Los Angeles: Anti-Imperialist Summit of the America, June 4-6

JUN 4 AT 1 PM – JUN 6 AT 11 PM EDT
Anti-Imperialist Summit of the America *Los Angeles* (Panel 4th / Action 6th)
4301 S Central Ave, Los Angeles

SATURDAY JUNE 4TH (10AM PANEL) -9:30am Registration: Central Avenue Constituency Center (CD9 Center) at 4301 Central Avenue, 90001
________________________________
SUNDAY JUNE 5: POSTER/BANNER MAKING
-Time/location to be determined
________________________________
MONDAY JUNE 6TH: ACTION/PROTEST 3PM-6PM
-Los Angeles Convention Center
________________________________
Endorsers/Organizers:
•Union del Barrio
•Partido de la Raza Unida
•Socialist Unity Party
•Black Alliance for Peace
•Progressive Asian Action Network
•Witness for Peace Southwest
•Harriet Tubman Center for Social Justice
•Zapata King Neighborhood Council
(Message us if your organization would like to endorse)

Los Angeles front of resistance, invites you to Anti-Imperialist Summit of the Americas (Panel 4th / Action 6th) to counter the imperialist Summit of the Americas.

The Summit of the Americas is taking place here in LA next month (June). The Biden administration is blocking Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua and the “Latin” American left from participating at the summit. Union del Barrio along with other organizations are organizing to make sure that the left is present at the Summit.

We want to make sure that the voices of Indigenous people, African people, women, LGBTQI+, environmentalists and everyone else is represented!

Strugglelalucha256


Después de expulsar a Francia, los militares en Mali se enfrentan a serios desafíos

El 2 de mayo de 2022, el portavoz militar de Mali, el coronel Abdoulaye Maïga, realizó una declaración en televisión nacional en la que leyó un comunicado que anunciaba el fin de los acuerdos de defensa que Mali tenía con Francia; lo que convertía en ilegal la presencia de tropas francesas en este territorio. El comunicado fue redactado por la cúpula militar del país, que está en el poder desde mayo de 2021.

El coronel Maïga dijo que los militares habían tomado esta radical decisión por tres razones. La primera era que estaban reaccionando ante la “actitud unilateral” de Francia, reflejada en la forma en que los militares franceses operaban en Mali y en la decisión tomada por el presidente francés Emmanuel Macron en junio de 2021, de retirar las fuerzas francesas del país “sin consultar a Mali”. A partir de ese momento, las fuerzas militares de Francia se trasladaron a la cercana Níger y siguieron sobrevolando con aviones militares franceses el espacio aéreo maliense. Estas violaciones del espacio aéreo “a pesar del establecimiento de una zona de exclusión aérea temporal por parte de las autoridades militares de Mali” constituyeron el segundo motivo de esta nueva decisión, según el comunicado. En tercer lugar, los militares de Mali habían pedido a los franceses, en diciembre de 2021, que revisaran el tratado de cooperación en materia de defensa entre Francia y Mali. Al parecer, la respuesta de Francia a las revisiones relativamente menores de Mali, el 29 de abril, no gustó a los militares, que emitieron el comunicado unos días después.

‘Ni paz, ni seguridad, ni reconciliación’

En los últimos años, las fuerzas francesas en Mali se ganaron la reputación de usar despiadadamente el poder aéreo, provocando innumerables víctimas civiles. El 3 de enero de 2021 se produjo un dramático incidente en la aldea de Bounti, en la región central de Mopti, no lejos de Burkina Faso. El ataque de un dron francés asesinó a 19 civiles que estaban en una fiesta de bodas. La ministra de Defensa de Francia, Florence Parly, dijo que “las fuerzas armadas francesas apuntaron a un grupo terrorista, que había sido formalmente identificado como tal”. Sin embargo, una investigación de la misión de las Naciones Unidas en Mali (la Misión Multidimensional Integrada de Estabilización de las Naciones Unidas en Mali, o MINUSMA) determinó que el dron disparó contra una celebración de bodas a la que asistían unas cien personas (entre las que tal vez, había cinco personas armadas).

Dos meses después, el 5 de marzo de 2021, en el pueblo de Talataye, al este de Bounti, un ataque aéreo francés mató a tres niños adolescentes e hirió a otros dos, que estaban cazando pájaros. El padre de los tres niños fallecidos – Adamou Ag Hamadou, un pastor de ovejas – dijo que los niños habían llevado a su ganado a beber agua y luego habían salido a cazar pájaros con sus dos rifles de caza. “Cuando llegué al lugar del ataque aéreo”, recordó Ag Hamadou, “había otras personas de este campamento [de caza]. Desde la 1 de la tarde hasta las 6 de la tarde, pudimos recoger los trozos de sus cuerpos, que enterramos”.

Estos son algunos de los incidentes más dramáticos. Otros ensucian el debate sobre la intervención militar francesa en Mali, pero pocas de estas historias salen de las fronteras del país. Hay varias razones que explican la indiferencia mundial ante estas muertes de civiles, una de ellas, es que estas atrocidades – cuando son perpetradas por los Estados occidentales durante sus intervenciones en África – no suscitan la indignación de la prensa internacional. Otra, es que los franceses niegan, sistemáticamente, incluso incidentes que encajan perfectamente en lo que debería considerarse como crímenes de guerra.

Por ejemplo, el 8 de junio de 2019, soldados franceses dispararon contra un automóvil en Razelma, a las afueras de Timbuktu, asesinando a tres civiles (uno de ellos un niño pequeño). Los militares franceses hicieron una declaración absolutamente bizarra con respeto a la matanza. Por un lado, los franceses dijeron que fue “involuntaria”. Pero, por otro lado, las autoridades francesas declararon que el automóvil era sospechoso, porque no se detuvo a pesar de los disparos de advertencia que se le hicieron. Testigos presenciales afirmaron que el conductor del vehículo estaba ayudando a una familia a trasladarse a Agaghayassane y que no estaban vinculados a ningún grupo terrorista. Ahmad Ag Handoune, familiar de los fallecidos en este atentado y que se acercó al lugar tras el incidente, dijo que los soldados franceses “cogieron gasolina y la vertieron sobre el vehículo para incendiarlo todo y que no se pudiera identificar nada”.

Las protestas contra la presencia militar francesa se suceden desde hace más de un año, y es plausible afirmar que el golpe militar de mayo de 2021, que instaló en el poder a la actual cúpula militar del país, se debió – en parte – tanto al fracaso de la intervención francesa en lograr la estabilidad, como a sus excesos. El coronel Assimi Goïta, quien dirige la junta militar, dijo que el acuerdo con los franceses “no trajo ni paz, ni seguridad, ni reconciliación” y que la población aspira a “detener el flujo de sangre maliense”.

Sin camino a seguir 

El día en que los malienses anunciaron que la presencia de las tropas francesas en su territorio era ilegal al haber terminado los acuerdos de defensa, el Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas, António Guterres, realizó una visita al vecino Níger. Cuando el ejército francés se retiró de Mali, se trasladó a Níger, cuyo presidente, Mohamed Bazoum, tuiteó su bienvenida a estas tropas. Guterres, al lado de Bazoum, dijo que el terrorismo “no es sólo una cuestión regional o africana, sino que amenaza a todo el mundo”.

Nadie niega el hecho de que el caos en la región africana del Sahel se agravó con la guerra de la OTAN contra Libia en 2011. Los problemas anteriores de Mali – que incluían una insurgencia tuareg de décadas y conflictos entre pastores fulanís y agricultores dogones – se vieron ahora convulsionados por la entrada de armas y hombres de Libia y Argelia. Tres grupos yihadistas aparecieron en el país como de la nada: Al Qaeda en el Magreb Islámico, el Movimiento para la Unificación de la Yihad en el Oeste Africano y Ansar Dine. Aprovecharon las tensiones más antiguas para tomar el norte de Mali en 2012 y declararon el estado de Azawad. Le siguió la intervención militar francesa en enero de 2013.

Iyad Ag Ghali, líder tuareg de Kidal, luchó en Libia y en Mali. A principios de la década de 2000, Ag Ghali creó la Alianza para la Democracia y el Cambio, que defendía los derechos de los tuaregs. “De voz suave y reservada”, decía un cable de la embajada estadounidense de 2007 sobre él. “Ag Ghali no mostraba nada del personaje de guerrero de sangre fría creado por la prensa maliense”. Tras una breve estancia como diplomático en Arabia Saudí, Ag Ghali regresó a Mali, se hizo amigo de Amadou Koufa, el líder del Frente de Liberación de Macina, y se adentró en el mundo de la yihad saheliana. En un famoso mensaje de audio de 2017, Amadou Koufa dijo: “El día que Francia empezó la guerra contra nosotros, ningún fulani ni nadie practicaba la yihad”. Ese tipo de guerra fue producto de la guerra de la OTAN contra Libia y de la llegada de Al Qaeda, y más tarde del ISIS, para buscar franquicias locales con agravios locales para alimentar sus ambiciones.

Los conflictos en Mali, como dijo el ex presidente Alpha Oumar Konaré hace más de una década, se inflaman debido a la asfixia de la economía del país. El país no ha recibido ningún tipo de alivio de la deuda ni de apoyo a las infraestructuras por parte de Occidente o de las organizaciones internacionales. Este Estado sin salida al mar, de más de 20 millones de habitantes, importa el 70% de sus alimentos, cuyos precios se han disparado en las últimas semanas y podrían agravar aún más la inseguridad alimentaria en Mali. Parte de la inestabilidad de la posguerra de la OTAN han sido los golpes militares en Mali, Guinea y Burkina Faso. Mali se enfrenta a duras sanciones de la Comunidad Económica de Estados de África Occidental (CEDEAO), sanciones que no harán sino agravar la crisis y provocar un mayor conflicto al norte de la capital maliense, Bamako.

El sentimiento antifrancés no es la historia completa en Mali. Lo que Francia y otros líderes mundiales deben reconocer es que hay cuestiones mucho más amplias en la raíz de los problemas que afrontan los malienses: cuestiones relacionadas con su medio de vida y su dignidad, que deben responderse para garantizar un futuro mejor para el país.

Este artículo fue producido para Globetrotter.

Vijay Prashad es un historiador, editor y periodista indio. Es miembro de la redacción y corresponsal en jefe de Globetrotter. Es editor en jefe de LeftWord Books y director del Instituto Tricontinental de Investigación Social. También es miembro senior no-residente del Instituto Chongyang de Estudios Financieros de la Universidad Renmin de China. Ha escrito más de 20 libros, entre ellos The Darker Nations y The Poorer Nations. Su último libro es Washington Bullets, con una introducción de Evo Morales Ayma.

Strugglelalucha256


One million people killed by capitalism

One million people in the United States have died of COVID-19. Coronavirus was written on their death certificates as the cause.

But they were really killed by poverty, racism and capitalism.

Even compared to other capitalist countries, the U.S. has a much higher death rate from COVID-19. If the United States had the same number of COVID fatalities per thousand people as Australia does, 900,000 people would still be alive.

At the beginning of the pandemic, reactionaries scoffed at the coronavirus. The late, unlamented, bigoted windbag Rush Limbaugh told his 12 million radio listeners on Feb. 24, 2020, that the coronavirus was just the common cold. 

The Wall Street Journal devoted an entire page of its March 25, 2020, issue to pour scorn on the risks. “Is COVID-19 as Deadly as They Say?” was the page’s lead headline.

Two years later, over 84 million people in the U.S. were counted as having gotten the disease. The real number is much higher because of a lack of initial testing and unreported figures from home testing.

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, half the U.S. population became infected with COVID-19. That includes 75 percent of children and adolescents.

Viruses don’t discriminate, but capitalism does. In zip code 11369 ― the East Elmhurst neighborhood of Queens, New York, where Malcolm X lived with his family ― one out of every 117 people died of COVID-19. That’s a rate almost three times the U.S. average.

In the Navajo Nation, 1,771 people died of Dikos Ntsaaígíí-19 (COVID-19). Latinx people are 18% of the U.S. population while having 24% of the COVID cases.

Essential workers were deliberately put in harm’s way. Nurses and other workers at Manhattan’s Mount Sinai Hospital had to wear Hefty garbage bags as their personal protective equipment. 

Over 150 transit workers in New York City died of the virus. Mass Transit Authority chief safety officer Pat Warren initially forbade workers from wearing masks. 

In the first 11 months of the pandemic, over 59,000 employees at the four biggest meatpacking companies became infected. At least 269 workers died in the industry. 

Most of these workers were Latinx, Black and/or immigrants. John Tyson and other dead animal capitalists got Trump to sign an executive order that drove workers back to the unsafe plants.

Demanding Chinese people die

Another big killer during the pandemic are high rents. Behind the slumlord is the bank or insurance company owning the cockroach capitalist’s mortgage.

Overcrowded housing makes social distancing impossible. Many are forced to double up in homes with their sister’s or brother’s family.

After the declining number of deaths in the last few months, there’s been a new push to downplay wearing masks. Schools and colleges were reopened without adequate protection.

Then came the highly contagious BA.2 Omicron subvariant. U.S. COVID cases soared to 171,000 on May 18. That same day socialist Cuba, despite a cruel U.S. economic blockade, had 61 cases. 

Also on May 18, the White House held its first pandemic briefing in six weeks. 

One million COVID deaths in the U.S. means 30 people died in an average small town with a population of 10,000. Despite that miserable record, the capitalist media are attacking the People’s Republic of China for doing too much to combat the coronavirus.

The Economist claimed in an April 16 editorial that “the zero-COVID policy has become a dead end from which the Communist Party has no quick exit.” To this mouthpiece of the Anglo-American financial aristocracy, profits are always more precious than life, especially the lives of poor people.

Socialist China, with over four times the population of the United States, has suffered 14,583 deaths from COVID-19. This figure includes the capitalist special administrative region of Hong Kong, which had 9,366 deaths.  

Hong Kong lagged behind the rest of China in taking necessary safety measures against COVID. Now it’s catching up. 

Yet Hong Kong’s death rate from the coronavirus is about a quarter of New York City’s rate. Not only is the Big Apple the capital of capitalism. It’s also a center of the $4 trillion U.S. medical-industrial complex. 

Eight medical schools are located in New York City, along with Rockefeller University, a leading research institution. That didn’t help people in East Elmhurst too much.

In the first year of the pandemic, more than 3,600 health-care workers died of COVID in the United States. Despite these workers’ valiant efforts, the capitalist medical system is unable to combat pandemics.

Socialist Cuba has the highest number of doctors per population in the world. But it doesn’t have a single health insurance company.

We need what Cuba has: free, quality health care for all.

Strugglelalucha256


Struggle ★ La Lucha PDF – May 23, 2022

Get PDF here

  • Fact-finding trip to Donbass: A front-line shelter in war zone
  • Beyond abortion, a struggle to win our future
  • Middle school students walk out for abortion rights
  • Students march on Capitol in defense of reproductive rights
  • Shireen Abu Akleh was a truth teller
  • Shireen Abu Akleh was assassinated
  • Never forget the MOVE bombing
  • ‘U.S.-NATO proxy war in Ukraine is extension of the war against us’
  • Donate to support Struggle-La Lucha’s John Parker on the frontline in Donbass
  • Victory Day & the struggle for abortion rights
  • Clarence Thomas speaks in NYC. ‘Mobilizing in Our Own Name: Million Worker March’
  • Washington’s economic war on Russia (and Germany)
  • Baltimore commemorates 8-year anniversary of Odessa massacre
  • Los héroes del Saratoga
Strugglelalucha256


Biden escalates ‘forever war’ in Somalia

Biden has authorized the redeployment of hundreds of troops in Somalia, thus reversing Trump’s December 2020 decision. The U.S. plans to establish a “persistent military presence” there. This new development is not very surprising, and in fact Washington had never quite left the country but has always maintained at least an advisory presence.

The U.S. has had an “invisible” presence in Africa for a while, encompassing a whole range of covert and clandestine operations – this includes the Horn of Africa, where Somalia is located. Washington has been militarily involved in the country since the early 1990s, as part of a humanitarian intervention in the context of civil war. By the early 2000s, violent fundamentalist Islamic groups started to grow in power and numbers, including the al-Shabaab, which started an insurgency in 2006-7.

At the end of his presidential term, former United States President Donald Trump had removed most troops from this African country, redeploying them to nearby states, so as to offer remote assistance to the Somali authorities against the al-Shabaab rebels. Recent U.S. intelligence reports claim that since the troops left, this group has grown stronger.

In July 2021 the Biden administration carried its first airstrike on Somali soil against al Shabaab combatants, shortly after withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. This took place without White House’s approval and was justified by the Pentagon by invoking the 2001 “Authorization for the Use of Military Force”, even thought this pertains to the terrorist groups that attacked the World Trade Center towers twenty years ago. In a context of growing mobilization in both houses to reclaim oversight of the very war powers the Presidency and the Pentagon have accumulated since the 911 attacks in 2001, even top Democrats (from Biden’s own party) warned  that such actions were a “dangerous precedent”. Even so, other such strikes followed – there was a major one in February 2022, for example. Voices within the Pentagon had been defending the redeployment of troops in Somalia since early 2021. It has finally happened.

One of recently elected Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s first actions was to issue a statement thanking President Biden for the redeployment and describing Washington as a “reliable partner” in the country’s anti-terrorism efforts. However several sectors of the country’s society dispute this description.

According to an Amnesty International April 2020 report, by the year 2020 the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) had already conducted hundreds of air strikes over a decade, with zero acountability for the deaths of civilians, who were routinely labeled as “terrorists”, and with no compensation of any kind to the families.

According to former Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the National Security Council (in the U.S.) Luke Hartig, it is simply not clear how Biden’s escalation of Washington’s “forever war” in Somalia even fits into the United States larger counterterrorism strategy, and this is so because the White House so far has not released its own National Strategy for Counterterrorism. As a result of this lack of transparency, nobody really knows what the strategy is and one can only speculate.

It is widely known, for example, that U.S. oil companies, such as Coastline Exploration Ltd, have interests in the country. Already in 1993, a Los Angeles Times article stated that  “nearly two-thirds of Somalia was allocated to the U.S. oil giants Conoco, Amoco, Chevron, and Phillips”.

When discussing Somalia, not so much is talked, though, about U.S.-China geopolitical competition in the region. Already in January 2021 the FPRI website published a piece by former U.S. Ambassador to Somalia Stephen M. Schwartz arguing that the withdrawal of troops could “open the door” to a “greater role for the People’s Republic of China” on the continent. Moreover, he argued that Somalia is “more” than just al-Shabaab. Chinese presence in Africa is of course a great concern for Washington.

More recently, in a March 18, 2002 article, former Pentagon official Michael Rubin criticized Biden’s “neglect” of Africa in general and of Somalia and its neighboring region, arguing that it was about time Washington provided “democratic, pro-Taiwan Somaliland” with the means to “defend itself against a Chinese-backed regime”. The Republic of Somaliland is a de facto state internationally considered to be part of Somalia, which lies  on the southern coast of the Gulf of Aden, a very strategic area, for a number of reasons, and is bordered by Djibouti, where China has its only overseas military base.

There is no indication so far the current administration will pursue any such policy pertaining to Somaliland especifically. In any case, for Washington, its activities in Somalia and in the larger Horn of Africa region are in now way merely about classic counter-terrorism operations. It is also about a kind of great power competition with Beijing.

While carrying on such a geopolitical dispute, the very legality of the U.S. military actions has been disputed, and Washington’s terrible record of human rights infringement in the region has been largely forgotten, while Biden’s presidency still hypocritically pursues the narrative of a moral leadership regarding human democracy and the rule of law.

Uriel Araujo is aresearcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.

Source: InfoBrics
Strugglelalucha256


Por qué América Latina necesita un nuevo orden mundial

El mundo quiere que el conflicto en Ucrania termine. Sin embargo, los países de la OTAN quieren prolongarlo, aumentando el suministro de armas a Ucrania y declarando que buscan “debilitar a Rusia”. Los Estados Unidos ya habían destinado 13.600 millones de dólares para armar a Ucrania. Biden acaba de solicitar 33.000 millones de dólares más. A modo de comparación, para acabar con el hambre en el mundo para el 2030 se necesitaría invertir 45.000 millones de dólares por año.

Incluso si las negociaciones tienen lugar y la guerra se acaba, es muy probable que no sea posible una solución pacífica real. Nada hace pensar que las tensiones geopolíticas vayan a disminuir, ya que detrás del conflicto en torno a Ucrania está el esfuerzo de Occidente por frenar el desarrollo de China, romper sus vínculos con Rusia y acabar con las asociaciones estratégicas del país asiático con el Sur Global.

En marzo, los comandantes del Mando de África de los EE. UU. y del Mando Sur (el general Stephen J. Townsend y la general Laura Richardson respectivamente) advirtieron al Senado estadounidense sobre los peligros percibidos del aumento de la influencia china y rusa en África, así como en América Latina y el Caribe. Los comandantes recomendaron que Estados Unidos debilite la influencia de Moscú y Pekín en estas regiones. Esta política forma parte de la doctrina de seguridad nacional de 2018 de Estados Unidos, que enmarca a China y Rusia como sus “desafíos centrales”.

No a la Guerra Fría

América Latina no quiere una nueva guerra fría. La región ya ha sufrido por décadas de gobiernos militares y políticas de austeridad justificadas en base a la llamada “amenaza comunista”. Decenas de miles de personas perdieron la vida y muchas decenas de miles más fueron encarceladas, torturadas y exiliadas sólo porque querían que sus países fueran soberanos y sus sociedades decentes. Esta violencia fue producto de la guerra fría impuesta por los Estados Unidos en América Latina.

América Latina quiere la paz. La paz sólo puede construirse sobre la base de la unidad regional. Este proceso comenzó hace 20 años, después de que un ciclo de levantamientos populares – impulsados por el tsunami de la austeridad neoliberal – condujera a la elección de Gobiernos progresistas: Venezuela (1999), Brasil (2002), Argentina (2003), Uruguay (2005), Bolivia (2005), Ecuador (2007) y Paraguay (2008). Estos países, a los que se unieron Cuba y Nicaragua, crearon un conjunto de organizaciones regionales: la Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América-Tratado de Comercio de los Pueblos (ALBA-TCP) en 2004, la Unión de Naciones Suramericanas (UNASUR) en 2008 y la Comunidad de Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños (CELAC) en 2011. Estas plataformas pretendían aumentar el comercio regional y la integración política. Sus logros se encontraron con una mayor agresión por parte de Washington, que trató de socavar el proceso intentando derrocar a los Gobiernos de muchos de los países miembros y dividiendo los bloques regionales para adaptarlos a los intereses de Washington.

Brasil

Por su tamaño y su relevancia política, Brasil fue un actor clave en estas primeras organizaciones. En 2009, Brasil se unió a Rusia, India, China y Sudáfrica para formar el BRICS, una nueva alianza con el objetivo de reordenar las relaciones de poder del comercio y la política mundiales.

El papel de Brasil no le gustó a la Casa Blanca, que – evitando la crudeza de un golpe militar – organizó una exitosa operación en alianza con sectores de la élite brasileña. Utilizando el poder legislativo, el sistema judicial y los medios de comunicación brasileños derrocaron el Gobierno de la presidenta Dilma Rousseff en 2016 y provocaron la detención del presidente Lula en 2018 (quien en ese momento lideraba las encuestas en las elecciones presidenciales). Ambos fueron acusados de formar parte de una cadena de corrupción que involucraba a la petrolera estatal brasileña. La justicia brasileña realizó una investigación conocida como “Operación Lava Jato”. La participación del Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos y del FBI en esa investigación se reveló tras una filtración masiva de los chats de Telegram del fiscal principal de la Operación. Sin embargo, antes de que se descubriera la injerencia estadounidense, la destitución política de Lula y Dilma devolvió el poder a la derecha en Brasilia. Brasil dejó de desempeñar un papel destacado en los proyectos regionales o mundiales que podían debilitar el poder de Estados Unidos, abandonó la UNASUR y la CELAC, y permanece en el BRICS sólo formalmente – como también es el caso de India –, debilitando la perspectiva de las alianzas estratégicas del Sur Global.

Cambio de rumbo

En los últimos años, América Latina ha experimentado una nueva ola de Gobiernos progresistas. La idea de la integración regional vuelve a estar sobre la mesa. Después de cuatro años sin celebrar una cumbre, la CELAC volvió a reunirse en septiembre de 2021, bajo el liderazgo del presidente mexicano Andrés Manuel López Obrador y el presidente argentino Alberto Fernández. Si Gustavo Petro triunfa en las elecciones presidenciales colombianas en mayo de 2022, y Lula gana en su campaña para la reelección a la presidencia de Brasil en octubre de 2022, por primera vez en décadas, las cuatro mayores economías de América Latina (Brasil, México, Argentina y Colombia) estarían gobernadas por la centro-izquierda, en particular los partidarios de la integración latinoamericana y caribeña. Lula ha dicho que si gana la presidencia, Brasil regresará a la CELAC y retomará una posición activa en el BRICS.

El Sur Global podría estar preparado para resurgir a finales de año y crearse un nuevo espacio dentro del orden mundial. Una prueba de ello es la falta de unanimidad que ha suscitado el intento de la OTAN de crear una mayor coalición para sancionar a Rusia. Este proyecto de la OTAN ha suscitado una reacción violenta en todo el Sur Global. Incluso los Gobiernos que condenan la guerra (como Argentina, Brasil, la India y Sudáfrica) no están de acuerdo con la política de sanciones unilaterales de la OTAN y prefieren apoyar las negociaciones para una solución pacífica. La idea de reanudar un movimiento de los no-alineados (inspirada en la iniciativa lanzada en la conferencia celebrada en Bandung, Indonesia, en 1955) ha encontrado eco en numerosos círculos.

Su intención es correcta. Buscan desescalar las tensiones políticas mundiales, que son una amenaza para la soberanía de los países y tienden a impactar negativamente en la economía global. El espíritu de no confrontación y paz de la Conferencia de Bandung es hoy urgente.

Pero el Movimiento de los No-Alineados surgió como un rechazo de los países del Tercer Mundo a elegir un bando en la polarización entre Estados Unidos y la URSS durante la Guerra Fría. Luchaban por su soberanía y el derecho a tener relaciones con los países de ambos sistemas, sin que su política exterior se decidiera en Washington o en Moscú.

Este no es el escenario actual. Sólo el eje Washington-Bruselas (y sus aliados) exigen la alineación con su llamado “orden internacional basado en reglas”. Los que no se alinean sufren las sanciones aplicadas contra decenas de países (devastando economías enteras, como las de Venezuela y Cuba), la confiscación ilegal de cientos de miles de millones de dólares en activos (como en los casos de Venezuela, Irán, Afganistán y Rusia), las invasiones e injerencias que resultan en guerras genocidas (como en Irak, Siria, Libia y Afganistán) y el apoyo exterior a las “revoluciones de color” (desde Ucrania en 2014 hasta Brasil en 2016). La exigencia de alineamiento proviene únicamente de Occidente, no de China o Rusia.

La humanidad se enfrenta a retos urgentes, como la desigualdad, el hambre, la crisis climática y la amenaza de nuevas pandemias. Para superarlos, las alianzas regionales del Sur Global deben ser capaces de instituir una nueva multipolaridad en la política mundial. Pero los sospechosos de siempre pueden tener otros planes para la humanidad.

Este artículo fue producido por Morning Star y Globetrotter.

Marco Fernandes es investigador del Instituto Tricontinental de Investigación Social (un pilar de la Asamblea Internacional de los Pueblos). Es miembro de la campaña No Cold War y es cofundador y coeditor de News on China (Dongsheng). Vive en Shanghai.

Strugglelalucha256


Is this the end of the French project in Africa’s Sahel?

On May 15, 2022, the military junta in Mali announced that it would no longer be part of the G5 Sahel platform. The G5 Sahel was created in Nouakchott, Mauritania, in 2014, and brought together the governments of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger to collaborate over the deteriorating security situation in the Sahel belt—the region just below the Sahara desert in Africa—and to increase trade among these countries. Behind the scenes, it was clear that the formation of the G5 Sahel was encouraged by the French government, and that, despite all the talk of trade, the real focus of the group was going to be security.

In early 2017, under French pressure, these G5 Sahel countries created the G5 Sahel Joint Force (FC-G5S), a military alliance to combat the security threat posed by the aftermath of the Algerian civil war (1991-2002) and the detritus of NATO’s 2011 war in Libya. The G5 Sahel Joint Force received the backing of the United Nations Security Council to conduct military operations in the region.

Mali’s military spokesperson Colonel Abdoulaye Maïga said on May 15 that his government had sent a letter on April 22 to General Mahamat Idriss Déby Itno—President of Chad’s transitional military council and the outgoing president of the G5 Sahel—informing him of Mali’s decision; the lack of movement in holding the conference of the G5 Sahel heads of state, which was supposed to take place in Mali in February, and handing over the rotating presidency of the FC-G5S to the country, forced Mali to take the action of leaving both the FC-G5S and the G5 Sahel platform, Colonel Maïga said on national television.

The departure of Mali was inevitable. The country has been torn apart by austerity policies pushed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and by conflicts that run along the length of this country of more than 20 million people. Two coups d’état in 2020 and 2021 in Mali were followed up with the promise of elections, which do not seem to be on the horizon. Regional bodies, such as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), have also imposed tough sanctions against Mali, which has only exacerbated the economic problems already being faced by the Malian people. The G5 Sahel defense ministers last met in November 2021, and the G5 Sahel member countries’ heads of state meeting in February 2022 was postponed. Mali was meant to take over the rotating presidency of G5 Sahel, but the other states who are part of the platform were not keen on this transfer (Chad has continued with the presidency).

Extra-regional power

The statement by Mali’s military blamed the institutional drift in the G5 Sahel on the “maneuvers of an extra-regional state desperately aiming to isolate Mali.” This “extra-regional state” is France, which Mali says has tried to “instrumentalize” the G5 Sahel for French objectives.

The five members of G5 Sahel are all former French colonies, who ejected the French through anti-colonial struggles and attempted to build their own sovereign states. These countries suffered assassinations (such as that of Burkina Faso’s former leader Thomas Sankara in 1987), dealt with IMF austerity programs (such as the measures taken against the government of Mali’s former President Alpha Oumar Konaré from 1996 to 1999), and faced the reassertion of French power (such as when France backed Chad’s Marshall Idriss Déby against Hissène Habré in 1990). After the French-initiated NATO war against Libya in 2011, and the destabilization it wrought, France intervened militarily in Mali through Operation Barkhane, and then—along with the United States military—it intervened across the Sahel as part of the G5 Sahel platform.

Since the reentry of the French military in the region, it has driven an agenda that seems to be more about catering to Europe’s needs than those of the Sahel region. The main argument made for the French (and U.S.) intervention in the Sahel is that they want to partner with the militaries of the region to combat terrorism. It is true that there has been a rise in militancy—some of it rooted in the expansion of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State activities in the Sahel. Conversations with officials in the Sahel states, however, reveal that they do not believe that countering terrorism is the main issue for French pressure on their governments. They believe, although they are wary of going on the record, that the Europeans are worried more about the issue of migration than that of terrorism. Rather than allow migrants—many from West Africa and West Asia—to reach the Libyan coast and make an attempt to cross the Mediterranean Sea, they want to build a perimeter in the Sahel to limit the migrant movement beyond that; France has, in other words, moved the southern border of Europe from north of the Mediterranean to south of the Sahara.

Poorest place on Earth

“We live in one of the poorest places on earth,” former Malian President Amadou Toumani Touré told me before he died in 2020. About 80 percent of the people of the Sahel live on less than $1.90 a day, and the population growth in this region is expected to rise from 90 million in 2017 to 240 million by 2050. The Sahel belt owes a vast debt to the wealthy bondholders in the North Atlantic states, who are not prepared for debt forgiveness. At the seventh summit of the G5 Sahel in February 2021, the heads of state called for a “deep restructuring of the debt of the G5 Sahel countries.” But the response they received from the IMF was deafening.

Part of the budgetary problem is the demands made on these states by France to increase their military spending against any increase in their spending for humanitarian relief and development. The G5 Sahel countries spend between 17 percent and 30 percent of their budgets on their militaries. Three of the five Sahel countries have increased their military spending astronomically over the past decade, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute: Burkina Faso by 238 percent, Mali by 339 percent, and Niger by 288 percent. The arms trade is suffocating these countries. With the potential entry of NATO into the region, this illusionary form of treating the Sahel’s problems as security problems will only persist. Even for the United Nations, the questions of development in the area have become an afterthought to the main focus on war.

Lack of support for the civilian governments to deal with the real problems in the region has led to military coups in three of the five countries: Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali. The military junta in Mali ejected the French military from Mali’s territory on May 2, a week before it left G5 Sahel. Indications of disquiet regarding French policies swirl around the region. Will Mali’s example be followed by any of the other countries who are part of the G5 Sahel group, and will France’s real project in the Sahel—to limit migration of people from the Global South to Europe—eventually collapse with Mali’s exit from the G5 Sahel?

This article was produced by Globetrotter. Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter. He is an editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is a senior non-resident fellow at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China. He has written more than 20 books, including The Darker Nations and The Poorer Nations. His latest book is Washington Bullets, with an introduction by Evo Morales Ayma.

Strugglelalucha256


New York City: Protest the Zionist Parade, May 22

Join Us Sunday, May 22nd
11:00am to #ProtestTheParade
Reject zionist supremacy!
No celebrations and parades for war criminals!
No normalization of zionism in NYC or anywhere.
Join us to condemn zionist war crimes and their revolting celebration.
Meeting Point: West side of 5th Ave at 58th St. Enter from 6th Ave or Central Park South exit (not 60th St), off the 5th Ave N, Q, or R stop.
#FreePalestine #RejectColonization
Strugglelalucha256


Labor Council opposes $40 billion in military aid to Ukraine

The Troy, N.Y., Labor Council passed the following resolution in opposition to the $40 billion in military aid to Ukraine. The resolution could be summarized as saying, “Money for housing, education and healthcare, not for war.”

Whereas: According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, it would cost $20 billion to end homelessness in the United States.

Whereas: The College For All Act endorsed by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Pramila Jayapal aims for free college tuition at all community colleges, public 4-year colleges, and tribal colleges.

And Whereas: The estimated total cost of the College For All Act is $700 billion.

Whereas: : A recent study by Yale epidemiologists found that Medicare for All would save around 68,000 lives a year while reducing U.S. health care spending by around 13%, or $450 billion a year.

Whereas: The US government should prioritize the needs of its own citizens.

Therefore be it resolved: that the Troy Area Labor Council AFL-CIO opposes the recently passed bill that would spend 40 Billion dollars in military aid to Ukraine.

Strugglelalucha256


U.S. government denies visas to Cuban civil society delegation to People’s Summit

People’s Summit for Democracy
May 18, 2022 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

U.S. government denies visas to Cuban civil society delegation to People’s Summit

Among the 23 person delegation that was set to travel to Los Angeles to participate in the Summit
are scientists, Olympians, and youth activists

Los Angeles – The People’s Summit for Democracy is outraged by the decision of the United
States government to deny visas to a 23 person delegation from Cuban civil society. The denial
of their visas is an affront to the same democratic values that the U.S. government and its
“Summit of the Americas” pretends to uphold. With this decision and Cuba’s exclusion from
Biden’s official Summit, Cuba has been denied a voice in vital discussions about democracy,
integration, and regional cooperation.

Among the 23 people set to travel to Los Angeles to participate in the People’s Summit for
Democracy were renowned Cuban scientist and medical doctor Tania Crombet Ramos a
member of the World Academy of Sciences who contributed to the development of several
life-saving vaccines, Reineris Salas Pérez an Olympic wrestler who won the Bronze medal in
Tokyo, Jorge González Nuñez a queer Christian student leader, and many others including
journalists, artists, trade unionists, and community leaders.

The participation of these diverse representatives of Cuban society would have given people in
the U.S., particularly young people, an important opportunity to learn more about the island
and build people to people relationships. It is an affront to the very necessary dialogue and
normalization of relations between the people of the United States with the Cuban people who
have been unjustly separated by the six-decade illegal U.S. blockade.

Manolo De Los Santos, one of the organizers of the People’s Summit said: “The U.S.
government’s policy towards is cruel towards the Cuban people, but also towards the people
of the United States who are being denied the right to not only relate with the people on the
Island, but also to be able to speak and dialogue directly with them.”
We call on the U.S. government and its Embassy in Havana, to reverse the decision to deny their
visas.

Sign our petition calling on the US to reverse their decision: https://chng.it/CjY4x8R4bq

Follow the People’s Summit on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and our website.

For press inquiries and interview requests contact: press@peoplessummit2022.org

Source: PeoplesSummit2022.org

Strugglelalucha256
https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/page/49/