its charity work and used political slogans such as “Your Sons at Your Service.”

Other groups have pursued a priority of attacking Western interests–sometimes splitting from al Qaeda to do so, and sometimes joining with al Qaeda to do so. Mokhtar Belmokhtar’s al-Murabitun, which operates in North Africa and Africa, split from al Qaeda in 2012 to pursue such attacks. In Tunisia, an Ansar al-Sharia partnered with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb for a similar cause.

In a conference earlier this year, Joscelyn stated a conclusion about al Qaeda. “Al Qaeda set out in 1988 to spark a political revolution to inspire jihadism around the globe. They’ve succeeded. We’ve still not come up with a real strategy for containing or combatting that across the board.”

By Day Blakely Donaldson

RAND

CTC

Fascinating Look at ISIS by Analyst Before the Takeover, Reveals Predictions and Warnings

isis
Share this
Share

The breakaway faction of al Qaeda ISIS, which disobeyed al Qaeda orders–and flouted it–while another branch of al Qaeda in the area, Ahrar a-Sham, was towing the al Qaeda line of building popular support in Syria and waging a

Fascinating Look at ISIS by Analyst Before the Takeover, Reveals Predictions and Warnings (5)more effective insurgency–captured large sections of Iraq in the first half of June with a grossly underestimated force. In this article, a fascinating retrospective take on ISIS from February of this year gives us a look on how al Qaeda and terrorist experts viewed ISIS before the attacks–as “a test case” of what would actually happen when a significant al Qaeda affiliate group broke loose from the core.

Fascinating Look at ISIS by Analyst Before the Takeover, Reveals Predictions and Warnings (2)
Gartenstein-Ross

Counter-terrorism scholar and analyst Daveed Gartenstein-Ross commented on the then-recent rebellion of ISIS in February of this year.

“You’ve certainly had infighting before. Algeria and that civil war is a good example of where you had significant splits in terms of the approach to that conflict. But in terms of this specific event, the degree to which it has happened, I would say is not precedented. It presents a very interesting situation.

“I think this presents the possibility of either fragmentation or else a strong cautionary tale to other affiliates. With respect to fragmentation, the reason why ISIS was expelled from al Qaeda is because they were basically openly flouting the central commands orders. There was infighting that was occuring within Syria and Zawahari had ordered ISIS to take part in mediation with other Jihadist groups including Jabat al Nusura. And ISIS was making a lot of noise about complying, but in fact they weren’t doing it. And so the order that came down on Sunday expelling ISIS was a rather shocking one in the world of Jihadism, which has sent immediate shock waves through that world.

“So if ISIS thrives, despite the fact that it was expelled from al Qaeda, this could, number one, make other organizations, other affiliates, say, ‘Well, what is the cost to me if I disobey senior leadership?’ Number two, they could attract some funding from traditional al Qaeda donors. Number three, you can already see on Jihadist message boards some kind of tensions that have been caused, where some members of these message boards and some Jihadists on Twitter and elsewhere are falling in with ISIS as opposed to al Qaeda.

“On the other hand, what you may have happening is ISIS being the one that fragments rather than al Qaeda. And you can already see some signs of this. For example, Abdullah al Massini, a prominent Saudi cleric who is pro-Jihadist, has called on ISIS fighters to defect. you have reports of some defections from ISIS. You may see serious fragmentation within it with splinter-groups that consider themselves loyal to al Qaeda’s core, as opposed to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who is the leader of ISIS.

“So there are very interesting things that are going to emerge from this,” Gartenstein-Ross continued, referring to mechanisms of command and control. “I think actually this is a very fascinating test case where we’ll actually start to see those mechanisms of control… but you can already see multiple clerics coming down and condemning ISIS. You might see some of their funding dry up. I don’t think you’ll see this immediately, but it actually really is a test-case because because at this point it has sent… an absolute shockwave through Jihadism and one that is going to change the dynamics in one direction or another.”

Daveed Gartenstein-Ross recently published a new article on ISIS, “Welcome to the era of ISIS – and pop-up terror,” in which he wrote, “We’ve seen it all before, but it remains shocking — and the latest advance by the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is arguably the most disturbing development in Iraq’s already horrifying recent history.” Gartenstein-Ross asked in the article, “How long can the group sustain these gains?”

“An examination of what might follow the jihadist groups’ inevitable setbacks shows a disturbing trend,” wrote Gartenstein-Ross. “ISIS is far from the only Islamic extremist movement to control territory and implement a strict version of sharia. Looking at groups that have done so, a clear pattern emerges in which the extremist group gains ground, announces the imposition of sharia, and governs territory. This alarms nearby states, and often those that are further away as well.

“So the extremist group’s enemies strike. They topple it from power rather quickly. Although non-state militants are formidable, they have no real response to their enemies’ air-power advantage, and haven’t been able to hold territory against the advance of professional militaries. The extremist group does its best to melt away rather than face a decisive battlefield defeat. It regroups with the intention of coming back stronger than before.

“The disturbing thing is the frequency with which militant groups are able to succeed in mounting this comeback.” Gartenstein-Ross listed several examples, including the Afghan-Soviet war and the Taliban which came to control 90 percent of Afghanistan. “After 13 years of costly war in Afghanistan, it’s now widely believed that the Taleban will remain one of the country’s most important players, and it is poised to retake territory in various regions.

“Today this pattern–of a militant group’s seizure of territory, followed by a state-led counteroffensive, and militants’ efforts to regroup–is repeating itself in several places.” Gartenstein-Ross referenced Southern Somalia, Nairobi, Kenya, Mali, Yemen, Egypt’s Sinai and the Caucasus region.

Gartenstein-Ross concluded that “though ISIS might succeed in holding a handful of cities for an extended period, it is likely to experience a reversal of some sort,” but, “If recent history is any guide, ISIS’s retreat will not mean the group’s death, and we may well see another cycle of retreat-regroup-new offensive.”

Gartenstein-Ross advised Western countries and their regional partners to work together to prevent extremist groups such as ISIS from establishing long-lasting control. “But they also need to recognise this growing boom-and-bust pattern of instability, and work to address it. Not claiming victory too soon might be a start.”

Day Blakely Donaldson

Spectator

Foundation for Defense of Democracies

“Our Coastline is Not for Sale to Big Oil.” Canadian First Nations Groups Vow to Be “the Wall” Against Northern Gateway Pipeline, Threaten Action

Share this
Share

First Nations Canadians who have banded together to oppose the recently approved the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline that would connect Alberta with the British Columbia coast–albeit with 209 conditions–have rejected the government’s decision to proceed with the project. First Nations groups have stated that they “will take whatever measures are necessary to prevent that from happening.”

“Our coastline is not for sale to big oil, no matter how much money is on the table. There are thousands of British Colombians and Canadians who feel the same way, and who will stand with us to stop this dangerous project,” stated one of the opposing First Nations groups, the Heiltsuk First Nation.

First Nations groups, such as the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, First Nations Summit and B.C. Assembly of First Nations, have stated that they “unequivocally reject” the decision to approve the pipeline, and have vowed to fight the pipeline with legal and direct action.

National Program Director for Sierra Club Canada John Bennet said, “I’ve been doing this for 30 years now, and I’ve never see such strength and opposition to a project.”

Under the Canadian constitution, the government of Canada legally must consult First Nations and accommodate First Nations treaties in decisions that could impact First Nations lands and resources. First nations groups say that the government failed to consult tribal bands before approving the pipeline.

Read more: Northern Gateway Pipeline Illegal if Without Consultation with First Nations

“Our position is that before a decision can be made, there has to be a complete report in accordance with the law — and the report was flawed, so the government cannot legally make the decision,” said a staff lawyer for EcoJustice, Barry Robinson. “If the courts find we are correct, then the decision made yesterday would have to be reversed.”

“The government has moved their legal responsibility to consult with First Nations to Enbridge, and that’s a wrong move on their part,” said Tl’azt’en Nation Grand Chief Edward John.

“Our Coastline is Not for Sale to Big Oil. Canadian First Nations Groups Vow to Be the Wall Against Northern Gateway Pipeline, Threaten Action (2)Enbridge’s Norther Gateway pipeline is a 730-mile (1175 km) that would carry tar sands oil from Alberta to Kitimat, a town on the British Columbia coast, where the oil would be loaded onto tankers for transport.

Enbridge spokesman Ivan Giesbrecht emailed a statement out that read that 60 percent of the First Nations population along the route of the pipeline had agreed to the project, but the challenges of the First Nations opposition are considered to be significant.

“We are the wall that Enbridge and Harper cannot pass,” said Chief Terry Teegee of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, and Grand Chief Stewart Philip of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs warned, “We will take whatever measures are necessary to prevent that from happening.”

By Day Blakely Donaldson

First Nations Governance

Northern Gateway Pipeline Illegal if Without Consultation with First Nations

northern gateway
Share this
Share

Rejecting the recent approval of Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline, which would transport tar sands oil from Alberta to the British Columbia coast, Canada’s First Nations groups have asserted that it is illegal for the government to approve any such project without consulting First Nations.

“Our position is that before a decision can be made, there has to be a complete report in accordance with the law — and the report was flawed, so the government cannot legally make the decision,” said a staff lawyer for EcoJustice, Barry Robinson. “If the courts find we are correct, then the decision made… would have to be reversed.”

First Nations groups have asserted that under the Constitution of Canada, the government legally must consult First Nations and accommodate First Nations treaties in decisions that could impact First Nations lands and resources.

Read more: “Our Coastline is Not for Sale to Big Oil.” Canadian First Nations Groups Vow to Be “the Wall” Against Northern Gateway Pipeline, Threaten Action

Two sections of Canada’s constitution deal specifically with native rights.

A provision in the Constitution of Canada–Section 35–although debated, has been found by courts to protect to First Nations treaty rights regarding fishing, logging, hunting and right to First Nations land.

The text reads,

35. (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.

(2) In this Act, “Aboriginal Peoples of Canada” includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.

(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) “treaty rights” includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.

(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

A part of the Constitution of Canada–the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the civil rights and liberties of every citizen in Canada–also provides for native rights, in Part II. Section 25 of the Charter insures that the Charter must be enforced in a way that does not diminish First Nations rights, and reads,

The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including

(a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and

(b) any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.

There is a difference between Section 35 of the Constitution and Section 25 of the Charter. Section 25 does not necassarily constitutionalize aboriginal rights, although it may protect some rights. Section 35 does constitutionalize some native rights.

Both Sections 25 and 35 were not originally written into the Constitution of Canada, but were reactions to strong protests by First Nations groups who protested the lack of guarantees for Aboriginal rights when the first draft of the constitution was being negotiated after the first version of the Charter was drafted in 1980. Prior to the inclusion of Sections 25 and 35, the Constitution only had the language of Section 26, which provides a guide for interpreting how the Charter should affect Canadian society. Section 26 reads,

The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

Section 26 requires that the Charter cannot be interpreted to deny that non-Charter rights exist–rights not within the Charter are nevertheless real as they would be if the Charter had never been written. The original 1980 draft of what would become Section 26 read provided that the Charter should not be construed as denying the existence of “any rights or freedoms that pertain to the native peoples of Canada.”

First Nations rights have been upheld in Canadian courts through Section 35 dating back to 1990, at which time a ruling handed down found that,

The constitutional recognition afforded by the provision [section 35], therefore, gives a measure of control over government conduct and a strong check on legislative power. While it does not promise immunity from government regulation in a society that, in the twentieth century is increasingly more complex, interdependent and sophisticated and where exhaustible resources need protection and management, it does hold the Crown to a substantive promise. The government is required to bear the burden of justifying any legislation which has some negative effect on any aboriginal right protected under section 35(1) (R. v. Sparrow [1990]).

Succeeding trials established that in fishing, logging, hunting and right to First Nations land, “the government must demonstrate that it has given the aboriginal fishery priority in a manner consistent with this Court’s [earlier decisions]” (R. v. Gladstone [1996]).

By Day Blakely Donaldson

First Nations Governance

Obama Intends to Use Executive Power to Create World’s Largest Marine Sanctuary [video]

Share this
Share

Two weeks ago, US President Barack Obama used executive authority to propose rules to cut carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants, in an attempt to lower carbon emissions by 30 percent by 2030. Now the president has announced plans to use that same authority to create rules protecting the Pacific Ocean.

A broad section of the ocean would be off-limits to fishing, oil and gas exploration and other environmentally-damaging activities.Obama Intends to Use Executive Power to Create World's Largest Marine Sanctuary <div class= The size of the section Obama wishes to protect is roughly double the area currently fully protected globally. The current US Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument would expand from 90,000 square miles to a possible 800,000, according to Pew Charitable Trusts. Such an expansion would protect five times the current amount of underwater mountains, in addition to the animals who live there, and provide safe harbor for whales, sharks and turtles. The area is the marine zone 200 feet from seven US-controlled islands that lie between Hawaii and American Samoa.

Enric Sala, a National Geographic explorer who has resided in the area since 2005, said of the place, “It’s the closest thing I’ve seen to the pristine ocean.”

Obama spoke in a video message produced for the US State Department’s Our Ocean Conference.

“I’m going to use my authority to protect some of our nation’s most precious marine landscapes,” Obama said.

Obama rationalized his intentions, “Let’s make sure that years from now we can look our children in the eye and tell them that, yes, we did our part, we took action, and we led the way toward a safer, more stable world.”

“If we ignore these problems, if we drain our oceans of their resources, we won’t just be squandering one of humanity’s greatest treasures. We’ll be cutting off one of the world’s major sources of food and economic growth, including for the United States.

Obama Intends to Use Executive Power to Create World's Largest Marine Sanctuary <div class=“We cannot afford to let that happen. That’s why the United States is leading the fight to protect our oceans.”

Obama also intended to develop a program to combat seafood fraud and the black market of fish.

President Obama has currently used executive authority to safeguard land areas 11 times. The current project to protect the US Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument is expected to draw opposition from the US tuna fleet that fishes the region.

The region accounts for three percent of US tuna fishing in the western and central Pacific.

The rules would enter into force later this year, but there will be a discussion period preceding any concrete action.

By Sid Douglas

New York Votes to Not Drill or Frack

fracking
Share this
Share

New York’s general assembly voted Monday on whether to drill or frack within the state. The majority voted in favor of a three-year ban on drilling and fracking.

An 89-34 vote favored a three-year moratorium on oil and gas drilling permits. The moratorium is intended in part to allow time for study of the environmental impact of drilling and fracking.

“We do not need to rush into this. The natural gas deposits within the Marcellus Shale are not going to go anywhere,” said New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

“We have heard from thousands of residents across the state about many issues associated with hydrofracking, and prudent leadership demands that we take our time to address all these concerns.”

New York State has been under moratorium since 2008. The most recent moratorium passed in 2013, and would have expired in 2015.

Gov. Cuomo of New York
Gov. Cuomo of New York

Passage of the vote depends on the New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the New York State Senate.

“Now, we’re urging Gov. Cuomo and the State Senate to stand up against the out-of-state oil and gas industry, and stand up for our state’s health, environment and long-term economy by rejecting fracking,” said Alex Beauchamp of Food & Water Watch and New Yorkers Against Fracking.

Health concerns have been raised by groups such as the American Lung Association in New York, and these health concerns have been recognized by the legislation.

“Oil and gas development utilizing High volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing (HVHF) involves the use and/or production of numerous toxic and hazardous air and water contaminants, a number of them known or suspected carcinogens,” reads the legislation. “Oil and gas development utilizing HVHF has also been associated with a range of adverse environmental impacts, including impacts to water and air quality, land and habitat, and community character.”

By Day Blakely Donaldson