The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Category: Uncategorised

Israel’s Medical Apartheid begins with the numbers

While the world has been congratulating Israel for the high number of Covid-19 vaccinations, Palestinians are being left out. Yoav Haifawi reports from Haifa about discrimination on a national and international level


17/01/2021

The Covid-19 pandemic posed a harsh “surprise test” for many states as well as local and global organizations and human societies in general. The arrival of the vaccine, though it was long expected, posed another harsh test for our ‘one-but-unequal’ worldwide society.

The first weeks of the distribution of the newly available vaccines exposed the incompetence or indifference of many states in caring for their citizens. But, above all, they exposed an international system of apartheid, where all the supposedly “premium” vaccines from western manufacturers are divided between the western capitalist states. One striking example is the case of Ukraine, that tried to buy vaccine from manufacturers like Pfizer, only to be blocked by an executive order from the USA administration banning its export.

Israel was late to contact Pfizer, which was the first producer to succeed in licensing a Covid-19 vaccine in the EU and the USA. Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu boasted that he talked 17 times on the phone with Pfizer’s president Bourla over the past weeks. Netanyahu secured enough vaccine for all Israel’s citizens above the age of 16 before the end of March. Needless to say – this bargain, one that puts Israel’s citizens before those of the vaccine’s inventors and producers in Germany and the USA – was not blocked by Trump.

This came just in time for the personal ambitions of an embattled Netanyahu, as he tries to avoid a pending trial on several counts of corruption. He caused his divided government to fall by preventing the adoption of a budget, and set elections for March 23. He is hoping to ride the vaccine wave and get a majority in the Knesset that will provide him with legal immunity.

But Israel not only gets top priority in the world-wide apartheid order. It also has its internal deeply established apartheid system. When Israel speaks of vaccinating “all its citizens”, it completely ignores millions of Palestinians who live under its rule as subjects with no rights. Actually, the whole world is adopting this racist Israeli approach. When for example, we read in the papers that “25% of Israel’s population was already vaccinated”, this percentage is calculated out of only some 9 million “citizens” – it leaves aside more than 5 million Palestinians. For them, Israel didn’t even think about their need for the vaccine.

Even independent data providers like “ourworldindata.org” (see figure below), buy into these Israeli Apartheid statistics. The excuse, of course, is the artificial division between the territories that Israel occupied in 1948. That performed an ethnic cleansing of most of the native population, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip that Israel occupied in 1967. The first, 1948 occupied areas, are regarded by many as a legitimate and “democratic” Israel. There the ethnic cleansing and the prevention of the return of the Palestinian refugees ensured Jewish majority in those areas. The 1967 occupation is regarded as “temporary” – ignoring that most of the population there is a second generation to live under this “temporary” rule that deny them all basic human rights.

The reality on the ground has no connection to this illusionary view, in all aspects of life including healthcare and vaccination. Jewish settlers in the West Bank (there are more than half a million of them) of course get the Covid-19 vaccine like any other citizen and are part of the official Israeli statistics. So, the denial of rights, and the wiping out from the statistics, is just in the case that you happen to be Palestinian.

On December 23, 2020, as Israel started its vaccination campaign, 20 human rights organizations published a call to the Israel government to respect its obligation under the international law, to take responsibility for the health of the population under its occupation. They wrote:

“The Israeli Ministry of Health has not yet publicly formulated an allocation policy that includes reserving specific amounts for Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT), nor has it established a timeline for the transfer of these vaccines. However, Article 56 of the Fourth Geneva Convention specifically provides that an occupier has the duty of ensuring “the adoption and application of the prophylactic and preventive measures necessary to combat the spread of contagious diseases and epidemics”. This duty includes providing support for the purchase and distribution of vaccines to the Palestinian population under its control.”

The Gaza Strip is a densely populated area with 2 million people, most of them refugees from the 1948 ethnic cleansing.The situation is much worse than even in the West Bank. After the bloody oppression of the second intifada (2000-2005) failed to break the resistance, Israel changed its’ tactics. Israel withdrew from within the strip, converting it to a huge open-air prison, controlled from outside by snipers, artillery and drones. This enabled the only semi-democratic elections in the history of the Palestinian Authority in 2006, which was won by Hamas. Under a strict siege by Israel and Egypt, the pandemic was late to invade, but it has flared there. In the Gaza Strip there is hardly any space for social distancing and the health services are deprived of resources due to poverty and the siege.

Israel is cynically using the pandemic to press the Hamas government in Gaza to agree to its terms for a prisoners’ exchange deal. Hamas captured two Israeli soldiers during the invasion of the strip in a bloody massacres campaign in 2014 and two Israeli citizens that entered the strip. Israel claims that both soldiers are dead, after doing its utmost to make sure it is true. Hamas wants the prisoners’ exchange to release as many as possible of the some 5000 Palestinian prisoners that are held by Israel. Now Israel is seeing the pandemic as “an opportunity” to lower the number of Palestinians to be released.

The family of one of the soldiers appealed to the Israeli “high court” to prevent any supply of the Covid-19 vaccine to the Gaza strip until the soldiers are released. In their reply, the Israeli state representatives promised the court that there is no intention to let vaccine to the strip anytime soon. They even claimed initially that the whole Palestine Authority (PA) has no vaccine, but on January 13 “admitted” that Israel passed to the PA 100 doses (!) “for humanitarian reasons”.

It is worth noting that the lawyer that is demanding in court, in the name of the soldier’s family, to prevent vaccination from 2 million people in Gaza is the Dean of Sha’arei Mishpat Law School, Professor Aviad Ha’cohen. He is doing it as part of his university’s “pro-bono” program.

Another especially vulnerable population are the thousands of Palestinian prisoners, many of them are old. This as Israel imprisons Palestinian to ultra-log periods, with no proportion to what they were accused of. Many of them already suffer from other diseases due to harsh conditions and systematic medical neglect. Israel’s minister of internal security, Amir Ohana, which is responsible to the Prisons’ Authority, is a former Shabak operator. He tries to gain popularity with racist public opinion by loudly refusing to vaccinate Palestinian prisoners. He was told by official legal and health experts that public health policies (like vaccinating all people over 60) should be applied also to all prisoners. Lately he seems to have hardened his stance and now objects to the inoculation of all prisoners. The fate of the prisoners is still hung in court while the pandemic is spreading in the prisons.

Israel’s advanced health services (for those that are entitled to receive them) rely heavily of Palestinian doctors and nurses. But the service is not equally administered in the Arab Palestinian communities (within the green line), from where most of these doctors and nurses come. Human rights organization complained of lack of explanatory materials in Arabic, lack of vaccination centers, etc. This is on top of the chronic problems of poverty, bad infrastructure, lack of public transport and the situation in dozens of unrecognized villages that are not receiving services at all.

All this is a stark demonstration of the nature of the Israeli regime, which B’Tselem recently declared to be a proper Apartheid State. The Covid-19 pandemic exposes this regime in its most ugly manifestations. The struggle for equality and social justice will probably stay with us long after the virus will be defeated.

Yoav Haifiwi runs the blog freehaifa. He wrote this contribution for theleftberlin website.

Our goal is 0 infections. We demand solidarity in the form of a European shutdown

The German/Austrian/Swiss Initiative #ZeroCovid was launched on January 14th, promising a left-wing answer to the Covid crisis. It is affiliated with the international Zero Covid Alliance. Here we publish its call to action in English, Spanish and German


15/01/2021

by ZeroCovid DE/AT/CH

 

After one year of the pandemic, Europe is in an extremely critical condition. Thousands of people die each day; even more get infected. The new coronavirus disease spreads rapidly, accelerated by mutations. The measures taken by the governments are not enough: They extend the pandemic instead of ending it, and thereby endanger our lives.

The strategy of controlling the pandemic (“flatten the curve”) has failed. It limited our lifestyles considerably, and still resulted in millions of infections and tens of thousands of deaths. We now need a radical change of strategy: Instead of a controlled continuation of the pandemic, it needs to end. The goal must not be only 200, 50, or 25 new infections per day – it must be zero.

We immediately need a common strategy in Europe in order to fight the pandemic effectively. We will not win with vaccinations alone. We especially won’t if the fight against the pandemic consists of an arbitrary limitation of leisure activities without a shutdown of the economy. We want the Sars-CoV-2-infections to be limited to the point that every single infection is traceable again. The determined action by many countries around the world has shown that it is possible to end the spread of the virus.

We orient ourselves at the joint statement calling for Pan-European commitment for rapid and sustained reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infections published by scientists on December 19, 2020. But we are convinced that the containment of the virus can only happen, if all measures are designed in a way that supports solidarity in our society. This is why we demand the following necessary measures:

1. Get to Zero together: The first goal is reducing the infections to zero. In order to prevent a ping-pong effect between the countries and regions, all European countries must act swiftly and simultaneously. If this goal is reached, the next step would be to cautiously lift limitations. The case numbers must be kept at a stable level, and local appearances of the virus must be contained immediately and energetically. Third, we need a common long-term vision that will ground regional and national action plans. Those contain strategies for screening and vaccination, the protection of at-risk groups, and support of those who are affected most by the pandemic.

In order to achieve this goal, we need a common break of a couple of weeks. Shutdown means: We reduce our direct contacts to a minimum – also at work. Measures cannot be effective as long as they are focused on leisure activities but exclude the work sphere. We need to temporarily pause the parts of the economy that are not absolutely necessary for society. Factories, offices, construction sites, schools must be closed, and the duty to work must be put on hold. This break must last until the goals mentioned above are reached. It is important that the employees design and implement the measures in the firms themselves. With this statement, we also call upon the unions to take a determined stand for the health of the employees, support the activism of employees for their health, and organise the necessary big common break together.

2. Nobody must be left behind: People can only stay at home if they are in a financially stable position. Therefore, a comprehensive set of measures for all is needed. The people who are most strongly hit by the effects of the shutdown will be supported with an extra focus – such as people with low income, those in small and/or dense living conditions, people in a violent environment, people who are homeless. Collective accommodations need to be dissolved; refugees must be accommodated in a decentralised manner. People responsible for care work during the shutdown should be supported via common organisations. Children should be educated online, or if necessary, in small groups.

3. Expansion of the social health infrastructure: The sector of health and care work needs to be expanded immediately and sustainably. This also holds for health authorities and administrations, who are responsible for contact tracing. Employment must go up. Wages need to be raised. Profit-orientation in the health and care sector endangers the common health. We demand that privatisations and closings of institutions are taken back. Instead of financing hospitals through default sums per case, a common financing of the needed expenses should be introduced.

4. Vaccinations are a global common: A global pandemic can only be won over globally. Public and private companies need to immediately prepare and execute the necessary production of vaccinations. Vaccinations should not be a source of profit. They are a result of the creative collaboration of many people, and need to belong to the whole of humanity.

5. Financing with solidarity: The necessary measures cost a lot of money. The societies in Europe have accumulated enormous wealth, which in return is owned by few individuals. With this wealth, the common break from work and all further measures can be funded without any problems. This is why we demand a Europe-wide Covid-solidarity fee on high assets, company profits, financial transactions, and the highest incomes.

We want to overcome the political paralysis in dealing with the coronavirus. We also want to collect support in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland for the necessary zerocovid-strategy change. Like the supporters of zerocovid in the UK, we know that we need to fight for the protection of our health against short-term profit interests and against the many profit-oriented spheres of politics.

There is no contradiction between the protection of health and tackling the pandemic on the one hand, and the protection of democratic rights and the rule of law on the other. Democracy without health protection is useless and cynical. Health protection without democracy leads to an authoritarian state. Uniting both is key to a successful zerocovid-strategy of solidarity.

January 12, 2021. Original text including the first signatures here Sign the call to action here.

¡El objetivo es cero contagios!

Por un apagón europeo solidario

Después de un año de pandemia, nos encontramos en una situación extremadamente crítica en toda Europa. Cada día mueren miles de personas y muchas más se enferman. El nuevo coronavirus se está propagando rápidamente, mucho más a raíz de las nuevas mutaciones. Las medidas tomadas por los diferentes políticos no son suficientes: prolongan la pandemia en lugar de acabar con ella y ponen en peligro nuestras vidas.

La estrategia para controlar la pandemia ha fallado (“aplanar la curva”). Ha restringido permanentemente las vidas y, sin embargo, ha provocado millones de infecciones y decenas de miles de muertes. Ahora necesitamos un cambio radical de estrategia: no una continuación controlada de la pandemia, sino su fin. El objetivo no puede ser 200, 50 o 25 nuevas infecciones, el objetivo tiene que ser cero.

Necesitamos una estrategia común en Europa de inmediato para combatir la pandemia de manera eficaz. La carrera contra la variante del virus mutado no se puede ganar solo con las vacunas, especialmente si la lucha contra la pandemia continúa consistiendo en restricciones de movimiento e interacción en el tiempo libre sin un cierre de la economía. Queremos que se garantice que las infecciones por Sars-CoV-2 se reduzcan inmediatamente hasta tal punto que se pueda rastrear cada infección individual. La acción decidida de varios países ha demostrado que es posible detener la propagación del virus.

Nos guiamos por el llamado internacional para la contención constante de la pandemia Covd-19 en Europa, que unos científicos iniciaron el 19 de diciembre de 2020.(1) Sin embargo, estamos convencidos de que la contención del virus Sars-CoV-2 solo puede tener éxito si si todas las medidas están diseñadas en base a la solidaridad social. Por eso exigimos estas medidas sociales fundamentales:

1. Bajar juntos a cero: El primer objetivo es reducir el número de infecciones a cero. Para evitar un efecto ping-pong entre países y regiones, todos los países europeos deben actuar rápida y simultáneamente. Si se logra este objetivo, las restricciones se pueden relajar cuidadosamente en un segundo paso. El bajo número de casos debe mantenerse estable con una estrategia de control y los brotes locales se deben contener de manera inmediata y vigorosa. En tercer lugar, también necesitamos una visión común a largo plazo y en base a planes de acción regionales y nacionales. Éstos incluyen estrategias de detección y vacunación, protección de grupos de riesgo y apoyo a las personas que se ven particularmente afectadas por la pandemia.

Para lograr este objetivo, necesitamos una pausa solidaria de unas semanas. Apagar significa: Nosotros restringimos nuestros contactos directos a un mínimo… ¡también en el lugar de trabajo! Las medidas no pueden tener éxito si solo se centran en el tiempo libre pero excluyen las horas de trabajo. Tenemos que cerrar aquellas áreas de la economía que no son socialmente esenciales por un corto tiempo. Se deben cerrar fábricas, oficinas, fábricas, obras de construcción, escuelas y suspender la obligación de trabajar y ello tanto tiempo como sea necesario hasta que se logren los objetivos anteriores. Es importante que los empleados participen en el diseño de las medidas en las propias empresas y las implementen conjuntamente. Con este llamamiento, también pedimos a los sindicatos que trabajen decididamente por la salud de los empleados, que apoyen los esfuerzos de los empleados por su salud y que organicen juntos la necesaria pausa larga.

2. Nadie puede quedarse atrás: Las personas solo pueden quedarse en casa si se encuentran aseguradas en el sentido económico. Es por eso que un paquete de rescate completo es necesario para todos. Las personas que se ven particularmente afectadas por los efectos del cierre deben recibir un apoyo especial, así como las personas con bajos ingresos, en condiciones de vida precarias, en un entorno violento, las personas sin hogar. Los refugios colectivos deben cerrarse, los refugiados deben alojarse de manera descentralizada. Las personas que realizan trabajos de cuidados y en el sector sanitario durante el cierre deben ser aliviados por las instituciones comunitarias. Los niños reciben lecciones online, en grupos pequeños si es necesario.

3. Expansión de la infraestructura social sanitaria: Todo el sector de la salud y la atención debe expandirse de forma inmediata y sostenible. Esto también se aplica a las autoridades sanitarias y autoridades responsables de rastrear las cadenas de infección. Es necesario aumentar la población activa en este ámbito. Los salarios se incrementarán significativamente. La búsqueda de beneficios en el sector de la salud y el cuidado pone en peligro la salud colectiva. Exigimos la retirada de privatizaciones y cierres anteriores. La financiación de los hospitales a través de tarifas planas en Alemania debe sustituirse por una financiación solidaria en función de las necesidades.

4. Las vacunas son bienes globales: Una pandemia global solo puede abordarse a nivel mundial. Las corporaciones públicas y privadas deben controlar la producción gubernamental de vacunas e impuestos. Las vacunas deben retirarse de la actividad lucrativa privada. Son el resultado de la colaboración de muchas personas y deben pertenecer a toda la humanidad.

5. Financiamiento solidario: Las medidas necesarias cuestan mucho dinero. Las sociedades europeas han acumulado una enorme riqueza, pero algunas personas adineradas se han apropiado de ésta. Con esta riqueza se pueden financiar sin problemas el extenso descanso laboral y todas las medidas solidarias. Es por eso que estamos exigiendo la introducción de un impuesto de solidaridad Covid en toda Europa sobre activos elevados, beneficios corporativos, transacciones financieras y los ingresos más altos.

Queremos superar la parálisis política relacionada con el Coronavirus. También queremos unirnos en Alemania, Austria y Suiza para el necesario cambio de estrategia ZeroCovid basado en la solidaridad. Como nuestros compañeros de campaña en Gran Bretaña (https://zerocovid.uk),

sabemos que tenemos que luchar por la protección de nuestra salud contra los intereses de lucro a corto plazo y gran parte de la política. No hay contradicción entre proteger la salud y combatir las pandemias, por un lado, y defender los derechos democráticos y el estado de derecho, por el otro. La democracia sin protección de la salud es inútil y cínica. La protección de la salud sin democracia conduce al estado autoritario. La unidad de ambos es la clave decisiva para una estrategia ZeroCovid solidaria.

12 de enero de 2020. Translation: Carmela Negrete

(1) Los científicos piden una estrategia europea para reducir de forma rápida y sostenible el número de casos de COVID-19. https://www.containcovid-pan.eu/ Véase también: Priesemann, Viola; et.al. (2020): Pidiendo un compromiso paneuropeo para una reducción rápida y sostenida de las infecciones por SARS-CoV-2. The Lancet. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32625-8/fulltext

Das Ziel heißt Null Infektionen!

Für einen solidarischen europäischen Shutdown

Nach einem Jahr Pandemie sind wir in ganz Europa in einer äußerst kritischen Situation. Tausende Menschen sterben jeden Tag und noch viel mehr erkranken. Das neue Coronavirus breitet sich rasend schnell aus, von Mutationen noch beschleunigt. Die Maßnahmen der Regierungen reichen nicht aus: Sie verlängern die Pandemie, statt sie zu beenden, und gefährden unser Leben.

Die Strategie, die Pandemie zu kontrollieren, ist gescheitert („flatten the curve“). Sie hat das Leben dauerhaft eingeschränkt und dennoch Millionen Infektionen und Zehntausende Tote gebracht. Wir brauchen jetzt einen radikalen Strategiewechsel: kein kontrolliertes Weiterlaufen der Pandemie, sondern ihre Beendigung. Das Ziel darf nicht in 200, 50 oder 25 Neuinfektionen bestehen – es muss Null sein.

Wir brauchen sofort eine gemeinsame Strategie in Europa, um die Pandemie wirksam zu bekämpfen. Mit Impfungen allein ist der Wettlauf gegen die mutierte Virusvariante nicht zu gewinnen – erst recht nicht, wenn die Pandemiebekämpfung weiter aus aktionistischen Einschränkungen der Freizeit ohne Shutdown der Wirtschaft besteht. Wir setzen uns dafür ein, dass die Sars-CoV-2-Infektionen sofort so weit verringert werden, dass jede einzelne Ansteckung wieder nachvollziehbar ist. Das entschlossene Handeln etlicher Länder hat gezeigt, dass es möglich ist, die Verbreitung des Virus zu beenden.

Wir orientieren uns am internationalen Aufruf für die konsequente Eindämmung der Covid-19 Pandemie in Europa, den Wissenschaftler*innen am 19. Dezember 2020 initiiert haben.1 Wir sind allerdings überzeugt, dass die Eindämmung des Sars-CoV-2 Virus nur gelingen kann, wenn alle Maßnahmen gesellschaftlich solidarisch gestaltet werden. Darum fordern wir diese unerlässlichen gesellschaftlichen Maßnahmen:

1. Gemeinsam runter auf Null: Das erste Ziel ist, die Ansteckungen auf Null zu reduzieren. Um einen Ping-Pong-Effekt zwischen den Ländern und Regionen zu vermeiden, muss in allen europäischen Ländern schnell und gleichzeitig gehandelt werden. Wenn dieses Ziel erreicht ist, können in einem zweiten Schritt die Einschränkungen vorsichtig gelockert werden. Die niedrigen Fallzahlen müssen mit einer Kontrollstrategie stabil gehalten und lokale Ausbrüche sofort energisch eingedämmt werden. Wir brauchen drittens auch eine gemeinsame langfristige Vision – und auf deren Basis regionale und nationale Aktionspläne. Diese beinhalten Screening- und Impfstrategien, Schutz von Risikogruppen und Unterstützung der Menschen, die besonders stark von der Pandemie betroffen sind.

Um dieses Ziel zu erreichen, brauchen wir eine solidarische Pause von einigen Wochen. Shutdown heißt: Wir schränken unsere direkten Kontakte auf ein Minimum ein – und zwar auch am Arbeitsplatz! Maßnahmen können nicht erfolgreich sein, wenn sie nur auf die Freizeit konzentriert sind, aber die Arbeitszeit ausnehmen. Wir müssen die gesellschaftlich nicht dringend erforderlichen Bereiche der Wirtschaft für eine kurze Zeit stilllegen. Fabriken, Büros, Betriebe, Baustellen, Schulen müssen geschlossen und die Arbeitspflicht ausgesetzt werden. Diese Pause muss so lange dauern, bis die oben genannten Ziele erreicht sind. Wichtig ist, dass die Beschäftigten die Maßnahmen in den Betrieben selber gestalten und gemeinsam durchsetzen. Mit diesem Aufruf fordern wir auch die Gewerkschaften auf, sich entschlossen für die Gesundheit der Beschäftigten einzusetzen, den Einsatz von Beschäftigten für ihre Gesundheit zu unterstützen und die erforderliche große und gemeinsame Pause zu organisieren.

2. Niemand darf zurückgelassen werden: Menschen können nur zu Hause bleiben, wenn sie finanziell abgesichert sind. Deshalb ist ein umfassendes Rettungspaket für alle nötig. Die Menschen, die von den Auswirkungen des Shutdowns besonders hart betroffen sind, werden besonders unterstützt – wie Menschen mit niedrigen Einkommen, in beengten Wohnverhältnissen, in einem gewalttätigen Umfeld, Obdachlose. Sammelunterkünfte müssen aufgelöst, geflüchtete Menschen dezentral untergebracht werden. Menschen, die im Shutdown besonders viel Betreuungs- und Sorgearbeit leisten, sollen durch gemeinschaftliche Einrichtungen entlastet werden. Kinder erhalten Unterricht online, notfalls in Kleingruppen.

3. Ausbau der sozialen Gesundheitsinfrastruktur: Der gesamte Gesundheits- und Pflegebereich muss sofort und nachhaltig ausgebaut werden. Dies gilt auch für Gesundheitsämter und Behörden, die für das Verfolgen der Infektionsketten zuständig sind. Das Personal muss in diesem Bereich aufgestockt werden. Die Löhne sind deutlich anzuheben. Das Profitstreben im Gesundheits- und Pflegebereich gefährdet die kollektive Gesundheit. Wir verlangen die Rücknahme bisheriger Privatisierungen und Schließungen. Die Finanzierung von Krankenhäusern über Fallpauschalen sollte durch eine solidarische Finanzierung des Bedarfs ersetzt werden.

4. Impfstoffe sind globales Gemeingut: Eine globale Pandemie lässt sich nur global besiegen. Öffentliche und private Unternehmen müssen umgehend die erforderliche Produktion von Impfstoffen vorbereiten und durchführen. Impfstoffe sollten der privaten Profiterzielung entzogen werden. Sie sind ein Ergebnis der kreativen Zusammenarbeit vieler Menschen, sie müssen der gesamten Menschheit gehören.

5. Solidarische Finanzierung: Die notwendigen Maßnahmen kosten viel Geld. Die Gesellschaften in Europa haben enormen Reichtum angehäuft, den sich allerdings einige wenige Vermögende angeeignet haben. Mit diesem Reichtum sind die umfassende Arbeitspause und alle solidarischen Maßnahmen problemlos finanzierbar. Darum verlangen wir die Einführung einer europaweiten Covid-Solidaritätsabgabe auf hohe Vermögen, Unternehmensgewinne, Finanztransaktionen und die höchsten Einkommen.

Wir wollen die politische Lähmung in Bezug auf Corona überwinden. Wir wollen uns auch in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz für den nötigen solidarischen ZeroCovid-Strategiewechsel sammeln. Wie unsere Mitstreiter*innen in Großbritannien (https://zerocovid.uk) wissen wir, dass wir den Schutz unserer Gesundheit gegen kurzfristige Profitinteressen und große Teile der Politik erkämpfen müssen.

Es gibt keinen Gegensatz zwischen Gesundheitsschutz und Pandemiebekämpfung einerseits und der Verteidigung demokratischer Rechte und des Rechtsstaats andererseits. Demokratie ohne Gesundheitsschutz ist sinnlos und zynisch. Gesundheitsschutz ohne Demokratie führt in den autoritären Staat. Die Einheit von beidem ist der entscheidende Schlüssel zu einer solidarischen ZeroCovid-Strategie.

12. Januar 2021

1. WissenschaftlerInnen fordern eine europäische Strategie zur raschen und nachhaltigen Reduktion der COVID-19-Fallzahlen. https://www.containcovid-pan.eu/ Siehe auch: Priesemann, Viola; et.al. (2020): Calling for pan-European commitment for rapid and sustained reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infections. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32625-8

WBS für alle (Housing Promotion Certificates for All)

Guarantee WBS accommodation access for refugees and non-German citizens – a resolution to the LINKE Berlin Conference on 16-17 January.


13/01/2021

by Die LINKE Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf, Die LINKE working group Hartz IV and conference delegates Anne Zetsche, Elif Elrap, Felicitas Karimi, Johannes Kolleck, Melrose Caramba-Coker, Moheb Shafaqyar, Nadja Charaby and Yasin Bölme

 

May the state party conference decide:

The Berlin Senate, the Senate Department for Urban Development and Housing and Die Linke party members in the Senate and House of Representatives are requested to commit themselves to enable refugees, asylum seekers, tolerated stay permit holders, and non-German citizens with temporary residence permits to access to housing promotion certificates (Wohnberechtigungsschein/WBS).

It is the goal of Die Linke, the Senate, and the coalition treaty to accommodate refugees in apartments primarily, rather than collective accommodation centres, and exhaust all legal options to do this. An apartment is a basic requirement for self determination.

In Berlin – based on the “decision support” of the Senate administration for district administrations – there are still approximately 25.000 asylum seekers and tolerated stay permit holders excluded from receiving housing promotion certificates. Additionally there are 200.000 non-German temporary residence permit holders in Berlin who can not acquire housing promotion certificates if their residence permit extension is due within eleven months. Families in Berlin are excluded from getting housing promotion certificates if the resident permit extension for one household member is due or if a member is an asylum seeker.

Currently, 60% of the state-owned apartments are to be rented to people with a housing promotion certificate in order to provide affordable housing to as many people with low incomes as possible. We welcome the fact that the Senate wants to promote social housing more intensively.

Homeless refugees and those looking for accommodation, who have received a temporary residence permit, by way of family reunification or student status, may no longer be excluded from these apartments.

To enable state-owned and social housing access to non-German citizens with low income, the same as their German counterparts, we demand that:

  • People looking for accommodation with a residence permit, visa for family reunification, or provisional residence certificate will receive housing promotion certificates as long as they satisfy other requirements
  • People seeking accommodation with a resident permit or tolerated stay permit who have been in Germany for at least 12 months will receive housing promotion certificates as long as they satisfy other requirements
  • When a family member fulfills the legal residence requirements for the housing promotion certificate, other members of the household are taken into account as well

The housing promotion certificate has been a state affair since the reform of federalism in 2006. The restrictive practice of the administration is based on federal law, since Berlin has neither a state law nor a comprehensive administrative regulation on the housing promotion certificate to date. We are therefore calling for a state law on the housing promotion certificate in the future and, until then, an expansion of the housing promotion certificate to the groups mentioned by way of administrative regulation.

Justification

Unlike in some other federal states, in Berlin asylum seekers, tolerated persons and all people of non-German nationality whose residence permit is due for extension within the next 11 months will not receive housing promotion certificates, even if their stay is likely to be extended or they have resided in Berlin for a long time.

This affects people with recognized refugee status, for example, whose residence permits are issued for three years in the third year of their stay. This excludes numerous foreigners and refugees from acquiring social housing. Even if a family member has, for example, an unlimited residence permit or German citizenship, other family members with limited residence permits for family reunification could be excluded from housing promotion certificates. Pandemic-related processing delays in residence permits extensions at the State Immigration Office additionally exacerbate the problem. Some families never receive a joint housing promotion certificate because of the differing terms of their residence permits.

In Berlin, almost 20,000 refugees are still living in accommodation provided by the State Office for Refugee Affairs and approximately 10,000 more are placed in shelters for the homeless by the districts according to the ASOG (Allgemeines Sicherheits und Ordnungsgesetz – General Safety and Order Law). Numerous studies show that living in collective accommodation long-term has negative psychological and health consequences. Integration into work, education and society is made more difficult. According to the coalition agreement, the political goal of Die Linke and the Berlin Senate is to prevent permanent segregation of refugees and enable quick access to a home of their own. The implementation of this integration policy objective and reduced support of mass accommodation has become even more urgent due to the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Refugee families searching for an apartment have a particularly hard time in the Berlin housing market. They face discrimination and need special support in finding accommodation.

60% of the 300,000 state-owned apartments are to be given to people with housing promotion certificates when they are re-let. Homeless refugees with low incomes or those receiving social benefits especially depend on these apartments and must not be excluded. This also applies to around 100,000 social housing locations in Berlin.

As a legal examination by the integration officer of the Berlin Senate already confirmed in 2017, within the framework of the interpretation of applicable federal law it is possible to regulate housing promotion certificate access according to criteria for non-German citizens. Federal law (Section 27 WoFG Bund – Law on Social Housing Promotion) does not specify a specific length of stay or alien status as a requirement for housing promotion certificates.

The Berlin Senate must finally use the opportunity created by the 2006 federalism reform to regulate access to the housing promotion certificate via state law and administrative regulations. They must ensure, within this framework, that previously excluded people without German citizenship have equal access to housing promotion certificates and thus to affordable housing.

Translation: Ilona Addis

Coup, insurrection, or none of the above?

What’s the difference between an ‘insurrection” and a choreographed test run?


12/01/2021

Faust: Die ich rief, die Geister, / Werd’ ich nun nicht los.“ [“Those I called – the ghosts, I won’t get rid of them now”. [1]

Having called up Trump, both many capitalists and sections of the Republican Party wish to be rid of him, but his ‘spirit’ or ‘ghost’ will remain. We dissect the events of January 6th on the steps of the Capitol – the nerve center enacting the ruling class edicts in the United States. Not merely a ‘riot’ – yet not an ‘insurrection’.

1. The ‘Event’ of January 6 2020 in Washington DC

Within the first week of 2021 – yesterday on January 6th, came the Trumpite riot in the center of the US Government. The rioters stormed the Capitol Building that houses the US Senate and the Congress. They had been urged onwards by Trump himself, under the false pretext of preventing ‘the theft of the elections’. Having been rebuffed by the courts – even those that Trump had stacked with pro-Republican judges – he has been nursing a wounded ambition and pride.

This event took place even as Trump’s own Vice-President Mike Pence presided over Congress . The Vice-President was there in a purely formal role, doing the final tally of the votes in front of Congress – that would finally declare Joe Biden as the in-coming President elect for the term starting on January 20th 2021. The event stopped the tally, and members of Congress were taken into safe hiding places from which it was only safe to emerge by 8:00 pm that night – when they re-convened. This is what happened:

“On Wednesday afternoon, a thin line of U.S. Capitol Police, with only a few riot shields between them and a knot of angry protesters, engaged in hand-to-hand combat with rioters on the steps of the West Front. They struggled with a flimsy set of barricades as a mob in helmets and bulletproof vests pushed its way toward the Capitol entrance. Videos showed officers stepping aside, and sometimes taking selfies, as if to usher Trump’s supporters into the building they were supposed to guard.” [2]

This was an extraordinary event. What was it though? Was it an ‘insurrection’ – as many of the national and international press have labeled it?

2. What should we call this storming of the Capitol?

To me the word insurrection implies a force of mass organisation and coherence. According to Frederick Engels, it is an ‘art’ with certain ‘rules’, one element of which is surprise:

“Insurrection is an art quite as much as war or any other, and subject to certain rules of proceeding… never play with insurrection unless you are fully prepared to face the consequences of your play. Insurrection is a calculus with very indefinite magnitudes, the value of which may change every day; the forces opposed to you have all the advantage of organization, discipline, and habitual authority: unless you bring strong odds against them you are defeated and ruined. Secondly, the insurrectionary career once entered upon, act with the greatest determination, and on the offensive. The defensive is the death of every armed rising; it is lost before it measures itself with its enemies. Surprise your antagonists…” [3]

Instead of an insurrection, what we saw was far more like a ‘playing with insurrection’. There are some further very strange elements to it. Most obviously, it is extremely difficult to believe that anyone could have been ‘surprised’ by this ‘event’. It had been announced quite loudly ahead of events in the social media of the most extreme Trumpites:

“The invasion of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday was stoked in plain sight. For weeks, the far-right supporters of President Donald Trump railed on social media that the election had been stolen. They openly discussed the idea of violent protest on the day Congress met to certify the result.

“We came up with the idea to occupy just outside the CAPITOL on Jan 6th,” leaders of the Stop the Steal movement wrote on Dec. 23. They called their Wednesday demonstration the Wild Protest, a name taken from a tweet by Trump that encouraged his supporters to take their grievances to the streets of Washington. “Will be wild,” the president tweeted.”

On Dec. 12, a poster on the website MyMilitia.com urged violence if senators made official the victory of President-elect Joe Biden. “If this does not change, then I advocate, Revolution and adherence to the rules of war,” wrote someone identifying themselves as I3DI. “I say, take the hill or die trying.” Wrote another person: “It’s already apparent that literally millions of Americans are on the verge of activating their Second Amendment duty to defeat tyranny and save the republic.” The easily overpowered police force guarding the Capitol on Wednesday posed a stark contrast to the tactics deployed by local police during this summer’s Black Lives Matter protests. Then, the city felt besieged by law enforcement.” [4]

Many more citations that confirm prior announcements of the ‘event’ could be referenced. But perhaps the most thorough examination is by Bellingcat. The journalist Robert Evans took on the mental distress of going through the social media feeds of the near-fascist elements in Trump’s mob. [5] The neo-Nazism and foreplanning pours out.

3. How does the ruling class normally protect itself from dissent?

So not an insurrection then. Let us call it a mob-riot.

Is there anything beyond that however? What about the deliberate neglect, and lack of preparation consistent with prior patterns of police, National Guard or armed forces behavior? I think anyone watching the reactions of the state to the black Lives Matter (BLM) protests and street actors will instantly see the difference. For BLM activists, nothing but almost instant carefully organised, violent repression. In those circumstances the police seem exceptionally well-organised, for example:

“Black activists noted that when they have planned protests, the police have rarely seemed ill prepared. This week, for instance, National Guard troops descended on Kenosha, Wis., and metal barricades were erected around that city’s courthouse the day before a prosecutor announced that no charges would be filed against an officer who shot a man, Jacob Blake, multiple times in the back last summer.” [6]

Yesterday the pictures of a nonchalant police were an astounding contrast. Leave aside the above-mentioned posing for selfies, barriers were actually opened for the mob. There were about 3,000 people swarming all over the Capitol after the police enabled their access to the Capitol steps. Even when there are not crowds like this, the area is usually firmly locked down. The activists of the community have not been slow to point this out. Hear the activist Rev. Lennox Yearwood Jr. (“who heads the Hip Hop Caucus, a civil and human rights group“), who:

“called the sight of the rioters being led out of the Capitol seemingly without repercussions “heartbreaking.” Mr. Yearwood has a long history of protest on a range of issues and has been arrested, and even beaten, as a result. “We know we’re going to go through that punishment” as part of fighting for cleaner energy, for environmental justice, for a better world, he said. “Up until yesterday, I thought, ‘This is how it’s done. You stop business, you’re going to be arrested, you’re going to be treated this way,” he said. “Yesterday changed all that,” he said. Some rioters carried weapons, injured police and committed acts of vandalism, and “certain police allowed them to walk away.” [7]

Yearwood points out that the lessons of the ‘event’ could be interpreted as a need to abandon the approach of Martin Luther King, and that could lead to violence:

“The comparatively lenient response to the overwhelmingly white protesters on Wednesday, he said, “was the epitome of white supremacy,” and a dangerous precedent for the future of protest in the United States. He said he feared that in the future, young activists would tell him when he advised a nonviolent path that “all the peace stuff you talk about, Rev and Bill, that doesn’t work.” “And that leads to destruction,” he said.”

It should be acknowledged that the President elect of the USA had to agree, and said this:

“President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. made a similar observation on Thursday. “No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protesting yesterday, they wouldn’t have been treated very, very differently than the mob of thugs that stormed the Capitol,” he said. “We all know that’s true, and it is unacceptable. Totally unacceptable.”

It took over 3 hours before there was any significant police force on the steps of the Capitol, and before the National Guard were involved. Why?

4. What has been the Reaction of the Powers That Be?

Even as events unfolded, the actions of President Trump served to amplify them – even saying mildly “go home”, and emphasising that “we love you” and “I understand you” and again reiterating that “the election was stolen”. Since he was the instigator-in-chief of the riot, none of this is a surprise. But what about the real power brokers? The most important in my view are the industrialists. What did they have to say?

As the ‘event’ was unfolding, The National Association of Manufacturers weighed in with condemnation so quickly, and called for Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment – which disempowers the President and effectively removes him from office. [8] That association represents over 14,000 companies includign some big ones like Toyota and ExxonMobil. [9] But after having played footsie with the Trump government, even after the Charlottsville racist riot, they are hypocritical. Even The New York Times has to note that their position is “hollow”:

“The National Association of Manufacturers called on Vice President Mike Pence to consider invoking the 25th Amendment of the Constitution and remove Mr. Trump from office. Many executives — including Mr. Cook of Apple, Mr. Dimon of JPMorgan and Mr. Schwarzman — denounced the violence, lamented the state of the country and called for accountability. But after four years of much talk but little action, their words rang hollow.” [10]

Yet what about the Republican Party? They are still riven – even after the events, a significant section of the party still voted in the Pence tally proceedings of Congress, to uphold objections to the vote in Pennsylvania:

“Many Republicans joined him in trying to reject the will of the voters — almost two-thirds of House Republicans voted against accepting Pennsylvania’s electors after the Trumpist riot.” [11]

Yet other various significant personages of the Republican Party – including former President Bush, Mitt Romney (Senator for Utah and former Republican candidate for the Presidency) – have called to accept the election finally. Even (for goodness’ sake) Lindsey Graham (Republican Senator for South Carolina), who has served as a mouthpiece for Trump. This also applies to the Republican Senate Majority Leader from Kentucky Mitch McConnell, though he is soon to become the Minority Leader when the new Democrats from Georgia are seated in the Congress.

5. How can we explain this non-preparation – this ever-so kind police behaviour?

There would seem to be at least a couple of very uncomfortable questions to ask. Surely it must be asked: ‘How can there have been such an extraordinary lapse before there was any significant police-military presence?’ And this naturally will lead to the query: ‘Does it all seem pretty choreographed?“ These may be considered very cynical and no doubt will be labelled as ‘conspiracist’ – but I do not think they can be so easily discounted.

I have addressed the split in the ruling class between the big oil and finance sections before. [12] Many sources will agree that the ruling class had brought forward the Trumpites. [13] However, Trump has now done what he was brought in for: he has performed some of his key preset tasks by ramming through laws enabling the environmental destruction to continue, and cutting taxes for the ruling class.

But all this comes at a potential cost. The cost of Trump to the ruling class, the opening and of fascism to the quasi-mainstream, has already provoked a mass reaction, for example, from the Black Lives Matter movement. It is all just too risky for the ruling class to warrant an open class conflagration if it can be avoided right now. There is enough ‘room’ in the Democratic party still – even now – to play to act as a façade for the ruling class.This may seen astonishing in the light of its repeated betrayals of the working class, but this remains true. The time for open fascism has not yet come. It may still – but it is not quite there yet.

In the meantime, the Republican Party has become riven down to the base. The problem for both the Republicans and the manufacturers was that articulated by the words of Goethe above: They had raised the spirit of Trump – and now could not easily get rid of him. But then they could not get rid of him without some form of public rejection of him. The Republican party is split – but still cowers from confronting Trump – and his base that he has perhaps not created – but certainly fed and nourished – remains strong.

The most charitable observers will simply say that the events were simply the result of ‘poor preparation’ and ‘incompetence’.

But I think that I am in fact even more charitable to the ruling class! In that I think that they are far from incompetent, and that they have a lot more brains than given credit for. They are very cunning and know how to choreograph a thing or two. At the very least, there were probably a set of ‘stand-down’ commands from high echelons of power. They knew the Trump forces would discredit themselves. This would help them re-build the Republican Party to a more “respectable” front for oil, gas and related industrialists. They have been able to somehow ‘unmask’ the reality of the Trumpite threat. It was of course a threat that they, as Trump’s enablers had themselves fostered throughout. We need only to think in particular of Senator Mitch McConnell. Scenes from the Ronald Reagan National Airport emerged tonight as Lindsey Graham left Washington. He of course is another upstanding citizen of Trumpland, but one who finally made a public call to recognise Biden’s electoral victory on the floor of the Senate after the riots. He was attacked at the airport by Trumpites screaming ‘traitor!” These Trumpites are hardly being unfair in their charge! [14]

At the time of writing events are quickly unfolding towards a possible attempt at impeaching Trump again. We may not know the real story of the riot until much later in history – but it has unleashed a chain of events which wee shall closely follow. But until there is a real, organized mass movement of working people in the United States, we can expect nothing more than continued choreography.

 

Footnotes

1 Goethe ‘Der Zuaberlehrling’; 1815; in ‘Johan W.Goethe Samtichle Gedichte’; Frankfurt 2007; p. 121.

2 Logan Jaffe, Lydia DePillis, Isaac Arnsdorf and J. David McSwane, Capitol Rioters Planned for Weeks in Plain Sight. The Police Weren’t Ready. Insurrectionists made no effort to hide their intentions, but law enforcement protecting Congress was caught flat-footed; Jan. 7; Publico

3 Friedrich Engels, Revolution and Counter- Revolution in Germany XVII. Insurrection, September 18, 1852. MECW Volume 11, p. 3-91

4 Jaffe, DePillis, Arndsdorf and McSwane op. cit.

5 Robert Evans, How the Insurgent and MAGA Right are Being Welded Together on the Streets of Washington D.C. January 5, 2021

6 John Eligon, ‘Racial Double Standard of Capitol Police Draws Outcry, New York Times, Jan. 7, 2021

7 John Schwartz, ‘Capitol Rioters Walked Away. Climate Protesters Saw a Double Standard’; New York Times January 7, 2021,

8 https://www.nam.org/manufacturers-call-on-armed-thugs-to-cease-violence-at-capitol-11628/

9 Yves Smith ,MAGA Cosplayers Seize Capitol While Cops Flounder January 7, 2021

10 David Gelles, After Riot, Business Leaders Reckon With Their Support for Trump New York Times, Jan. 7, 2021

11 Paul Krugman, Opinion: Appeasement Got Us Where We Are. It’s time to stand up to the fascists among us, January 7th New York Times;

12 Hari Kumar, More Signs of Establishment Moves against Trump Berlin Blog; Oct 16, 2020

13 What is Behind Trump – Is There Method Behind His Madness? Finance Capital and Industrial Capital – An Evolutionary History, August 18, 2019

14 Breaking News CNN.

When is a coup not a coup? A view from Belgrade

Anja Ilic grew up under US bombs and knows a thing or two about what violent insurgencies really look like. While worrying about the consolidation of the far right, she warns against rallying behind a state which has proved to be racist and corrupt


11/01/2021

I was rather little when NATO forces bombed Serbia (then still formally Yugoslavia). I was born in late October 1995 – which was quite a delay for a couple that got married in 1987, after many years of relationship. But the late eighties and early nineties were war-like, followed by real war, so it was wiser not to rush.

I don’t remember that much from my earliest childhood, but I do remember the bombing quite well (I was 3 at the time). My father was a signaller in the Air Force of Yugoslavia, so every day rendered a new possibility that he’d be killed. I still vividly remember – and thoroughly hate – the sound of the sirens alarming us civilians to go get shelter.

My neighbours and I lived in Savamala, in a now demolished neighbourhood called Bara Venecija, and we were hiding in a huge pyramid made of concrete. Though now also demolished to pave the way for the Belgrade Waterfront project, it had served as a German bunker during the WWII. I remember a bricolage of fragments: of running to get shelter, day or night; of being crowded with my neighbours in the pyramid, with a lit yellow lantern; of doing my first-ever (proto-)hobby while in there – drawing.

I know that many people who have also experienced the bombing were quite amused with the latest scenes in the US and all the talks about the “coup”. This partly comes from chauvinistic sentiments. But in bigger part, I believe, it does not. It simply shows awareness of the blatant hypocrisy of American liberals (and some left-wingers) who keep whining about the “coup”.

This is notwithstanding the fact that many US liberals have actively advocated real coups, bombings and what-not outside the US, and others have simply failed to recognise that US foreign interventions were, in fact, coups. Joe Biden serves as an example of the former tendency, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of the latter.

Now, I am a Marxist, and as such, I do fully sympathise with fears about the far and fascist right who have been emboldened by Trump. At the same time, I disagree with the belief that what happened last Wednesday was a fascist coup. I disagree not out of pedantic reasons, but because I think that this whole farce about Trump being a fascist dictator is a dangerous and historically ill-informed one, all the more when it comes from self-declared socialist corners in the US.

Even more striking is the fact that this particular brand of “progressive” responds to something they deem the worst abomination in American political history – with appeals to the existing justice system, which they very well know is thoroughly unjust. Some of them, like Joe Biden or Kamala Harris, are very eager to serve it as such. Meanwhile others, like Bernie Sanders, are at best naïve in repeatedly suggesting contradictory reforms of the police state. They’ve been penning amendments in the previous days without at any point offering any hint of an organising vision.

Admittedly,when it comes to the US, I set the bar relatively low(er), than for left-wingers from some other parts of the world. But there comes a point when socialists need to quit idolising mainstream “progressives”, and put all their efforts in building the movements (let’s start with *a* movement) and organisations from below.

Mainstream idols aren’t supposed to be excused or benevolently ignored for failing to properly deal with their country’s imperialism – especially when it’s the leading imperialism in the world! Nor should we allow them to fail to recognise its foreign operations as inexcusable breaches of basic democratic principles; or to fail to offer any other response to the perceived fascist threat but a legalist one.

It is an act of solidarity to criticize socialists in other countries when necessary, especially those who are active in the world’s top imperial force. And I feel that the US Left should be offering a better example, through organising on the ground. Socialist organisers, especially those outside the second party of American capitalism, should pose a radical pole, and not cling to the two-party model.

I believe my expectations echo the bare minimum expected from socialists in countries other than the US. It is they after all, who all too frequently felt the consequences of their bloody politics first-hand.