Ebola in Africa - Third World Network

Transcription

Editors Note
OUTBREAKS of epidemics are not uncommon in
our times, but few have generated such a terrified
response as the recent outbreak of Ebola virus disease.
Although the current outbreak has been mainly
confined to West Africa, the spectre of Ebola has
haunted countries and continents far removed. The
rush by the governments of Canada and Australia to
erect immigration controls is a case in point; it smacks
of the medieval response to bubonic plague or, to use
the apocalyptic name by which it was referred to, the
Black Death.
Such paranoid responses have been rightly
criticised for good reason, including the simple fact
that while Ebola is very infectious, it is not very
contagious. The truth is that Ebola, unlike airborne
diseases, can only be spread through close contact with
the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of
infected humans or animals.
All this is not to minimise the gravity of the
current outbreak, which has already been declared by
the World Health Organisation (WHO) to be an
international public health emergency. What is a
particular cause for concern is that the disease, which
for the past 40 years was confined to remote areas of
Central Africa, has now spread to the West African
states of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. Not only
has the present outbreak infected more than 16,000
people and claimed some 7,000 lives; it is still not clear
when it will be contained. And to date, there is no cure
for the disease!
The Ebola crisis has served to highlight the larger
crisis of global public health which is reflected most
acutely in the Third World. The deplorable state of
public health infrastructure in the affected countries
has been a major factor in the failure to contain the
crisis. While poverty and civil war have contributed to
the shoddy state of health facilities in these countries,
the role of international financial institutions such as
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
Bank has not been sufficiently exposed in the making
of this health crisis.
Since the 1980s, especially with the ascendancy
of neoliberal policies, both these institutions have
imposed on these affected countries the adoption of
strict financial austerity policies as preconditions for
the loans they advance. These countries are thus
compelled to drastically cut their public sector
spending, including expenditure on the critical public
health sector. The consequence of this has been the
shrivelling up of the already dilapidated public health
infrastructure in these poverty-stricken countries. This
has left these countries completely ill-equipped to face
the Ebola epidemic when it broke out.
More recently, as if to atone for their sins, both
the IMF and the World Bank have pledged some $530
million to help Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone
contain the scourge. In October, at a special session
with African leaders on Ebola during the IMF/World
Bank annual meetings in Washington, IMF Managing
Director Christine Lagarde said that in addition to the
aid, the IMF would relent on its spending strictures to
enable these afflicted countries to increase their public
expenditures to meet their desperate health needs. Too
little too late, critics of these institutions may justifiably
say!
The whole crisis has also brought to the fore the
question of why there has been no real commitment
to research on a vaccine or cure for Ebola. Since the
global hegemony of neoliberal ideology, with the
private sector assuming the dominant role in
development, it has been left to the corporate sector
to determine the priorities for medical research. To be
sure, some of the most important scientific and medical
discoveries have actually been the result of public
sector or publicly funded research. Private corporations
have appropriated the benefits of such research and a
mythology has been fostered that only the private
sector has the real capacity for research and innovation.
But the whole and sole basis for private sector
research is profitability, and since Ebola has been the
misfortune of poor African nations, it has been deemed
not sufficiently profitable to invest in research to tackle
the disease. Decrying this failure of the current global
system, Professor John Ashton, President of the UK
Faculty of Public Health, has denounced it as the moral
bankruptcy of capitalism acting in the absence of a
moral and social framework.
And as some critics have pointed out, even if a
vaccine were discovered, can its benefits be realised by
the needy in the developing world under a global system
of exclusive patents designed to confer monopoly
profits to its corporate holders? How are these medical
remedies to be accessed by those who need them if
they are exorbitantly priced?
These are weighty questions and they compel us
to reconsider the whole basis of a world system with
its huge economic and social disparities between rich
and poor where the fate of millions and the health of
nations is determined by the profit calculus of private
coporations.
In our cover story, we take up the issue of the
Ebola epidemic. We feature a number of articles which
provide background information on the disease, its
spread and the varied responses to it. Others highlight
the inequities of the global economic system which
have left poorer nations so vulnerable to the disease.
Finally, we discuss the critical problem of the absence
of a vaccine or cure for Ebola and show how this is
due to the inadequacies of a global regime which
focuses primarily on profits and patents.
The Editors
Visit the Third World Network website at: www.twn.my
THIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
Third World
RESURGENCE
www.twn.my
No 290/291 Oct/Nov 14
ISSN 0128-357X
33
35
37
39
41
44
Liberian nurses carry the body of an Ebola victim for burial. While
much coverage of the largest Ebola outbreak in history has focused on
the aetiology of the disease, the social and economic roots of the epidemic
have been insufficiently highlighted.
9
ECOLOGY
2
Guar beans and fracking
giants Joyce Nelson
ECONOMICS
5
BITs a challenge to regional
integration in Africa Yao
Graham
HEALTH & SAFETY
8
Bhopal victims present
demands on 30th anniversary
of disaster
14
18
20
22
24
28
COVER
Confronting Ebola under a
failed global system
9
Ebola epidemic exposes the
pathology of the global
THIRD WORLD RESURGENCE is published by the Third World Network, an international network of groups and individuals involved in efforts to bring about a
greater articulation of the needs and rights
of peoples in the Third World; a fair distribution of world resources; and forms of development which are ecologically sustainable and fulfil human needs.
economic and political
system Peoples Health
Movement
The long incubation of Ebola
Jeremy Seabrook
Inequalities and the Ebola
crisis Nissim
Mannathukkaren
Ebola in Africa: A product of
history August H Nimtz
Ebola and the failure of Big
Pharma Shila Kaur
No cure: Behind the lack of
options to treat Ebola
Edward Hammond
Lessons the US can learn
from Cuba and the Ebola
crisis Dan Kovalik
47
The Islamic State: A
monster empire created
Jerome Roos
There are no moderate
Syrian rebels Ben
Reynolds
Pro-Israel hawks take
wing over extension of
Iran nuclear talks Jim
Lobe
Phantoms of the past
Ramzy Baroud
Climate change, land
grabs and revolution in
Burkina Faso
Alexander Reid Ross
Ayotzinapa protests
awaken Mexico from a
nightmare Maggie
Blanca and Jeremy
Crowlesmith
The forgotten coup John
Pilger
HUMAN RIGHTS
49
Coca-Cola and human rights
in Colombia
WOMEN
52
Against all the odds: Maternity and mortality in Afghanistan Karlos Zurutuza
VIEWPOINT
54
Building an egalitarian
economy in Myanmar
Ramesh Shrestha
WORLD AFFAIRS
POETRY
29
56
The bases of war in the
Middle East David Vine
THIRD WORLD RESURGENCE is published monthly by Third World Network, 131
Jalan Macalister, 10400 Penang, Malaysia.
Tel: 60-4-2266728 Fax: 60-4-2264505.
Email: [email protected]
Printed by Jutaprint, No. 2, Solok Sungai
Pinang 3, 11600 Penang, Malaysia.
Cover Design: Lim Jee Yuan
Copyright © Third World Network
A poem on poetry Amado
V Hernandez
Publisher and Chief Editor: S.M.
Mohamed Idris; Managing Editor: Chee
Yoke Ling; Editors: T Rajamoorthy, Lean
Ka-Min, Evelyne Hong; Contributing Editors: Roberto Bissio (Uruguay), Charles
Abugre (Ghana); Staff: Linda Ooi (Design),
Lim Jee Yuan (Art Consultant), Lim Beng
Tuan (Marketing), Yap Bing Nyi (Editorial)
ECOLOGY
Guar beans and fracking giants
It sounds incredible but the fact is that the shale oil/natural gas industry is actually
dependent upon a little green bean which is grown mainly by peasant farms in
India. Joyce Nelson explains how the demand for this bean by this giant industry in
the US triggered a price bubble in India.
LAST year on 4 July, North Dakota
oil and gas billionaire Harold Hamm
just couldnt contain his patriotic enthusiasm. In an op-ed commentary
published by Forbes, Hamm wrote,
America has a long history of achieving the impossible. We defeated the
British. We landed on the moon. We
invented the Internet. And now we can
add horizontal drilling to the list of
American innovations that have
changed the world forever.
Frustrated that hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has been getting all the
attention surrounding the shale oil/gas
revolution, Hamm insisted, What is
new is horizontal drilling. In 2000,
there were less than 50 horizontal
drilling rigs in the US and experts
believed we had reached peak oil. In
2009, the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance issued its Declaration of
Energy Independents [sic] due to the
phenomenal turnaround caused by
horizontal drilling. With 1,200 horizontal drilling rigs in the US by 2012,
Hamm enthused, This advanced
technology allows us to drill two
miles down, turn right, go another two
miles, and hit a target the size of a
lapel pin.
The combination of horizontal
drilling and fracking certainly is a remarkable feat that has not been fully
understood. Take, for example, the
statement made by Pioneer Natural
Resources (PNR) CEO Scott Sheffield during a quarterly conference
call in 2013. Sheffield was discussing PNRs horizontal drilling and
fracking in the Permian Basin of
Texas. Sheffield said, Whats interesting, in six months, its reached
140,000 barrels of oil equivalent. Our
typical vertical well takes 30 to 35
years to produce 140,000 [barrels] on
a vertical well. So we did that in six
months.
What seems like an offhand com-
Guar beans (pic) are crushed to make guar gum, a crucial ingredient in the fracking
process.
ment needs to be spelled out clearly: By switching from vertical well drilling to horizontal drilling and fracking,
the company was able to suck out
three decades worth of oil and gas
production in six months! No wonder shale wells are depleted in about
three years, as Canadian geologist
David Hughes and others have
pointed out, creating a drilling treadmill just to maintain continuous production and resulting in areas of North
America that look like a pin cushion.
Hamm is right: the shale revolution is pretty astonishing, and the most
surprising thing about it is that it all
pretty much depends on a little bean.
A little bean
It sounds like something out of
the Brothers Grimm or Hans Christian Andersen. The giant shale oil/
natural gas industry is actually dependent upon a little green bean,
grown mainly by peasant farms in
India. Without the guar bean, the inTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
2
dustry would come crashing down
like the giant felled in Jack and the
Beanstalk.
Guar beans are crushed to make
guar gum, which has unique binding,
thickening and emulsifying properties
making it a crucial ingredient in the
drilling slurries used to fracture shale
rock formations. In the fracking process, millions of litres of water and
fracking chemicals, mixed with large
volumes of frac-sand, are pumped
under extreme pressure into each well.
Guar thickens the fluids, helping to
keep the grains of sand in suspension
until they are forced into the fractures
blasted into the shale rock. The sand
holds the fractures open while the oil
or gas seeps out to the wellhead. Without guar gum, the frac-sand
would simply fall to the bottom of the
well.
Until about a decade ago, guar
was bought mainly by the food industry, which uses guar gum as a thickener for things like ice-cream and
ketchup, and as an ingredient that
ECOLOGY
keeps bakery goods moist. Guar
grows best in heat and full sun with
frequent rains. Thousands of farmers
in India, where most guar beans are
grown, make a hard-scrabble living
planting guar in July and selling their
few acres at the farmgate in October. Most of those farmers also grow millet, lentils and carrots. Then, like something in a fable,
a big change came.
With the advent of horizontal
drilling and multi-stage fracking, the
primary frackers like Halliburton,
Schlumberger, Baker Hughes and
Calfrac Well Services gradually
started buying up guar gum like there
was no tomorrow. A report by IMR
International placed the turning point
at 2010. IMR founder Dennis Seisun
told the media, Basically the oil people are big buyers, big spenders. They
go to the guar suppliers and say,
Whats your price, and give me all
you got. The food industry is getting
left behind.
Before the shale boom, the food
industry was paying about $2,000 for
a ton of guar gum. By 2012, the price
was $28,000. Between 2006 and
2011, North American frackers quadrupled the amount of guar gum they
were using, driving the amount up to
one billion pounds in 2011. According to Report on Business (December
2012), a typical shale oil well consumes roughly 4,000 kilograms of
guar gum. By 2012, Halliburton alone
was using 14 million pounds of guar
gum per month.
Meanwhile, those peasant farmers in northwestern India (especially
in Rajasthan state) couldnt believe
their good fortune. With the frackers
and the bakers and the ketchup makers all vying for guar, the price started
rising like some moist gluten-free
muffin. Guar farmers took out loans
to buy equipment and extend their
guar acreage. A few bought SUVs or
gold bars, becoming the envy of their
neighbours. Then those neighbours by
the thousands stopped growing lentils and millet and jumped on the guar
bean bandwagon. By 2012, 8.6 million acres of guar beans were being
grown in India and the price just kept
rising. With the advent of horizontal drilling and multi-stage fracking, the primary frackers
like Halliburton started buying up guar gum in large amounts.
The price cut into the profitability of the frackers, who were paying
some 30% of their well-service costs
just for a bean. During the summer of
2012, the situation reached a climax.
As The Guardian (18 December
2012) reported, by that point demand
for guar was so strong that panic buying set in and prices were doubling
week-by-week.
While the guar gum price was
reaching toward $28,000 per ton (with
an increase of 1,400% in a single
year), one of the fracking giants took
action. Halliburton CEO David Lesar
complained to Reuters (20 July 2012)
that guar had the fastest-moving
commodity price that I have ever
seen. But the Reuters writer noted
Halliburton itself probably contributed to the volatility by embarking
on an aggressive and successful campaign to build up a private stockpile
that would protect it from future supply gaps. Halliburton reportedly
stockpiled four months worth of guar
gum, adding to the panic buying by
others.
As the Wall Street Journal (5 December 2012) reported, US oil-services companies, worried that a
drought in India would hurt guar output, began to stockpile the gum, which
they buy from Indian processors or
through commodity-trading companies like Connell Bros. Co., a division of Wilbur-Ellis Co. At the same
time, India-based commodity specuTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
3
lators began to ramp up the price of
the bean and gum on local futures
markets. The WSJ writer called it a
classic bubble.
The bubble
Like many agricultural commodities, guar is overlaid by an infrastructure of traders, bankers, speculators
and exporters all of whom were getting very rich on guar. According to
The Guardian, as the price of guar was
escalating in the summer of 2012,
one of Indias biggest guar exporters, Vikas WSP, gave away 3,000
tonnes of guar seeds to encourage
farmers to switch away from cotton
and other crops to guar bushes. Finally, Indias commodity markets regulator, the Forward Markets
Commission, stepped in during late
summer 2012 and suspended futures
trading because of suspicions of market
manipulation.
As
globalresearch.ca reported (18 September 2012), day-traders and rogue
brokers were having such a guar
speculating frenzy that twice the size
of annual production of the [actual]
crop was traded in the futures markets on a single day. Other speculators were buying up and storing guar
in warehouses (financed by private
banks) to raise the price.
The FMCs market suspension,
coupled with the massive stockpiling
by US frackers, suddenly plunged the
ECOLOGY
price of guar to about $7,000 per ton
a bursting of the bubble that meant
many farmers who had taken out bank
loans based on the high guar price
were suddenly in trouble. Nonetheless, with free seeds available from
exporters, farmers in three Indian
states increased their guar acreage by
almost 30% in 2013, only to see another price bubble, and another crash
by November 2013, with the regulator again stepping in to investigate.
Given such a volatile market, the
oil-services giants decided to make
their own fracking guar substitutes.
Into the laboratory
Calgary-based Trican Well Services Ltd. touts its trademarked guar
substitutes TriFrac-C and Novum,
which the companys 2012 Annual
Report says have been field tested by
Trican customers and results have
been equivalent to or have exceeded
guar-based systems.
Baker Hughes trademarked
something called AquaPerm, while
Halliburton rolled out PermStim
leading a business writer for Reuters
(13 August 2012) to note that they
sound like hair care products but
could be a big prize for oil services
companies as they try to stabilise
costs. By 2013, Schlumberger was
advertising its trademarked guar substitute HiWay. Most of these laboratory substitutes use biodegradable
A fracking rig in the US state of Pennsylvania.
polymers, thought to be more greenfriendly than other chemicals.
But according to market trends
analyst Thomasnet.com (9 May
2013), there isnt anything currently
available with the reliability and quantities of guar gum. Others have noted
that the industry likes to claim its proprietary fracking fluids contain common food ingredients, like guar. For
example, the American Petroleum
Institutes July 2014 report Hydraulic Fracturing: Unlocking Americas
Natural Gas Resources uses images
of a tube of lipstick and an ice-cream
bar (which both contain guar gum) as
examples of the non-threatening ingredients in fracking fluids.
By 2014, Indias Economic Times
(6 February 2014) was reporting that
Preparing the field for guar cultivation in India. The guar market has been characterised
by sharp volatility.
4
guar demand from the US oil/gas sector was again on the rise, with
Halliburton and Baker Hughes the
two major buyers of Indias guar
gum. Whether that means PermStim
and AquaPerm delivered less-thanstellar fracking results is not clear.
Ironically, however, increasing
climate change is causing weather
extremes that endanger Indias guar
crops another form of volatility for
the sector but this time by delayed,
weakened or heightened monsoon
seasons. Many peasant farmers themselves, who profit little from the price
increases, appear to be turning away
from guar, apparently having lost faith
in the economic trickle-down theory.
A July 2014 Guar Gum Report: India
from
corporate
adviser
threeheadedlion.com quotes farmers
saying they are less interested in
growing guar. This year a delayed
monsoon season was followed by intense monsoon flooding that wreaked
havoc across India.
Perhaps fossil fuel-induced climate change will itself be the giantslayer that brings down the fracking
industry. Otherwise, maybe the Big
Green NGOs could use their millions
to provide free seeds for other crops
and help Indias peasant farmers transition away from guar.
ÿu
Joyce Nelson is an award-winning freelance writer/
researcher and the author of five books. This article
is reproduced from the Watershed Sentinel
(November-December
2014,
www.watershedsentinel.ca).
ECONOMICS
BITs a challenge to regional
integration in Africa
International investment agreements, especially bilateral investment treaties (BITs),
that have come to preoccupy some African countries pose a major challenge to
Africas integration agenda, writes Yao Graham.
OVER the past two decades, as part
of the push to attract foreign investment, African countries have been
signing international investment
agreements (IIAs), mainly bilateral
investment treaties (BITs), with little
attention to tradeoffs such as loss of
national and regional policy space.
IIAs also take the form of investment provisions in free trade agreements such as in the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the
European Union (EU) and the Caribbean countries (CARIFORUM). It has
sections on investment, competition
and services, all of which have investment protection implications. The
EPAs being negotiated between the
EU and various African regional
groupings have rendezvous clauses
for negotiations on investment issues
similar to what is contained in the
CARIFORUM EPA. A number of
North African countries have free
trade agreements with Europe which
also contain investment provisions.
Then there is a third category
which is regional investment agreements. For example, there is a
COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) investment
area agreement; the SADC (Southern
African Development Community)
protocol on finance and investment,
and the ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) Energy
Protocol which is an obscure but very
important agreement.
So far African countries have
signed close to 1,000 BITs. According to the United Nations Conference
on Trade and Development
(UNCTAD), by the end of 2013, Africas bilateral investment agreements
amounted to 27% of global BITs. Formally speaking, these state-to-state
Pipelines belonging to a foreign oil company in Nigeria. The pattern of actual
investment flows into Africa shows that most have gone into resource extraction,
with large amounts going into some of the most difficult countries such as Nigeria...
particularly in the zones where oil extraction is taking place.
agreements are reciprocal frameworks
for the management of investment
flows between countries. Between
most African countries and their partners in the BITs, however, formal reciprocity does not mean substantive
reciprocity because most African
countries are not capital exporters and
usually sign these agreements as investment attraction agreements while
the capital-exporting countries sign
them as investment protection agreements. So different purposes have
driven the signing of these agreements.
The signing of BITs globally has
been declining since a peak in the
mid-1990s. The African pattern of
signing BITs mirrors the declining
global trend. This is not surprising
because African countries are not
demandeurs of BITs but takers, so if
those who are pushing for them slow
down, it will be reflected in what happens in Africa.
In recent times, however, negotiations have been initiated for a
5
number of major regional or bilateral
investment agreements the outcomes
of which will have implications well
beyond those directly involved. These
include the Trans-Pacific Partnership
which involves the US and a number
of major players in Asia; the negotiations involving ASEAN, Australia,
China, India, Japan, New Zealand and
Korea; the EU-US Transatlantic Trade
and Investment Partnership; and in
Africa there is the trilateral free trade
area between SADC, the East African Community (EAC) and
COMESA. An African investment
treaty is also said to be in the offing.
It has been estimated that these agreements cover 76 countries and about
half the worlds population with a
combined GDP of 90% of the worlds
GDP.
Germany has got the largest
number of BITs in Africa, 42, China
has 34 and the UK 22. Despite the
decline in the overall push for BITs,
Africa remains a target with demands
from Asian countries and notably
ECONOMICS
Canada which has been particularly
aggressive. In fact the Canadian foreign minister early this year publicly
celebrated the fact that under the
Stephen Harper government, 2013
was Canadas most successful year for
the signing of BITs particularly in
Africa. In 2013 it signed agreements
with Tanzania, Cote dIvoire,
Cameroon, Madagascar, Mali, Nigeria, Senegal and Zambia, while it
has ongoing negotiations with Ghana,
Tunisia and Burkina Faso. The US has
also signed BITs in Africa, with
Cameroon, the Democratic Republic
of Congo, Congo Republic, Egypt,
Morocco, Mozambique, Senegal and
Rwanda.
In addition to the bilateral investment treaties, the US has been signing Trade and Investment Framework
Agreements (TIFAs). These are
understandings very broadly put, but
what they really create is a political
and legal framework within which
specific demands are made on the signatory countries regarding the treatment of US investment. So although
strictly speaking they do not belong
to the classic category of international
investment agreements, the TIFAs
serve that purpose. The US African
Growth and Opportunity Act
(AGOA), a unilateral preferential
market access framework for qualifying countries, also contains investment-related conditionalities which
serve investment protection and investment liberalisation functions.
A look at the pattern of actual investment flows into Africa shows that
most have gone into resource extraction, with large amounts going into
some of the most difficult countries
such as Nigeria, hardly a model of stability, particularly in the zones where
oil extraction is taking place. Angola
continued to receive American investment during the civil war even as the
US was arming the opposition.
There are issues with so many of
these investment agreements. The
broad effect is the restriction on policy
space as a quid pro quo for expected
investment inflows. There is an imbalance between the state and investors in terms of rights and obligations
under such agreements, usually in favour of the investor. The state agrees
to give up a lot of its power to regulate investment even in regard to pro-
tecting identified public policies.
The institutional management of
investment agreement negotiations in
many countries is problematic in
terms of the analysis of the clauses.
In many African countries, there is
also a challenge of coherence. This is
not simply policy coherence across
sectors but also policy coherence even
across different BITs because usually
each capital-exporting country comes
in with different demands, differences
in definitions and so on.
BITs establish very broad standards which are subject to interpretation by tribunals. The tribunal function is vested in the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism which
provides for treaty-based arbitration
which has been found to be very intrusive and also with very expensive
enforcement. One of the things about
this mechanism is that it is one-sided
in disciplining the role of the state
because it is designed primarily to
protect the investor, who can initiate
an action under the arbitration provision. The mere threat of a suit or an
award can force the abandonment of
important public policy initiatives
because the cost of arbitration is very
high. Many African countries have to
hire and pay expensive lawyers from
outside the continent.
The wide coverage of definitions
in BITs is another problem. The definition of investment, for example, can
cover anything from derivatives to
establishment of a firm and concrete
direct investment. What is a state
measure is also defined very broadly.
For example, the Canada-Benin BIT
defines this to include any law, regulation or procedure requirement or
practice by any branch of government
at any level of the state from district
to national; the Rwanda-US BIT has
the same provisions.
A BIT, being primarily about investment attraction, has its own very
narrow logic which may not necessarily fit in with where a countrys
development policy is going. It effectively freezes the regulatory climate
of the country as of the time the BIT
is signed. Then there are burdensome
obligations both in substance and in
process and their institutional challenges. The reality is that, after these
treaties are signed, there is a lot of
work to do on what they mean in
6
terms of policy. In many cases, nothing else is done until disputes arise
and people start scrambling to try and
work out what they mean and, worse
still, realise the prohibitive cost of litigation.
The substance of the treaties
poses a number of questions. Under
the national treatment provision in
such agreements, once somebodys
investment has entered your country
under the BIT, the investor is to be
treated like a national and cannot be
discriminated against in any way.
National treatment has led to a
number of problems in some contexts.
For example, when South Africa introduced its Black Economic Empowerment programme, it was sued by a
number of foreign investors under
various BITs who said the affirmative
action to correct the ills of apartheid
violated the national treatment nondiscrimination provisions. So anything to do with localisation, local
procurement rules and so on could
potentially run foul of these provisions.
The most favoured nation
(MFN) provision under which investors from one foreign country are
to be treated no less favourably than
those from any other foreign country
is also problematic, as is the principle of fair and equitable treatment
which has been interpreted very
broadly. There are also restraints on
performance requirements; for instance, if a country wants investors
to be located in a particular place, train
a given number of locals or transfer
technology to contribute to national
development in a particular way, it is
no longer possible. North American
BITs in particular are very strong in
outlawing performance requirements.
In fact the Rwanda-US BIT applies
the prohibition even to third-party investors so that, even for non-US companies, Rwanda is required not to impose performance requirements.
The German model BIT of 2008
has national and MFN treatment in a
single clause, but many BITs have
them as separate clauses. The
Rwanda-US and Canada-Tanzania
BITs also have similar provisions and
are quite extensive. The effects of
national treatment and MFN treatment
are immense. The World Bank did a
study in 2012 in which it appeared to
ECONOMICS
be moving back from its original position of 20 years ago when it said that
all that governments in Africa should
do was encourage foreign investment
and hope that the firms would do the
rest. In this study, which in a way was
driven by the African Mining Vision
(AMV), it put forward proposals for
how local content in mining can be
increased in West Africa, particularly
on the input side. Unfortunately, to
undertake that in the form of affirmative action will be in breach of the
national treatment provision in some
BITs. Some have argued, for example, that Nigerias local-content legislation in petroleum possibly violates
some of its BITs and World Trade
Organisation (WTO) principles.
Another effect of these provisions
relates to regional cooperation. If
there is a regional cooperation agreement in, say, West Africa or in Africa
with special terms to each other, unless there are some exceptions in the
BITs around regional cooperation, the
MFN provision will trigger enjoyment by all foreign investors. The
MFN provision in BITs can thus blunt
the momentum for South-South and
regional cooperation.
The African Mining Vision,
which has this vision of minerals and
industrialisation, raises important
questions about the coherence between the ambitions expressed in it
and various initiatives in agriculture,
industrialisation and so on vis-a-vis
the terms accepted in these agreements. Things like value addition, local enterprise ownership and promotion are all called into question by
some of the terms of BITs.
It is obvious that the various BITs
being entered into by African countries pose dangers to the declared intentions of the same countries to integrate, as the BITs not only run counter to the national development policies of these countries but also conflict with regional and continental
policies.
ÿu
Yao Graham is coordinator of Third World NetworkAfrica, the Africa secretariat of TWN. Reproduced
from TWN-Africas African Agenda magazine (Vol.
17, No. 3), the above is an edited excerpt from a
presentation he made at a colloquium on regional
integration organised jointly by TWN-Africa and the
United Nations Economic Commission for Africa
(UNECA) on 6-8 May in Accra, Ghana.
Some Intellectual Property Issues Related to H5N1
Influenza Viruses, Research and Vaccines
By Edward Hammond
Concern about the possibility of a new influenza
pandemic has sparked increased scientific interest
in influenza viruses, particularly the H5N1 virus
that causes Bird Flu. Currently, global vaccine
production capacity cannot meet the potential
demand of a major Bird Flu outbreak and there are
concerns that traditional vaccine production methods
are poorly adapted for H5N1 vaccines.
As Bird Flu research increases and vaccine
technology changes, a growing number of corporate
and government laboratories are laying patent claims
to influenza virus genes, gene sequences, treatments,
and vaccines. These include proprietary claims on
viruses originating in developing countries and that
were shared with the international community for
public health purposes. These claims threaten the
ability of countries to prepare for a pandemic because
they potentially restrict access to treatments and may
IPRs series no. 12
make them too expensive for many countries to
ISBN: 978-983-2729-83-9 40pp
afford. In response to these problems, many
developing countries are seeking reform of the World Health Organisations Global
Influenza Surveillance Network (GISN), to make sharing of the benefits from
influenza research more fair and equitable.
This report reviews recent trends in patenting of influenza viruses and treatments,
and provides details on a number of specific patent applications by corporations and
government laboratories. It also provides information on corporate concentration in
the vaccine industry, with a view to raising awareness of the implications of the
wave of influenza patent claims and of the importance of reforming the international
system for sharing influenza viruses and research results.
Malaysia
Third World countries
Other foreign countries
PRICE
RM7.00
US$4.00
US$6.00
POSTAGE
RM1.00
US$2.00 (air); US$1.00 (sea)
US$3.00 (air); US$1.00 (sea)
Orders from Malaysia please pay by credit card/crossed cheque or postal order.
Orders from Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, UK, USA
please pay by credit card/cheque/bank draft/international money order in own currency, US$ or Euro. If paying in own currency or Euro, please calculate equivalent of
US$ rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that the agent bank is located in the USA.
Rest of the world please pay by credit card/cheque/bank draft/international money
order in US$ or Euro. If paying in Euro, please calculate equivalent of US$ rate. If
paying in US$, please ensure that the agent bank is located in the USA.
All payments should be made in favour of Third World Network Bhd., 131 Jalan
Macalister, 10400 Penang, Malaysia. Tel: 60-4-2266728/2266159; Fax: 60-4-2264505;
Email: [email protected]; Website: www.twn.my
I would like to order..................copy/copies of Some Intellectual Property Issues
Related to H5N1 Influenza Viruses, Research and Vaccines.
I enclose the amount of US$/Euro/RM ..................
(cheque/bank draft/IMO).
Please charge the amount of US$/RM ............................. to my credit card:
American Express
A/c no.:
Visa
Mastercard
Expiry date:
Signature:
Name:
Address:
7
HEALTH & SAFETY
Bhopal victims present demands
on 30th anniversary of disaster
On 2 December 1984, a pesticide plant run by a Union Carbide subsidiary leaked about
40 tons of deadly methyl isocyanate gas in the Indian city of Bhopal. The final death toll
has been estimated at between 15,000 and 20,000, making it one of the worst industrial
disasters in history.
Although some Indian officials of the American company have been found guilty of
negligence, attempts to bring the late Warren Anderson, then chief executive of the
company, to justice were frustrated. In a 1989 settlement of a suit in the Indian Supreme
Court against the corporation, the Indian government, in a shameful abdication of its
duty to protect its citizens, accepted a total compensation of $470 million. Attempts to
secure a higher compensation have been resisted by Dow Chemical, which purchased
Union Carbide in 1999. It has insisted that all of the companys liabilities were settled in
the 1989 agreement.
On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the disaster, we reproduce below a report of
a press conference by representatives of five organisations of the survivors.
AT a press conference on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the
Union Carbide disaster, representatives of five organisations of the survivors presented their list of demands
and recent achievements of their
struggle.
Holding the two US corporations
Union Carbide and Dow Chemical
primarily responsible for the ongoing
disasters in Bhopal, the organisations
charged both the US and Indian governments with aiding corporate crime.
They demanded that Union Carbide
and Dow Chemical answer criminal
charges and obey a Bhopal courts
summons, pay additional compensation, and arrange for clean-up of the
toxic contamination in Bhopal.
The organisations demanded that
the US government acknowledge and
express regret for financing the hazardously designed Union Carbide
plant in Bhopal through the EXIM
Bank. They also demanded that the
US government express regret for refusing to extradite prime accused
Warren Anderson, the former Union
Carbide CEO who died while absconding from Indian courts.
The organisations called upon the
Indian government to move on the
extradition of John McDonald, secretary of Union Carbide, and not allow Dow Chemical to make any investment in the country until it accepted Union Carbides liabilities in
Bhopal.
The organisations also demanded
that the Indian government set up a
commission on Bhopal for effective
medical care and economic rehabilitation and social support, and create
a special prosecution cell for speedy
prosecution of accused Indian corporate officials including Keshub
Mahindra, former chairman of Union
Carbides Indian subsidiary.
Achievements
Some of the notable achievements of the struggle of the survivors
in the last four years include completion in August of a project to supply
clean drinking water to 50,000 residents of the communities with contaminated groundwater, Dow Chemicals withdrawal of its corporate logo
from the London Olympic Stadium
wrap in 2012, the blacklisting of Dow
Agrosciences by the Indian government in 2011 and, most recently, the
summoning of Dow Chemical to the
8
Bhopal district court.
The five organisations, which
have been working together for the
last five years, held a festival of alternatives in Bhopal from 30 November to 2 December showcasing sustainable solutions in healthcare, energy, education, livelihood and agriculture. Forty-six organisations from
different parts of the country participated in this festival.
A delegation with representatives
from 10 Scottish trade unions and
members of Friends of the Earth,
Scotland, ANOREV (Hong Kong),
Hazards Network (UK), Minamata
Solidarity Network (Japan), Bhopal
Medical Appeal (UK) and Pesticide
Action Network Asia Pacific (Malaysia) were among the international supporters of the Bhopal justice struggle
who arrived in Bhopal to express solidarity.
Members and supporters of the
Bhopal survivors organisations took
part in a torchlight rally on 2 December and a rally to the Carbide factory
on 3 December. Musical events were
held in the evenings of 1 and 3 December at Iqbal Maidan, the festival
venue. International Campaign for
Justice in Bhopal
u
COVER
Ebola epidemic exposes the
pathology of the global economic
and political system
The outbreak of Ebola in West Africa has set off alarm bells all over the world. The
fear that the epidemic may spread beyond its present confines has generated
widespread public interest and concern about a little-known disease which for the
past 40 years has been confined to remote parts of the African continent. While
much of the public discussion has understandably been focused on the medical
and humanitarian aspects of this crisis, the following article draws attention to the
social and economic roots of the epidemic.
ON 8 August the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the Ebola
outbreak a public health emergency
of international concern. The declaration came four months after WHO
reported a major Ebola outbreak in
Guinea in West Africa. The epidemic
broke in Guinea and spread to three
of its neighbours Liberia, Sierra
Leone and Nigeria. The cumulative
number of cases and deaths, officially
reported to WHO from 23 March to
22 September, is 5,843 cases and
2,803 deaths. To date, 337 health care
workers have been infected, and more
than 181 of them have died. Most
public health experts agree that the
official figures are a major underestimation of the extent and spread of the
disease.
The occurrence of current and
past epidemics and mode of spread
of the disease, outlined below, are not
contested. But this comment aims to
go beyond these data in order to shed
light on the underlying aetiology of
the disease, that is, the global and local political, economic and other
societal factors that underlie Ebolas
appearance, spread and high fatality
rate at this moment in time and in the
particular settings where it has proliferated.
Ebola epidemics in the past
four decades
EVD Ebola Virus Disease as it
is now officially termed is not a new
Peoples Health Movement
disease and was first reported almost
40 years ago. Simultaneous outbreaks
of the disease, formerly known as
Ebola Haemorrhagic Fever, were reported from Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1976. The
latter outbreak was in a village situated on the Ebola river hence the
name. It is conceivable that Ebola infections had remained undetected in
rural communities before the identified outbreaks. Since 1976 there have
been 24 discrete reports of clusters of
infections from different countries in
Africa. The table below provides details of outbreaks where more than a
hundred people were reported to have
been infected, before the current epidemic.
Five distinct sub-types of the
Ebola virus are known to cause infec-
Reston and Taï Forest), and their virulence (i.e., the ability to cause serious
symptoms) varies across these subtypes. While the case fatality rate (i.e.,
the percentage of people infected who
eventually die) can be as high as 90%
for one sub-type, another sub-type
(Reston) which has been known to
infect people in the Philippines does
not lead to fatal outcomes. The Ebola
sub-type that is responsible for the
present outbreak is the most virulent,
with case fatality rates in the region
of 60% or more.
How Ebola spreads
Human beings are not the primary targets of the Ebola virus. It affects humans who come into close
contact with the blood, secretions,
organs or other bodily fluids of infected animals. In Africa, human outbreaks have been traced to the handling of dead or diseased animals such
Previous Ebola outbreaks with more than 100 cases
Year
Country
Cases
Deaths
Case
fatality
2007
2007
2003
2000
1995
1976
1976
Uganda
Democratic Republic of Congo
Congo
Uganda
Sudan
149
264
143
425
315
284
318
37
187
128
224
254
151
280
25%
71%
90%
53%
81%
53%
88%
9
COVER
as chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats,
monkeys, forest antelope and porcupines. The virus is known to have
been the cause of major epidemics in
chimpanzees and gorillas. All these
animals are found in the tropical rainforests, and countries surrounding
these have been the centres of Ebola
outbreaks.
While many animals are known
to be infected by the virus, it is now
believed that the virus primarily resides in a few species of fruit bats.
Unlike other animals infected by the
virus, fruit bats do not show any
symptoms of disease and thus act as
the reservoir for the Ebola virus. What
is still a mystery is that the natural
habitat of fruit bats lies in Central
Africa (where all the earlier major
outbreaks had taken place), hundreds
of kilometres away from the epicentre of the present epidemic in West
Africa. It is hypothesised that there
might have been a major shift in the
habitat of fruit bats, or that the infection was somehow imported into the
region by a human contact.
Once the virus affects a human
contact, human-to-human transmission can take place through direct contact (through broken skin or mucous
membranes) with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of
infected people, and indirect contact
with environments contaminated with
such fluids. Traditional burial practices, where mourners come into direct contact with the dead, may also
be a source of infection. Health workers, who come into contact with infected patients, are particularly at risk
when they work in unhygienic conditions (i.e., not adequately protected
with gloves, face masks, overalls,
etc.). Once infected, a person is capable of infecting others for up to seven
weeks after recovery from illness.
The incubation period of the disease (i.e., the time between when a
person gets infected and when s/he
shows symptoms) can vary from 221 days. The initial symptoms are
very like those of other viral infections high fever, muscle pain, sore
throat and headache. Patients often
deteriorate rapidly and develop symptoms of vomiting, internal and exter-
Members of a Red Cross burial team in Sierra Leone take samples from a woman
suspected of dying of Ebola. The present Ebola epidemic in West Africa is one brought
upon by poverty and ruthless exploitation of the regions natural resources.
nal bleeding, diarrhoea and rash. The
liver and kidneys are most commonly
affected. Those who do not succumb
to the disease usually make a complete recovery without any residual
effects.
There are no approved drugs or
vaccines that can treat or prevent the
disease. As the disease progresses, the
only care possible is supportive, often requiring intravenous hydration
and respiratory support. It is clear that
the quality of supportive care is crucial in determining the outcome:
nearly all (mostly expatriates) evacuated to well-equipped centres have
survived.
Not an ideal candidate for an
epidemic
There are several typical characteristics that define the disease. The
very high case fatality rate sets it apart
from most viral diseases that are
known to cause epidemics. For example, the present Ebola epidemic has a
case fatality rate of 60% or more,
while even the 1918 influenza epidemic a rapidly spread airborne infection that affected a third of the
global population and killed an estimated 50 million people had an average case fatality rate of only 2.5-5%.
Normal influenza epidemics, typically, have a case fatality rate of less
10
than 0.1%, i.e., less than 1 in 1,000 of
those infected eventually die of the
infection. Another feature that sets
Ebola infection apart from other infections that cause epidemics is its
relatively low level of infectivity. The
Ebola virus can enter the human body
only when the bodily secretions of an
infected person come in contact with
broken skin or mucous membrane.
The third characteristic of importance
is that carrier states in humans are not
known, and those infected show
symptoms of major illness and are
relatively easy to identify.
The above three characteristics
do not make the Ebola virus an ideal
candidate for a major epidemic. As all
those who are infected show major
symptoms, it would be expected that
they would be in a health facility, in
which case well-known public health
safety measures should prevent further spread, as close contact with the
infected patient is necessary for the
infection to spread.
Why the epidemic?
Why then are we confronted with
an Ebola epidemic in West Africa?
The answer lies not in the pathology
of the disease but in the pathology of
our society and the global political
and economic architecture. It is not
an accident that the present Ebola epi-
COVER
demic has affected three of the poorest countries in the world. Liberia,
Guinea and Sierra Leone number 175,
179 and 183, respectively, out of 187
countries on the United Nations Human Development Index. Their health
systems are ineffective and almost
non-existent in many regions. The
present epidemic is one brought upon
by poverty and, as summarised below,
by ruthless exploitation of the regions
natural resources.
The social and economic roots
of this epidemic
The organism causing the current
explosive epidemic, the Zaire species
of the Ebola virus, has never been
detected in humans in the countries
currently affected. How did it travel
thousands of kilometres from its earlier known habitat in Central Africa?
We may perhaps never know, but
some possibilities are already being
discussed.
If the Zaire species was recently
introduced into the region, it would
most likely have been introduced by
fruit bats the natural reservoir of
Ebola. However, the mere presence
of these bats in the proximity of humans could not have caused the epidemic. In fact earlier epidemics by
pathogens with similar characteristics
seem to follow a pattern: almost invariably, they affect regions whose
economies and public health systems
have been decimated for a variety of
reasons. In such regions, poverty
drives people to venture deeper into
the forests to look for food and fuel,
where they come into contact with
animals that act as reservoirs (fruit
bats in the current case). The situation is compounded by the inability
of an almost non-existent public
health system to respond effectively.
Consequently the impoverished
health system now becomes the reservoir of infections, and patients and
health workers alike carry the infection to the general population. Many
of the human outbreaks since 1976 are
believed to have begun with the ingestion of an infected monkey or fruit
bat. Those afflicted, at least initially,
are typically the poorest that are
forced, by scarcity, to look for food
in the forests.
There is a reason why people in
the region affected by the current
Ebola epidemic face chronic food
shortages and extreme poverty. The
affected area in Guinea is part of the
Guinea Savannah Zone that has drawn
the attention of agribusiness in recent
times. In 2010 the British-backed
Farm Land of Guinea Limited bought
huge tracts of land to be developed
for maize and soybean cultivation.
The Italian energy company Nuove
Iniziative Industriali has bought over
700,000 hectares for biofuel crops.
In neighbouring Liberia, agricultural land was already being used for
cash crops almost a century ago. The
transition of Liberias agro-economy
into a cash-crop export economy, controlled by foreign companies, began
as far back as 1925 with the entry of
the Firestone Rubber Company. Firestone is believed to have acquired 1
million acres for 99 years at 6 cents
an acre. Historical accounts speak of
how 20,000 indigenous inhabitants of
the area were forced to work for a pittance in Firestones plantations. Today, Liberia has the highest ratio of
foreign direct investment to GDP in
the world. In less than a decade, Liberia has signed concession agreements in the iron ore and palm oil industries with numerous transnational
corporations.
Recent entrants into the business
of land-grabbing have been the logging industry and palm oil companies.
Meanwhile, the global trade regime
in agriculture, both before and after
the signing of the World Trade Organisation agreement in 1994, has
continued to undermine the productive base of agriculture in Africa.
It thus comes as no surprise that
gross ecological changes have been
brought about by the takeover of agricultural land by agribusiness. These
changes could well be responsible for
hitherto unknown pathogens (diseasecausing organisms), which had earlier been confined to the wild, to start
infecting humans. There are good reasons to believe that prolonged dry
spells in the region, brought about by
massive deforestation, as well as the
11
penetration of new roads into previously remote forest areas primarily for
extractive operations, have led to
easier inter-mixing between the animal population in the forests and to
the desperation of humans who have
been driven deeper into the forest areas for survival and sustenance.
The tragic story of the region is
further embellished by years of civil
strife, largely fuelled by competition
over the control of very valuable natural resources. The civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone have involved
powerful local interests that work at
the behest of transnational corporations and capitalist countries of the
North. Diamond mining, for example,
was one of the major causes of the
civil war in 1991 in Sierra Leone.
These wars have led to enormous
displacements of the local population,
and consequently increased the pressure on forest land and also accelerated migration out of areas harbouring forest animals.
Weak health systems no
accident
The entire worlds gaze is on Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone (itself
due to a media epidemic of fear-mongering with virtually no contextual
analysis), yet it is not just Ebola that
is killing people in these countries. Let
us take the case of Sierra Leone. In
the first four months since the beginning of the Ebola outbreak, 848 people had been infected by the virus and
365 had died. In four months Sierra
Leone sees around 650 deaths from
meningitis, 670 from tuberculosis,
790 from HIV/AIDS, 845 from
diarrhoeal diseases, and more than
3,000 from malaria. These deaths
have been occurring for decades, not
just in the last four months. Yet global attention was not previously focused on these countries. For, to do
so would force the rich and the powerful global leaders, the capitalist
press, the institutions of capitalism,
the captains of industry both nationally and globally, UN agencies to
confront the reality of Africas poverty and inequality.
Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone
COVER
Inside a ward at a hospital in Monrovia, Liberia, which serves as a transfer and holding
centre for Ebola patients. An impoverished health system, unable to respond
effectively to the outbreak of a disease like Ebola, can become a reservoir of infections,
with patients and health workers carrying the infection to the general population.
are not poor by choice. They did not
choose not to build functioning health
systems. Their colonial occupation
(brief in Liberias case) and exploitation left them poor. Agencies such as
the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) imposed further misery through their infamous
structural adjustment programmes.
These countries (and many others in
Africa) were instructed by these agencies not to increase public spending
on welfare and public services. The
World Trade Organisation promised
them greater prosperity in the name
of trade liberalisation, and further
devastated their economies. The developed capitalist countries send in
aid as charity and repatriate back
much more through their corporations. These poor countries also subsidise the health systems of rich countries more doctors born in Liberia
and Sierra Leone work in developed
OECD countries than in their home
countries. Health worker migration
which is nothing short of a direct subsidy that the poor countries of the
world provide to the rich makes it
impossible for many countries in West
Africa to build credible health systems. Indeed, many countries in this
region, with few exceptions, display
the worlds poorest health outcomes,
reflecting their impoverishment and
weak health systems especially implicated in poor maternal health outcomes.
However, the persisting poverty
and increasing inequality in these
countries are due not only to their
lowly placement in the global economic pecking order. In common with
other post-colonial situations, corruption has aggravated their economic
plight. Sierra Leones public sector
has been wracked by financial scandal. In 2013 seven medical practitioners and 22 others working in the public service were convicted of misappropriation of donor finances, having
misused funds from a vaccine provider. Tax dodging is also a major
cause of revenue losses, particularly
in Sierra Leones mining sector. In
2010 the countrys mining industry
contributed almost 60% of exports but
only 8% of government revenue. The
top five mines in Sierra Leone are part
of company structures with excessive
use of tax havens. As of 2011, only
one of the major mining firms in the
country was paying corporate income
tax, while none of the top five was
reporting profits despite the boom in
mineral
exports.
(Ref:
www.christianaid.org.uk/images/Africa-tax-and-inequality-reportFeb2014.pdf). Due in part to such
leakages, the fruits of the countrys
recent growth surge the economy
expanded by 20% last year and 15%
in 2012, largely on the back of massive iron ore extraction have not
been equitably shared.
We have known of the Ebola virus for 40 years, yet no vaccine or
remedy was ever developed. No pharTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
12
maceutical company is interested in
a remedy for a disease that afflicts the
poor who cannot pay blockbuster
prices for blockbuster drugs. Interestingly the only experimental drug
that is being discussed (called
ZMapp) was developed as a result of
a collaboration between US and Canadian public institutions and two
small companies. This is also the story
of neglected diseases the story of
kala azar, malaria, tuberculosis,
Chagas disease and many more. These
diseases are neglected by the research
industry because they do not satiate
the appetite of profit-hungry pharmaceutical corporations.
Despite selfless service the
health system has been
overrun by the epidemic
In the meantime a human tragedy
unfolds that is not limited to only
those infected by the Ebola virus. The
entire health system has been overrun in affected areas, thus amplifying
the effect of other diseases. In Liberias capital Monrovia, at one point
all five of the main hospitals were
closed. Some have since reopened but
are barely functioning. Health workers, scared for their safety, have fled.
They are scared with good reason,
given reports that gloves, gowns and
even safe water are in short supply.
One report from Sierra Leone talks
about blood-, vomit- and urinesmeared hospital floors. Without protective gear, hospital workers treat
Ebola patients wearing only scrubs.
When nurses got sick, others went on
strike, leaving few people left to pick
up patients who had fallen out of their
beds. Alongside the weak formal
health system are private mushroom
health clinics which have popped up
outside the network of licensed clinics and which have housed several
Ebola sufferers despite inadequate
infrastructure and infection control
facilities.
In the midst of this human tragedy reminiscent of the Black Death
in medieval times, there are inspiring
examples of selfless service. Most
health workers, although overwhelmed and underequipped, have
COVER
struggled valiantly to save lives and
contain the spread of the disease. Several have died in the process. While
there has been justifiable concern and
then relief worldwide at the evacuation, treatment and survival of dedicated expatriate health personnel from
the US, the UK and the Netherlands,
so far no local health workers have
been evacuated, even though, according to WHO, in West Africa 337 have
so far caught Ebola and 181 have died.
Dr Sheik Humarr Khan, Sierra Leones top Ebola doctor, was being considered for evacuation to a European
country when he died of the disease
in late July.
The Guardian newspaper reported recently the tragic death of Dr
Olivet Buck, a doctor in Sierra Leone
who treated Ebola virus sufferers and
who, for the past few months, had
been fighting the desperate battle
against Ebola ravaging parts of her
country. It was recently reported that
she had contracted the virus. Local
campaigners called for her to be
evacuated to Germany to receive
treatment since all three previous doctors who had caught the disease in the
country had died. Sierra Leones
president supported this plea, saying
that a hospital in Hamburg was in
readiness to receive her. WHO, however, said it would not allow her to
leave Sierra Leone, and refused to
fund the move. Desperate attempts
were made to try to reverse this decision but Buck died.
Her death, as a 59-year-old
mother of three and one of the few
medical doctors working to save lives
of those affected by this disease, raises
wider questions about how the world
responds to the Ebola crisis, how it
protects those working closest to stop
its spread, and how foreign lives appear to be valued more highly than
local lives. Despite the deaths of previous doctors, WHO had said merely
that it would work to give Buck the
best care possible in Sierra Leone.
In some parts of this region the
economy is coming to a standstill as
people are just too afraid to venture
out. Symptomatic of peoples distrust
of the crumbling health system is the
report that residents of the West Point
slum in Monrovia launched a raid to
close down a facility that had quarantined Ebola patients. Similarly, it
has been recently reported that six
suspects have been arrested in Guinea
after the killing of eight people, including three journalists, conducting
an Ebola education campaign.
So we have an epidemic where
there should be none. Routine public
health measures are not routine here
they are a luxury that surfaces during epidemics when provided by global charities. And so the world is worried, lest the infection travel to shatter their comfortable existence. This
is the downside of the globalised
world that global capital had not bargained for. If you create conditions
where infections fester, they will
come back to haunt you.
A compromised WHO
WHO, which has recently
amidst considerable fanfare announced a global emergency, stands
indicted as well. Starved of funding
by the US-led freeze on financing of
UN agencies in the 1990s, it can do
little beyond the mouthing of platitudes. Some 80% of its budget is predetermined by donors, essentially
handcuffing the organisation.
According to its constitution,
WHO is the directing and coordinating authority on international health
work. While WHO received its first
report about Ebola cases in Guinea on
22 March, it took more than three
months to convene a meeting of regional health ministers or open a regional coordination centre.
WHOs current budget saw cuts
in WHOs outbreak and crisis response of more than 50% from the
previous budget from $469 million
in 2012-13 to $228 million for 201415. This is the very budget line that
the organisation needs to rely upon in
order to respond to Ebola. WHO has
announced that it needed $71 million
to implement its Ebola response plan
a deficit that would not have existed
if it had not slashed its budget for crisis response by half!
Conclusion
In the short term, at a minimum,
13
the response from the global community, particularly the rich countries,
has to be greatly accelerated and much
more generous. Large numbers of
personnel, quantities of equipment
and supportive medicines must be
provided. The expediting of ZMapp
and other candidate drugs is urgent.
The Ebola epidemic, as we have
argued, can be traced to the rampant
exploitation of the regions natural
resources, the countries continuing
impoverishment and accompanying
weakness of their health systems. In
the medium term, there is an urgent
need to strengthen health systems in
the region. While the discourse of
health systems strengthening has
become commonplace, there is little
evidence of such strengthening in
many countries in the region. In particular, there is a persisting crisis of
human resources with a serious deficit of health workers, especially in
rural areas, as a result of long-term
underproduction and continuing outmigration. Major and sustained investment in health systems development, especially in human resources,
is required. Initially, this will require
increased donor assistance. A longerterm solution requires fundamental
changes to economic and power relations between these countries (and
indeed many others with similar histories) and the capitalist economies
and enterprises that continue to bleed
them dry, often with the collusion of
local officials and elites.
The epidemic, in all probability,
will run its course and die down after
leaving a trail of death and destruction. Not because we as a global community would have done very much
right, but because of the nature of the
virus itself. The moot question is, will
we have learnt anything? Or will it
be back to business as usual?
ÿu
The above is an abridged version of a position paper
(September 2014) on the Ebola epidemic developed
by the Peoples Health Movement (PHM). The full
PHM paper including references can be accessed
at www.phmovement.org/en/node/9612. The PHM
is a global network bringing together grassroots
health activists, civil society organisations and
academic institutions from around the world,
particularly from low- and middle-income
countries. It currently has a presence in around 70
countries.
COVER
The long incubation of Ebola
Jeremy Seabrook says that the shrouds holding the remains of Ebola victims,
borne by volunteers, should be seen for what they are human sacrifice to the
savage god of an ideology that is ready to deplete the earth of its inhabitants with
the same insolence with which it scoops out its treasures.
THE terrain in which Ebola has raged
in 2014 was well prepared for the harvest of death it has yielded. Liberia,
Sierra Leone and Guinea are haunted
by a violent, driven history. Between
55% and 75% of the people live below the imaginary latitude of a poverty line defined by experts in the
impoverishment of others. Life expectancy in Liberia is 58, in Guinea
55, in Sierra Leone 47; all have high
infant mortality rates, and since Ebola,
maternal mortality is again rising.
They suffer the affliction of riches
vast mineral wealth extracted by
mining conglomerates which have
brought great suffering and negligible benefit to the people. They are
subject to alien structural adjustment
programmes designed to stabilise
their economies, even as they
destabilise the health and well-being
of the people. Nowhere in the world
is there such divergence between favourable reports on economic
progress, like those which preceded
the Ebola outbreak, and the reality of
ruined healthcare systems, lack of
employment and insecurity, as a global economy gouges the treasures of
the earth from beneath the light tread
of people whose land harbours diamonds, gold, bauxite, iron ore and titanium.
Liberia was conceived by the
American Colonisation Society in
1816 as a site for freed slaves, but it
was no philanthropic venture. Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky said:
Can there be a nobler cause than that
which, while it proposed to rid our
country of a useless and pernicious,
if not dangerous, portion of our population, contemplates the spreading of
the arts of civilised life, and the possible redemption from ignorance and
barbarism of a benighted quarter of
the globe?
The descendants of settlers con-
International Monetary Fund headquarters in Washington. The pledge of funds by
the IMF and World Bank to help the Ebola-hit West African countries can be seen as
an act of penitence by institutions which have superintended loans conditional upon
reduced public expenditure, which have indirectly dismantled already rudimentary
healthcare.
stitute about 5% of the population.
The anticipated mass exodus from
America never occurred. Former
slaves had to fight indigenous people
for space. Liberia was recognised by
the US in 1847 as the second black
republic after Haiti. Liberia furnished
the rubber for the making of car tyres
in the US. Fear of disease in West
Africa (the white mans grave) gave
an impulse to US medical research in
Liberia. Gregg Mitman writes in the
New England Journal of Medicine
(November 2014) of a yellow fever
outbreak which signified a major
threat to American business in Liberia. In 1926, Firestone Tire and Rubber Company gained access to 1 million acres of land supplied to the
United States with rubber free from
British control. Knowledge of tropical medicine was vital to the companys success. In 1928-29, yellow fever killed prominent American, British and Japanese researchers. This led
14
the US government and the League
of Nations to press the Liberian government to address the unsanitary
conditions deemed a menace to the
lives of the citizens and subjects
of foreign nations who reside in Liberia. An expedition undertaken on
behalf of Firestone to investigate yellow fever, collecting blood samples,
tissue and urine, met with fierce resistance by people who saw the
project as witchcraft; which it was,
since its objective was the extraction
of wealth from the people.
The government of Liberia was
dominated by American-Liberians
until 1980, when Samuel Does Peoples Redemption Council took power
after the rice riots. Charles Taylor
and supporters from the National Patriotic Front of Liberia entered
Monrovia in 1990 from Cote dIvoire,
and Doe was executed. Communal
conflict between warring ethnic factions broke out, and led to a terroris-
COVER
ing and mutilation of civilians; while
child soldiers toting heavy weaponry,
ammunition belts weighing down
their skinny torsos, became a characteristic image.
In 1997, weary of war, and with
military assistance of West African
peacekeeping force ECOMOG, the
people elected Taylor president. He
ran the country as a private fiefdom,
as conflict spilled into Guinea and
Sierra Leone, which Taylor accused
of harbouring rebels. He sold diamonds and supplied weapons to fighters of Sierra Leones Revolutionary
United Front. The recurrent war cost
a quarter of a million lives. In 2003
Taylor stepped down under international pressure and a United Nations
force. Brought before the International Criminal Court in The Hague,
he was sentenced to 50 years in jail in
2012, the first head of state convicted
since Nuremburg. The UN maintains
7,000 soldiers in Liberia.
Liberias bloody past was apparently cleansed by the presidency of
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf in 2006 (narrowly re-elected in 2011). As a former
official of the World Bank, her qualification to lead a country of such misery was not doubted; she was awarded
the increasingly inauspicious Nobel
Peace Prize in 2011. Of her sons,
Robert, chair of the National Oil Corporation of Liberia and his mothers
chief adviser, is reportedly under investigation by the FBI for assets of
$2.5 billion; his brother was dismissed
as deputy governor of the central bank
in 2012 for failing to report his assets; another heads the National Security Agency.
Sierra Leone was disputed between the Portuguese, Dutch and
French, until Britain established a
factory (trading post) in 1628; this,
in the 18th century, served as an embarkation point for slaves. In 1787 the
Committee for the Relief of the Black
Poor in London planned to settle
slaves who had sought refuge with the
British after the American Revolution
there, together with other non-white
inhabitants of London. Freetown, established in 1792, was wiped out by
disease and the hostility of the existing population.
Diamond mining in Sierra Leone. Despite its vast mineral riches, the people of Sierra
Leone live in poverty.
With the abolition of the slave
trade in 1807, British naval authorities intercepted slave ships, releasing
their human cargo into a Freetown
which belied its name: the British negotiated with local rulers and, where
these were not compliant as they
rarely were took land by force.
Wider still and wider were its bounds
set, until, during the scramble for
Africa in the 1880s, agreement between London and Paris set frontiers
between French Guinea and Sierra
Leone. Britain imposed a Protectorate, although no one had requested
protection, transforming kings into
paramount chiefs, who became
agents for British taxation, policing
and providers of corvee labour.
Negotiations for independence
were concluded in 1961. A period of
relative stability gave way to a series
of coups and counter-coups. Liberias
Taylor sent weapons to the Revolutionary United Front of Foday
Sankoh, which controlled eastern Sierra Leones diamond-mining areas.
Sankohs atrocities against civilians
matched those of Taylor. Further
coups failed to dislodge his RUF, despite UN sanctions against Sierra
Leone and the presence of ECOMOG
forces. The Lome accord of 1999 gave
Sankoh vice-presidency of the country and control over the alluvial diamonds in the East. The RUF advanced
again and UN peacekeepers clashed
15
with its forces. Britain intervened with
Operation Palliser; an action which
earned Tony Blair, warmonger of Iraq,
a local status as bringer of peace. Over
50,000 people had died by the time
the war concluded in 2002. Promises
to a pacified Sierra Leone included a
pledge to turn its golden beaches into
a tourist destination to rival Gambia;
by then, it had become an entrepot for
Colombian drug cartels and narcotics en route for Europe.
Eastern Sierra Leone has diamonds, titanium, gold and chromite.
African Minerals Limited has prospecting licences one thousand times
greater than the average of all others,
including for nickel, cobalt, uranium,
gold and iron ore. Titanium Reserves
Group mines rutile (titanium dioxide),
and Sierra Minerals Holdings, bauxite. There have been forcible
relocations of villages. The only infrastructure is to facilitate removal of
wealth. Mining operations pollute
water courses with cyanide and caustic soda.
Sierra Leone comes 183rd out of
187 countries on the UNs Human
Development Index. Literacy is 41%,
youth unemployment exceeds 70%.
There are less than six million people: that such a small population
should live in such wretchedness with
the riches beneath, is a reproach to a
development in which the Ebola crisis occurred. In 2013 the African De-
COVER
velopment Bank reported, The outlook for the Sierra Leone economy
remains positive in the current and
medium terms with sustained economic growth, falling inflation and
improved fiscal and external conditions.
Guinea where the first Ebola
case was reported in March 2014
contiguous with Sierra Leone and Liberia, suffers the same scourge of extreme wealth, to which mining entities of gold, diamonds, aluminium and
bauxite have prior claim over its 10
million people.
The great-grandfather of Sekou
Toure, the first president of independent Guinea (1958), died in resistance
to French occupation in 1898. Sekou
Toure famously said to de Gaulle, We
prefer poverty in liberty to riches in
slavery. That poverty under a form
of modernised slavery might be his
countrys destiny, did not, perhaps,
occur to him. He remained president
until his death in 1984.
A coup brought Laurent Conte to
power, his leadership confirmed with
elections in 1993. Conte accused his
neighbours of destabilising the country. In 2001 a referendum confirmed
Contes lengthening of his presidential term; but Guinea was torn by continual strikes by trade unions, the opposition and the military. Conte died
in 2008, replaced by a military junta.
In 2009 soldiers fired on an opposition rally at a stadium in Conakry,
where 150 people were killed and
more than a thousand wounded. The
EU, the African Union and the US
imposed sanctions, and the UN set up
a tribunal to investigate the deaths. In
2010, the International Criminal
Court declared the massacre a crime
against humanity.
Alpha Conde became the new
president in 2010, and despite the violence of what are described as
ethnoregional tensions, his Rally of
the Guinean People won parliamentary elections. Conde promised to review mining contracts, since in 2008
the Beny Steinmetz Group had secured the rights to mine the Simandou
mountains. Steinmetz was accused of
having links to former president
Conte: his investment of $165 million
All it required was the death in Dallas of one man, who had recently travelled from
Liberia, to create an infection of fear that spread like wildfire in the US. Picture
shows hazmat crew members outside the Dallas apartment where the patient stayed.
was subsequently sold to the Brazilian mining corporation Vale for $2.5
billion. Steinmetz, an Israeli citizen,
is said to have a fortune of $6-7 billion. The slopes of the Simandou
mountains are streaked with the red
iron-ore wounds of mining activity,
while those who live there lack electricity, water and sanitation. An African Economic Outlook report offered
this judgment on the economy of
Guinea: Successful macroeconomic
stabilisation and the start of reforms
to boost the productive sector and the
business climate have not been
enough to register clear economic and
social gains. Poverty still affects
55.2% of the population more than
half a century after independence.
Enter Ebola
In this setting Ebola, with its partners of corruption, poverty, exploitation and indifference to humanity,
found propitious circumstances for its
own grisly rule in 2014.
Since 1976, when Ebola was
identified (named after the river in the
Democratic Republic of Congo where
it first appeared), there have been 26
outbreaks, the current visitation by far
the most extensive. The over 14,000
Ebola cases recorded in the current
outbreak (certainly an underestimate)
16
up to mid-November have resulted in
a death rate of around 36%; how far
malnutrition and weakened immune
systems contribute to this figure cannot be known. There has in the past
40 years been no concentrated effort
to find a cure, since Ebola has, until
now, been confined to Central and
West Africa, perceived as no threat to
populations in the US or Europe.
The virus has its habitation in an
animal host (believed to be a species
of fruit bat). It is communicated by
contact with bodily fluids of those
affected. It is no accident that animal
infections which can transfer themselves to human beings are becoming
more common: AIDS, SARS, Lyme
disease, swine flu and bird flu have
created global health scares. As the
natural world of West Africa has been
laid waste, ransacked to nourish a global economy, viruses that were contained within animal populations have
surmounted habitats, now destroyed
or contaminated, and invaded human
communities; another baleful consequence of a development which has
still not reckoned its true costs as it
scythes, like Death itself, through the
planet.
In the early stages of the Ebola
outbreak bodies lay unburied on the
streets of Freetown in Sierra Leone
and Monrovia in Liberia; scenes of
COVER
people drawing their last breath outside barred, ramshackle medical centres were broadcast by global media.
The suffering were ostracised and
people fled the source of the outbreak,
contributing further to the spread of
the virus. If the world (that is, governments and international bureaucracies) was slow to respond in the initial stages, this was not the case with
volunteers from the affected communities, who picked up and buried the
dead in improvised graveyards, even
under insults and attacks from frightened neighbours. Later, more than
800 workers from Britains National
Health Service offered to help the effort of Medecins Sans Frontieres and
the Red Cross, which provided vital
personnel to treat those stricken by
what was described as a medieval
pestilence since it convulsed countries in ways similar to those that
wracked Europe in the 14th century.
It is impossible to overestimate
the disturbance to traditional cultures
already tormented by poverty and
war inflicted by such events. It is
expected that the relatives will remain
close to the body of the dying, and
the deceased must be given a last
touch of love by their kinsfolk, must
be washed and clothed in garments fit
for the afterlife. It is the custom for
the sister of the father of the dead person to bathe, cleanse and dress her or
him. To impose isolation on the dead
and dying is not to suppress superstition it is to violate the most elementary decencies that can be accorded
to human beings in extremis; and it
was understandable if people refused
to withhold what they regarded as the
necessary honour and dignity to the
dying, and fled to traditional healers
and practitioners in their despair.
Amid great fanfare, the United
States despatched 4,000 troops to construct treatment centres, while Britain sent its military troops to set up
seven, each with 100 beds. These
were to treat medical personnel who
become affected, but are not in the
business of tending the sick. Cuba, the
outcast, stigmatised, pariah, reject of
a figment known as the international
community, already has over 50,000
doctors, nurses and paramedics in 66
countries worldwide, and sent 461
medical workers more than any
other country to tend patients directly.
The self-congratulation of colonial powers has a semi-redemptive
purpose, since they have benefited not
only from the riches of West Africa
but also from a steady drain of qualified medical practitioners from the
area; there were only a hundred doctors and a thousand nurses in Liberia
at the start of the outbreak. How many
medical staff from that country now
practise in the US or Europe is unknown, but the urgency of the US and
Britain to act may be read as an obscure compensatory calculus, since
their own health services have been
beneficiaries of the continuing loss
and impoverishment of West Africa.
The IMF and World Bank
pledged $530 million to help the three
West African countries. The IMF is
to allow an increase in budget deficits in order to rebuild healthcare systems which had scarcely ever existed.
This is another act of penitence by
institutions which have superintended
loans conditional upon reduced public expenditure, which have indirectly
dismantled already rudimentary
healthcare. We are still living under
the triumphal hegemony of a
neoliberalism governed by belief in
low inflation and small budget deficits i.e., dwindling public expenditure, even on the basic elements that
sustain life. The shrouds holding the
remains of Ebola victims, borne by
volunteers, should be seen for what
they are human sacrifice to the savage god of an ideology that is ready
to deplete the earth of its inhabitants
with the same insolence with which
it scoops out its treasures.
Panic and hysteria
The word Ebola has become a
kind of curse, reawakening folk
memories of West Africa associated
perhaps with the vengeful heritage of
slavery, that earlier haemorrhagic fever built into the foundations of Western wealth. Is this why, thousands of
miles from the centre of the epidemic,
panic and hysteria seized the suggestTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
17
ible mind of America? All it required
was the death in Dallas of one man,
who had recently travelled from Liberia, to create an infection of fear that
spread like wildfire in the safest of
places, a country which spends almost
one-fifth of its GDP on health and
medical care. Schools were closed, a
cruise ship sequestered; politicians
called for the sealing of borders and
suspension of visas, while billionaire
Donald Trump urged that all flights
from Ebola-affected countries be
stopped or the plague will spread inside our borders.
If West Africa is a producer of
primary raw materials, America is
shown to be a producer of primary
raw emotions: paranoia, anxiety,
panic, hysteria and feelings of impotence are among the major industrial
outputs of rich societies. Ebola, in this
context, serves as yet another source
of terror, inspiring fear among those
whose well-being and prosperity must
always be maintained in a state of high
insecurity: along with ISIS, immigration, invasive exotic species, as well
as sicknesses yet to appear in an Africa ravaged by epic disturbances to
its ecology and society, Ebola is part
of an armoury that maintains social
discipline, conformity and a determination to protect the pirated gains of
privilege. Perhaps this is why Australia and Canada, whose health systems are said to be among the best in
the world, hastened to impose bans
on entry to people from the affected
countries, following the example set
by such shining examples of care for
its people as North Korea.
Pity the people of West Africa,
who, as well as undergoing the afflictions of Ebola, have been assigned an
unchosen role in the didactic global
immorality play that drains it of
wealth, brains, resources and power,
and then expects its people to bless
as saviours those who lend their aid
to restore the merest fraction of the
natural treasures, vitality and life
which have been, and continue to be,
spirited away from them.
ÿu
Jeremy Seabrook is a freelance journalist based in
the UK. His latest book is The Song of the Shirt
(published by Navayana).
COVER
Inequalities and the Ebola crisis
Nissim Mannathukkaren contends that inequalities are at the heart of the
Ebola crisis.
THE principle upon which the fight
against disease should be based is the
creation of a robust body; but not the
creation of a robust body by the artistic work of a doctor upon a weak
organism; rather, the creation of a robust body with the work of the whole
collectivity, upon the entire social
collectivity. Che Guevara
The photograph in August this
year of a very weak, 10-year-old Saah
Exco, suspected of having contracted
Ebola, sitting naked on a bucket and
fighting to stay alive while residents
of a slum in Monrovia, Liberia, milled
around him, terrified of helping him,
might go on to win Pulitzer Prize-winning photographer John Moore another prize. But thats irrelevant in
what is unfolding as a devastating
tragedy in Africa. Moores and others pictures can only show us a
glimpse of that tragedy. They do not
show that Excos mother and brother
had died earlier, or that he himself
would die later.
The popular media in America
and the rest of the Western world,
which, until recently, was busy dealing with the horrors of beheadings
perpetrated by medieval barbarians
and other horrors in the form of nude
photographs of celebrities being
leaked online on a daily basis, was
suddenly forced to confront another
horror. One that had been silently
brewing for many months in those
parts of the world which appear in the
Western consciousness only through
Hollywood blockbusters. And this it
was forced to do only once the first
Ebola death happened on American
soil.
Global apathy
Nevertheless, the response to the
crisis has been on expected lines. The
entire discourse surrounding Ebola in
the West is about quarantining itself
A soldier enforcing an Ebola quarantine in the West Point slum in Monrovia clashes
with a resident. Order and planning mark the Western intervention, but chaos reigns
in the centre of the outbreak.
against those poor Africans entering
our space, bringing deadly viruses
with them. Look at the discussion surrounding Thomas Duncan, the Liberian who was the first person to be
diagnosed with Ebola in the US, in
September. Social media was rife with
opinion that he had deliberately come
to the US to infect others. The state
authorities in the US, before his death,
were even considering filing criminal
charges against him for intentionally
exposing the public to the virus! Airports in North America have begun
screening passengers travelling from
affected areas and the governments
are on high alert for any eventuality.
Of course, it is only natural that
people are concerned about their own
safety and lives. But what is shocking is that the concern for ones own
self is also accompanied by a complete apathy towards the distant other.
Otherwise, how can we explain the
response to what the World Health
Organisation (WHO) calls the unparalleled health crisis in modern times?
Canadian journalist Geoffrey York,
who has covered wars and disasters
from the Gulf War to tsunamis, reported from Liberia that nothing is
18
quite like Ebola, a feeling reinforced
by photographs: stricken mothers
slumped on pavements with their infants on their laps, the dead lying on
roads, people pleading with health
workers to touch the bodies of their
loved ones.
These gut-wrenching pictures resemble nothing short of a scene of a
war-ravaged zone, except that the
tragic
difference
here,
unprecedentedly, is that one cannot
even help the dying or grieve for the
dead. Yet, the international community has only failed miserably, as the
World Bank president would admit.
The reported response of developing
nations like India, China and Brazil
all of which want Africa as a business
partner has not been any better than
that of the West either (the shining
exception has been that of the tiny
nation of Cuba, contributing, as in all
global health crises, far beyond its
means).
The overriding concern with protecting oneself, other than producing
an apathetic response, has also led to
the prescribing of piecemeal solutions
which will only perpetuate such tragedies in the future while hiding seri-
COVER
ous questions about the root cause of
the crisis structural inequalities in
global health. While solutions like a
global health fund for emergencies
prescribed by the World Bank president will save lives, they will not
eliminate the root causes that produce
periodic crises.
Worlds apart
Inequalities are at the heart of the
Ebola crisis. Ebolas are produced in
a world in which the United States
spends $8,362 annually per person on
health while Eritrea spends $12. It is
the same world in which the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) countries
which constitute a mere 18% of the
worlds population spend 84% of the
total money spent on health in the
world. Thus, unsurprisingly, 95% of
tuberculosis deaths and 99% of maternal mortality are in the developing
world.
And these inequalities are not
only between the developed and the
developing worlds, but also exist
within the developed world, as the
health indicators of African Americans and indigenous people in North
America show. In the city of London,
it is estimated that on a tube journey
eastwards from Westminster, each
tube station signifies the loss of approximately one year of life expectancy.
It is not an accident that Ebolas
epicentre is in Liberia, Guinea and
Sierra Leone. They are some of the
poorest countries in the world with a
history of wars and conflicts, and of
collapsing or dysfunctional health
systems. Liberia has only 51 doctors
to serve 4.2 million people and Sierra
Leone, 136 for six million.
Inequalities mark every step of
the current outbreak. Questions are
being asked about the initial tardy
hospital treatment given to Duncan
and whether his race and class had
anything to do with it here was an
African man without medical insurance seeking emergency medical help
in the most privatised and
corporatised medical system in the
West. That his nine-day treatment cost
$500,000 should tell us something
about the state of global health care.
When American missionaries
Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol
were infected with Ebola in Liberia,
the American government had them
airlifted isolated in an aeromedical
biological containment system and
had them successfully treated in the
US. Contrast this with the 22-year-old
Liberian woman and nurse-in-training, Fatu Kekula, who was forced to
look after four of her Ebola-stricken
family members at home using trash
bags as protective gear after hospitals
turned her away.
While a patient brought from Africa to a state-of-the-art facility in
Germany was treated in an isolation
ward equipped with three different air
locks (even when Ebola is not believed to be transmitted by air) and
by doctors and nurses wearing hazmat
suits with their own oxygen supplies,
the efforts to quarantine the West
Point slum in Monrovia failed completely, after it erupted in riots.
Order and planning mark the
Western intervention, but chaos reigns
in the centre of the outbreak. If an
entire building near Paris was cordoned off and quarantined on the mere
suspicion of a person having Ebolalike symptoms, in Liberia, the police
had to fire at a mob which had closed
down an isolation ward and even
looted contaminated material as they
believed Ebola to be a hoax.
Focus on priorities
Such conditions of absolute deprivation and desperation are spawned
by socio-economic inequalities. Is it
not astonishing that a deadly virus like
Ebola does not have a cure despite the
fact that it has been around for 40
years? The answer lies, as the WHO
Director-General emphasises, in the
fact that diseases that afflict only some
poorer and darker nations of the world
are not a priority for the global pharmaceutical industry. The latters market is a $300-billion behemoth of
which a third is controlled by 10 drug
companies only six in the US and
19
four in Europe.
Ebola also raises serious questions about the priorities of the global superpowers. The US has until
now seen Ebola only as a potential
weapon of bioterror. It has already
spent $1.1 billion in the military campaign against the Islamic State (a
monster produced by American imperialism), while the Ebola outbreak
which requires at least $1 billion has
got a third of it in actual paid donations from all the nations. Again, this
is unsurprising, considering that the
annual world military expenditure is
$1.75 trillion while its health expenditure is only $6.5 trillion.
Under globalisation, the empire
also unwittingly strikes back. Thus the
epicentre of the latest Ebola outbreak
lies in former French colonies, posing new threats to the former colonial
master, France, by people travelling
there from them. Similarly, Duncan
grew up next to a colony of leprosy
patients, fled Liberia during the civil
war, lived in refugee camps across
Africa and finally brought Ebola to
the US. Such are the ironies of our
deeply divided but interconnected
world.
In the immediate term, the response to Ebola, which has killed
4,922 Africans but only two Western
citizens, cannot be colour-coded
anymore. For the future, we cannot
but raise questions about the structural
inequalities that prevent accessible
health care for the global poor, and
societies that eliminate these inequalities. Questions such as: Why does it
cost $1 billion to develop a drug in
the US, while Cuba achieves the same
health indicators as the US by spending 40 times less on health? And what
makes all celebrities and others across
the globe who only a month ago were
emptying ice buckets over their heads,
raising $100 million for the ALS Ice
Bucket Challenge, turn silent as Ebola
continues to surge ahead? Do such
questions have answers?
ÿu
Nissim Mannathukkaren is an Associate Professor
of International Development Studies at Dalhousie
University in Canada. This article is reproduced
from The Hindu (27 October 2014).
COVER
Ebola in Africa: A product of
history
The vulnerability of Africans to the Ebola and other epidemics is largely the
outcome of colonial government policies which have been dutifully reproduced by
post-colonial regimes, says August H Nimtz.
MODERN African history teaches,
often tragically, the need to distinguish between what might be called
natural phenomena and those that are
essentially socio-economic-political.
The droughts that ravaged many parts
of the continent in the early 1970s are
an example of the former. (I leave
aside the issue of human actions and
global warming.) As drought-stricken
California presently shows, the famines and the tens of thousands of lives
lost that came in their wake were not,
however, inevitable. That horrific outcome was largely the product of the
policies put in place by colonial governments and dutifully and sadly reproduced by post-colonial regimes.
The same lesson is being taught,
again tragically, by the continents
latest scourge. Human pathogens have
existed in Africa ever since our species began to evolve there and they
too evolve, sometimes resulting in
viruses like Ebola. But theres nothing inevitable about the Ebola epidemic thats still unfolding. Like famines, it too is a product of history, the
decisions that governments have
made in the past as well as the present.
The relevant question is: whose interests are prioritised in those choices?
How a society responds to that most
natural of processes, the evolution of
human pathogens, testifies to the answers it gives to that question.
Colonial policies
Colonial regimes, in place from
about the last quarter of the 19th century to a decade or so after the Second World War, were, above all else,
designed to extract Africas natural
resources in the most lucrative way.
Social services that might have benefited the colonial subjects, such as
A team of Cuban doctors and health workers arriving at Freetown airport to help in
efforts to control the Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone. Cuba has stepped forward
unlike any other country to commit healthcare personnel to fight the Ebola scourge.
healthcare and education, were, in the
interest of cost savings, kept to a minimum if that. This explains the profoundly undemocratic character of
those regimes. The last thing the extractors wanted was for the subjects
to have some say-so about how they
were governed and, hence, how their
natural resources should be utilised.
These were the arrangements that
post-colonial elites not only inherited
and readily embraced but deepened
to advance their own narrow class interests. In the case of Liberia, a semicolony of the US nominally independent since 1847 its elite (the descendants of repatriated slaves from
America) ensured that Firestone Rubber would reap enormous profits from
its operations there. Thus, the outrageously ironic situation today where,
in one of the worlds leading rubber
producers, there are not enough rubber gloves to protect its citizens from
the scourge.
20
In recent decades, in the name of
fighting wasteful government spending and corruption, international lending agencies such as the International
Monetary Fund have demanded that
African governments must, as a condition for getting new funding, reduce
their spending. African elites have
willingly agreed to do so with resulting cuts in healthcare and education
helping to create the perfect storm
for the Ebola virus.
Lest it be assumed that only poor
or underdeveloped countries are afflicted with such tragic outcomes,
consider what happened in the richest country in the world in 2005. In
the wake of a natural phenomenon,
Hurricane Katrina global warming
again notwithstanding more than
1,600 people (and still counting, for
those of us intimately familiar with
what happened) lost their lives in New
Orleans and surrounding areas. Yet
two months earlier a hurricane of
COVER
greater intensity, Dennis, struck Cuba
twice and only 15 of its citizens perished.
Neither outcome was inevitable.
The difference, rather, evidenced the
deep-going structural transformations
in Cuban society after its 1959 revolution. For the first time in Cubas history, its toilers had a government that
prioritised their interests and not those
of a tiny elite. Their life chances, as
measured by, for example, infant
mortality rates, life expectancy and
levels of education, dramatically improved, despite the fact that Cuba is
still poor and underdeveloped. The
starkly different aftermaths of the two
hurricanes in both societies spoke
volumes about what Cubas toilers
had achieved and what their apparently better-off counterparts 400 miles
to the north had not.
Neither is it a coincidence that
Cuba has stepped forward, unlike any
other country, to commit healthcare
personnel to fight the Ebola scourge.
Four hundred and sixty-one Cubans
are either on their way or already in
the affected areas. They were selected
from 15,000 of their 11 million citizens who volunteered to go. Thats
tellingly in contrast to, as of the time
of writing, the 2,700 US citizens, out
of a population of 316 million, who,
according to the US Agency for International Development, have volunteered to do the same. For Cubans
there is nothing unusual about what
they are doing since 4,000 of their
healthcare workers already serve in
38 African countries and about 45,000
in 28 countries elsewhere.
Thus, the political choices a society makes have consequences not
only for the life chances of its own
citizens but also for those of other
countries. And therein is the most important lesson. Until the toilers not
only in Africa but elsewhere have
governments that serve their interests,
they risk being once again needless
victims of natural phenomena. ÿu
August H Nimtz is a professor of political science
and African American and African studies at the
University of Minnesota in the US. This article is
reproduced from Pambazuka News (Issue 700, 29
October 2014, www.pambazuka.net).
Compulsory License and Government Use
to Promote Access to Medicines: Some
Examples
The Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public
Health that was adopted by the WTO (World
Trade Organization) Ministerial Conference
of 2001 reaffirmed the rights of Members to
issue a compulsory license when
negotiations for a reasonable price or a
voluntary license to import or manufacture
a patented product from the patent holder
fail.
This book describes the experiences
of a number of developing countries in
exercising their rights to use compulsory
licensing, especially a license for
government use. This is a form of
compulsory license that is issued to obtain
generic medicines for use in public hospitals
and clinics, through imports or domestic
production.
Copies of the actual compulsory
licenses of the developing countries are
included for reference.
Malaysia
Developing countries
Others
Price
RM20.00
US$8.00
US$12.00
ISBN: 978-967-5412-97-4 176 pp
Postage
RM2.00
US$4.00 (air); US$2.00 (sea)
US$6.00 (air); US$2.00 (sea)
Orders from Malaysia please pay by credit card/crossed cheque or postal
order.
Orders from Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore,
Thailand, UK, USA please pay by credit card/cheque/bank draft/international
money order in own currency, US$ or Euro.If paying in own currency or Euro,
please calculate equivalent of US$ rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that
the agent bank is located in the USA.
Rest of the world please pay by credit card/cheque/bank draft/international
money order in US$ or Euro. If paying in Euro, please calculate equivalent of
US$ rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that the agent bank is located in the
USA.
All payments should be made in favour of: THIRD WORLD NETWORK
BHD., 131 Jalan Macalister, 10400 Penang, Malaysia. Tel: 60-4-2266728/
2266159; Fax: 60-4-2264505; Email: [email protected]; Website:
www.twn.my.
I would like to order .............. copy/copies of Compulsory License and
Government Use to Promote Access to Medicines: Some Examples.
I enclose the amount of .......................... by cheque/bank draft/IMO.
Please charge the amount of US$/Euro/RM ..................... to my credit card:
American Express
A/c No.:
Visa
Mastercard
Expiry date:
Signature:
Name:
Address:
21
COVER
Ebola and the failure of
Big Pharma
In a damning indictment of a profit-driven industry, the head of the World Health
Organisation has denounced the reluctance of the global pharmaceutical
corporations to invest in research on Ebola simply because the disease has been
confined to poor African nations. Shila Kaur reports.
ON 8 August 2014, the Director-General of the World Health Organisation
(WHO) Margaret Chan declared the
current Ebola outbreak in West Africa
a public health emergency of international concern. This is the largest, most severe, most complex outbreak in the nearly four-decade history of the disease, she stated emphatically.
The original outbreak in the West
African states of Guinea, Liberia and
Sierra Leone spread quickly to Nigeria. According to WHO estimates,
as of 4 August 2014, the number of
cases in these four countries stood at
1,711, including 931 deaths.
But a 24 September Bloomberg
news report stated that since its appearance in Guinea in December
2013, Ebola had spread very quickly
to five West African countries, infecting 5,864 people and killing 2,811.
The Bloomberg article attributed the
figures to WHOs 22 September report and went on to state that it was
an underestimate. The report added
that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)s worstcase scenario pointed to significant
under-reporting of cases by a factor
of 2.5. With the correction, the CDC
predicted that there would be 21,000
total cases in Liberia and Sierra Leone
alone by 30 September.
What is undeniable is that, in a
continent that is on course to improving living conditions and the health
status of its inhabitants, Ebola has set
back hard-won political stability and
economic recovery and is reversing
recent gains in health outcomes.
This latest outbreak has trained
the spotlight on two critical issues,
viz., the state of health systems in the
The WHO head has lambasted the pharmaceutical industry for neglecting to create
an Ebola vaccine. Because Ebola has historically been confined to poor African
nations, the R&D incentive is virtually non-existent.
affected countries and
the absence of a vaccine
for Ebola.
At a meeting of
WHOs Regional Committee for Africa in
Benin on 3 November,
Chan pointed out that
when heads of state in
non-affected countries
talked about Ebola, they
blamed the outbreak on
failure to put basic public health infrastructures
in place.
Without funda- WHO Director-General Margaret Chan: Without
mental public health in- fundamental public health infrastructures in place, no
frastructures in place, no country is stable.
country is stable. No
society is secure. No
quency and force, whether from a
resilience exists to withstand the changing climate or a runaway killer
shocks that our 21st century societies virus, she stated.
are delivering with ever greater freIt is clear that a lack of fundamenTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
22
COVER
As the death toll mounts and as international criticism of Big Pharma grows, the
rush to develop an Ebola vaccine appears at last to be gaining pace.
tal health infrastructure is indeed the
root cause for the spread of what Keiji
Fukuda, WHO Assistant DirectorGeneral for Health Security, calls not
a mysterious disease, but an infectious
disease that can be contained.
Writing along similar lines in The
Independent on Sunday on 3 August,
Professor John Ashton, the President
of the UK Faculty of Public Health,
stressed: The real spotlight needs to
be on the poverty and environmental
squalor in which epidemics thrive,
and the failure of political leadership
and public health systems to respond
effectively. The international commu-
nity has to be shamed into real commitment if the root causes of diseases like Ebola are to be addressed.
The problem with Big
Pharma
On the problem of the absence of
a vaccine, there can be little question
as to who is to blame. At the Benin
meeting, WHOs Chan took the bull
by the horns and blamed Big Pharma
for causing the problem. She lambasted the pharmaceutical industry for
neglecting to create a vaccine for the
Ebola virus despite its having exacted
Professor John Ashton (pic), President of the UK Faculty of Public Health, has branded
the unwillingness of Big Pharma to invest in research on treatments and vaccines a
scandal.
23
a human toll in Africa for almost 40
years.
In a damning statement, Chan
said, Because Ebola has historically
been confined to poor African nations,
the R&D [research and development]
incentive is virtually non-existent. A
profit-driven industry does not invest
in products for markets that cannot
pay. WHO has been trying to make
this issue visible for ages. Now people can see for themselves.
Chans views find resonance in
Ashtons earlier article. Ashton
branded the unwillingness of Big
Pharma to invest in research on treatments and vaccines a scandal. Big
Pharma refuses to invest in this type
of research because the numbers involved are, in their terms, so small and
dont justify the investment. This is
the moral bankruptcy of capitalism
acting in the absence of a moral and
social framework.
In his article, Ashton also lamented the failure to mobilise an adequately resourced international
medical response to the Ebola outbreak. In contrast to what he called
the tardiness of the international response, it is heartening to note that
Cuba, a small island nation with few
financial resources, pledged 461 doctors and nurses to provide care in
Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone.
Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) or
Doctors Without Borders, the international medical humanitarian organisation, deployed 270 international
healthcare specialists working in the
affected countries.
Meanwhile more than 90 of the
worlds leading scientists have participated in a joint collaborative effort on
an experimental Ebola vaccine, from
national and university research institutions to government health agencies,
ministries of health and foreign affairs, national security councils and
several offices of prime ministers and
presidents. Anthony Fauci, Director
of the US National Institutes of Health
and one of the worlds leading immunologists, told the BBC in August that
he hoped to develop a vaccine by the
middle to end of 2015.
ÿu
Shila Kaur is Health Consultant with the Third World
Network.
COVER
No cure: Behind the lack of options
to treat Ebola
The absence of a medical cure or vaccine for Ebola has clearly demonstrated that
private investment, even when supplemented with government research grants,
especially grants oriented towards national defence, cannot be relied upon to tackle
infectious diseases that primarily impact the poor and occur where the drug
industrys market incentives do not function. It is time to turn to alternative models
and approaches, says Edward Hammond.
AS the 2014 Ebola epidemic in West
Africa took root, it became widely
apparent that there is no ready drug
to cure the disease, nor any vaccine
available to stop its spread. Gutwrenching scenes have been televised
worldwide of overworked doctors and
nurses isolating victims and treating
their symptoms, but unable to cure
infections.
Why is medicine so often helpless in the face of this disease? Where
are the potential treatments, who controls them, and why werent they
ready to be used?
Part of the answer is obvious and
unsurprising: Before the current epidemic, Ebola only occasionally appeared, usually in remote areas of
Africa where, after causing localised
mayhem, the virus receded to its
poorly understood forest reservoirs.
Because rural Africans dont present
much of a market to drug companies,
particularly for a disease that only
appears intermittently, no company
ever invested heavily in an Ebola cure.
If thats the case, however, why
have so many potential Ebola treatments appeared? More than a dozen
companies are offering possible
vaccines or antiviral drugs. But all of
these possible cures are in development, dont have regulatory approvals, and have limited or no availability for patients. Were these companies
altruistically pursuing an Ebola cure
before the epidemic? Did they sagely
anticipate a dramatically more intense
outbreak and the West Africa epidemic came too soon?
Neither is the case. Few of the
candidate treatments widely men-
tioned in the media
today both antiviral
drugs
and
vaccines were developed from the
ground up as Ebola
treatments. Instead,
most
candidate
therapies for Ebola
rely on research and
technology whose
aim is the treatment
of other, more potentially profitable con- A phial containing an experimental Ebola vaccine. Since
ditions ranging from Ebola was often only a side-interest in research focused
hepatitis to cancer. on more profitable diseases, many half-developed drugs
have resulted, only ready for Ebola to the extent to which
Ebola has been an
they have received public funding.
ancillary aim of drug
and vaccine development efforts, un- key expertise, materials and lab work
dertaken not as the primary objective by its governmental Vaccine Research
but rather when companies have been Center.
able to obtain grants for Ebola reBut while in mid-2014 GSK had
search that will, in parallel, advance pushed the hepatitis version of the
other goals.
vaccine to Phase II human trials, the
The overwhelming driver of Ebola vaccine lingered behind. It was
Ebola research has thus not been pri- untested in humans until Phase I studvate investment but the public sector. ies were recently initiated with more
This includes both the work of public public funding, spurred by the Ebola
laboratories, such as Canadas Na- epidemic. Even if it works, and detional Microbiology Laboratory in spite an accelerated testing proWinnipeg, which created a leading gramme, it may not be available for
candidate vaccine, and research by the African public until 2016.
companies working under public
In other cases, discoveries were
grants and contracts.
incidental. Brincidofovir, a broadFor example, the candidate Ebola spectrum antiviral drug recently
vaccine typically described as com- touted for Ebola and owned by US
ing
from
industry
giant company Chimerix, emerged from
GlaxoSmithKline is built on vaccine 1990s publicly funded research at the
research whose main target is hepati- University of California aimed at findtis C. A version of GSKs hepatitis C ing drugs to treat eye infections.
vaccine for Ebola was created under BCX4430, an antiviral owned by
an agreement with the US National Biocryst, another American company,
Institutes of Health, which contributed appears to have been identified as
24
COVER
having potential use against Ebola by
the US Army, not Biocryst. Until recently, Biocryst gave BCX4430 little
attention compared to its focus on
drugs for influenza, gout and other
conditions, pursuing BCX4430 to the
extent that the government funded
research.
Since Ebola was often only a
side-interest in research focused on
more profitable diseases, many halfdeveloped drugs have resulted, only
ready for Ebola to the extent to which
they have received public funding,
with none ready to treat the diseases
victims.
Not only has Ebola typically been
a sideline in research, treating Africans hasnt been the primary objective of much of the government investment that has taken place. Thats
because a substantial proportion of the
funding for research into antivirals to
treat haemorrhagic fevers like Ebola
and its close cousin Marburg virus
hasnt come from public health budgets but rather from military coffers.
The immediate objectives of these
military programmes are to protect
troops and stockpile against the (often remote) possibility of a terrorist
attack, rather than treating foreign civilians.
For example, JK-05, a possible
Ebola drug controlled by Chinas
Sihuan Pharmaceutical, emerged
from research supported by the Peoples Liberation Armys biodefence
programme, and appears to have been
stockpiled by the PLA for defence
purposes. (Some JK-05 has been
shipped to Africa, but with the intent
of only treating Chinese citizens there,
since testing and regulatory approvals for regular civilian use were not
obtained.)
JK-05 mirrors brincidofovir from
Chimerix, a company that has been
kept afloat for years by defence grants
from the US government.
Brincidofovir, and perhaps the chemically related JK-05, were supported
by defence programmes intended to
build military stockpiles of treatments
against smallpox, a disease (at least
until recently) considered by some
militaries to be a greater security
threat than Ebola.
The overwhelming driver of Ebola research has not been private investment but the
public sector, including the work of public laboratories such as Canadas National
Microbiology Laboratory (pic).
Understanding these funding dynamics that have ruled Ebola research
since at least the early 2000s explains
why theres no treatment on the shelf,
and why a confusing panoply of partially developed drugs and vaccines
must be further tested and sorted out
before treatments become available.
Those dynamics also show why
proven antiviral drugs and vaccines
against Ebola, both of which may
emerge in 2015, even if too late for
tens of thousands of West Africans,
are unlikely to be drug company miracles. Rather, they will substantially be
the result of public sector scientists
and publicly funded research, raising
questions about patents, and who
should profit, if anybody, from efforts
to contain the horrifying epidemic.
Public confidence shaken
As the Ebola epidemic gained
momentum and desperation mounted
in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone,
public health officials in developed
countries were initially overconfident
about their own capacities to both help
Africa and control spread of the disease to other regions. Blame for much
of the epidemic, health officials declared, was attributable to poor infection control practices in West Africa
and the particularly weak healthcare
systems in the countries where the
disease had taken root.
There is certainly some truth to
that explanation for Ebolas spread in
Africa the number of doctors is
appallingly low and appropriate
25
equipment and hospitals scarce in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, a situation that presented preventable opportunities for the disease to spread.
Adding to the confidence, two
American health workers who contracted Ebola in Africa were flown
back to the US for treatment and recovered from the disease. Both were
administered an unusual antibody
therapy called ZMapp, an experimental drug grown in genetically engineered plants by an obscure California company. While health officials
knew better there were signs that at
least one patients recovery had little
or nothing to do with the drug they
allowed the apparent success to buoy
public hopes of a cure.
(ZMapp is a privately owned
product of publicly funded biodefence
research in Canada and the US. The
US and German interests that own the
majority of ZMapp are primarily focused on pharming growing drugs
in plants a controversial technique
considered risky from a biosafety perspective. Pharming has a history of
commercial failure, in no small part
due to opposition from safety activists.)
In an interview published on 29
September, the USs top infectious
disease official, Anthony Fauci, declared that the US could shut off any
domestic outbreak. He was quickly
proven half-right. The next day, an
American who travelled from Liberia to Texas was diagnosed with
Ebola. He died eight days later, and
two nurses became infected while
COVER
treating him. With widely reported
difficulties, public health officials
contained the nurses cases. While
Ebola had been shut off in a manner
of speaking, it had been transmitted
in the United States and public confidence shaken.
In a European parallel, a Spanish
nurse treating a victim that had travelled from West Africa also became
infected. It became clear the world
over that conditions in Africa werent
the only factor allowing the epidemic
to grow. Even the most sophisticated
and well-equipped healthcare systems
could not reliably control or cure the
disease.
While the small number of Northern cases unduly distracted from the
far greater human suffering taking
place in Africa, the possibility of
Ebola taking root on other continents
had been demonstrated, changing international perceptions of the severity of the threat.
From the beginning of the epidemic, experts knew that Ebola was
incurable, and that there is little to be
done for those infected but to treat
symptoms and let the disease take its
course, hoping for the best. Because
previous outbreaks tended to occur
sporadically in relatively sparsely
populated rural areas far away from
the media spotlight reducing opportunities for transmission, the brutal
reality of an Ebola ward hadnt entered the public consciousness.
By late September, however, few
remained naïve. Seeking to allay concern, governments, the World Health
Organisation (WHO) and Britains
Wellcome Trust were rushing ahead
with clinical trials of a number of possible Ebola treatments, suspending
normal testing procedures and
timelines.
NewLink Genetics, a small US
research company that bought rights
to Health Canadas candidate Ebola
vaccine, has received millions of dollars in new grants, even as Canadians
have questioned why an unknown US
company should control the fate of the
countrys publicly developed vaccine,
and if commercial interests are being
put in front of public health.
Yet NewLink may be as much a
symptom of failure in the drug development system as the problem itself.
In a stroke of potential financial luck,
in 2010 NewLink, whose main focus
is cancer research, licensed the candidate vaccine through its tiny
biodefence subsidiary (which subsisted on small government grants).
The vaccine had languished without
active development since shortly after it was created in the mid-2000s
and, until 2014, NewLink had also
failed to move it far down the course
towards approval.
Profectus, a US company with a
vaccine very similar to the Canadian
one, has received new grants, as has
Tekmira, a company with a more
speculative drug based on RNA interference technology that, like others,
was primarily developed not to treat
Ebola but other conditions.
For some companies the Ebola
outbreak has been a godsend not only
for grants but also in the stock market. Chimerix, the company that has
never commercialised a product, was
worth as little as $15 a share in May,
but hit over $35 by mid-November,
in large part on the basis of hopes that
a drug it controls will be bought in
large quantities to be used against
Ebola.
Chimerixs gain in market capitalisation since the epidemic took off,
over $650 million as of mid-November, is nearly as much as the entire
Ebola aid pledge to date from the
United Kingdom (£475 million or
$750 million), Europes largest Ebola
donor and a leader of efforts to aid
Sierra Leone.
At least five vaccines are being
moved into trials, in one case with two
products from different companies
used together in what is termed a
prime boost regime (two shots
spread over time). A half-dozen antiviral drugs are also being tested in
humans.
It is cold comfort for West Africa,
but that these tests are occurring in
the midst of an Ebola epidemic makes
some technical aspects of the trials
easier there is no shortage of people being exposed to the virus, yielding far better data than animal studies but raises ethical dilemmas about
26
use of placebos and control subjects.
Pity the participant in a study who
receives a placebo instead of a potentially effective vaccine and later contracts Ebola. Or what to do about vulnerable groups, such as children, the
elderly and those with other diseases?
It can be hoped that the phase that
is now being entered will end quickly.
So many parallel trials, while necessary, divide effort and spending. Some
work will not be successful, at least
not in a useful time frame for the
present epidemic. Adding to confusion and potential waste, some companies too will likely continue to push
their drug, even if results arent as
promising as for other products.
Who will pay?
It is impossible to know if any of
these candidate vaccines and drugs
will be validated as safe and effective
in the course of the present epidemic
before it winds down as a result of
non-pharmaceutical control efforts.
Effective treatments may come too
late, or they may be crucial. If treatments are approved, they will be regarded as crucial to control future
outbreaks, which are a virtual certainty (although it can be hoped that
none will reach the present scale
again).
This raises the question of who
will receive and who will pay for any
successful vaccines and antiviral
drugs, all of which are covered by
patent claims.
For Ebola vaccines, as long as
they remain in private hands, and as
long as epidemics and the unknown
natural reservoir(s) of the virus remain
constricted to Africa, routine vaccination is unlikely to become the norm
anywhere.
Outside Africa, Ebola vaccination
would be unnecessary, except for
those who travel to a location where
an epidemic was underway or recently
occurred. Inside Africa, assuming that
the present epidemic is stopped, routine vaccination appears unlikely because economic conditions will not
support a commercial market, and
public healthcare systems in affected
countries are unlikely to be able to buy
COVER
large quantities of vaccine on their
own.
With Ebolas ability to cause destruction so visibly demonstrated, a
more reliable market will be created
for biodefence stockpiling. Such vaccine reserves are typically costly and
mostly maintained by developed
countries.
Bavarian Nordic, a Danish company that also has a candidate Ebola
vaccine in the running, holds a contract with the US government to provide it with smallpox vaccine. (Smallpox has been eradicated from the wild
since the 1970s.) The deal is worth
up to $1.78 billion, and since vaccines
expire, the US and other governments
can be counted on to eventually order more. The US and a number of
countries in Europe and Asia will also
likely stockpile an effective Ebola
antiviral drug.
The other market is in aid for
Africa. It is presently easy to see a
need for tens of millions of doses of
vaccine (the population of affected
countries and some surrounding areas) and potentially hundreds of thousands of courses of antivirals predominantly delivered as aid. If the
epidemic spreads and takes root in
more populous African nations, such
as Nigeria, vaccine numbers could
easily leap much higher.
Before results begin to come back
from clinical trials, there are too many
unknowns to predict what treatments
will be delivered and how. What
seems certain is that there will be tension between companies, which will
claim proprietary rights and expect
profits, versus humanitarian imperatives and the limited resources of affected countries.
Should companies profit from the
Ebola outbreak? Most Ebola therapies
have directly and significantly benefited from public grants, contracts
and science. Few, maybe none, would
exist without that public support.
Since the public has paid much of the
development costs for Ebola drugs
and vaccines, should companies have
any expectation of royalties or other
profit in excess of recovering production costs?
Might a better way not be to open
production of Ebola products to any
entity able to do it? Knocking down
patent barriers has had public health
benefits with AIDS and other diseases. Doing so seems to offer a much
better potential return on the publics
investment, and seems more likely to
result in affordable products worldwide.
Although Ebola has been dreaded
for decades as one of the worlds most
fearsome viruses, private pharmaceutical research and development failed
to provide any viable treatments before the West African epidemic, despite the fact that technical barriers to
an Ebola vaccine do not appear insurmountable.
Since the 2000s, government
spending spurred some development
of candidate Ebola treatments, but
government efforts failed on followthrough because their research and
development model relied on market
forces that did not work.
Companies were happy to take
public money for Ebola research in
order to supplement and advance their
work on other, more profitable goals,
but no company put in the extra investment needed to bring a product
to fruition before today.
US conservatives like Senator
Richard Burr, a champion of
militarising infectious disease research, have seized upon the situation
to demand that more public money be
given to companies that promise possible cures so that they can bridge the
so-called valley of death between
drug discovery and licensure.
But this solution, in addition to
heightening questions about who
should own such subsidised products,
relies on the false premise that the
market would steer a licensed vaccine
to those that need it (rather than limited and pricey production for defence
stockpiles). Further public research
subsidies might increase the rate of
Ebola drug development, but will not
correct for markets that wont function like trying to sell expensive new
patented vaccines and drugs in rural
Africa.
There are many other cases in
both Africa and other regions. For
example, it is very hard to imagine
27
bringing to market a vaccine against
Bolivian Haemorrhagic Fever
(Machupo virus). Lethal in up to a
third of cases, the virus occasionally
breaks out in the countrys north,
where per capita incomes are low and
the burden of treatable diseases is
higher.
Although it will come too late for
many thousands in West Africa who
have died and will continue to die of
Ebola in the coming months, and for
a few people elsewhere, it seems
likely now that Ebola treatments will
be finalised, approved and produced
in the next two years, greatly reducing the chances of a future outbreak
of such severity.
While reassuring, that is cold
comfort for West Africa, and a lesson
for other regions. Ebola has proven
especially wicked, but there are
haemorrhagic fevers and other ill-understood transmissible viruses, like
SARS and MERS, that have the potential to begin to move through human populations across the world.
Traditional drug industry research and
development, even supplemented by
government grants, doesnt serve the
need for treatments for these diseases
very well either.
And that is one important longterm lesson: Thousands shouldnt
have died before companies were
spurred to take half-developed treatments off the shelf and put them into
testing. Private investment, supplemented with government research
grants, especially grants oriented towards national defence, cannot be relied upon to produce treatments for
infectious diseases that primarily impact the poor and occur where the
drug industrys market incentives do
not function.
The Ebola outbreak is thus another clear example for the growing
movement to change the incentive
structure of drug research away from
patents and proprietary approaches
and towards more open and collaborative models with economic and noneconomic incentives.
ÿu
Edward Hammond directs Prickly Research
(www.pricklyresearch.com), a research and writing
consultancy based in Austin, Texas, USA. He has
worked on biodiversity and infectious disease issues
since 1994.
COVER
Lessons the US can learn from
Cuba and the Ebola crisis
While Cuba has responded to the Ebola crisis in West Africa by sending the largest
foreign medical team comprised of doctors and nurses, the US has dispatched
some 3,000 troops. Dan Kovalik says that the US decision to send troops to fight
disease says it all!
A STORY I read on Cubas sending
300 additional medical personnel to
Africa to help with the Ebola epidemic made a great impression on me.
Published on the teleSUR English
website, the 27 September piece read,
in pertinent part:
Cuba, which has about 50,000
health workers stationed across the
world, received accolades from the
UN and the World Health Organisation (WHO) for its effort against
Ebola, last week, when it already had
the largest foreign medical team fighting the killer virus in West Africa,
consisting of 62 doctors and 103
nurses.
The US has sent 3,000 troops to
Liberia as part of its response to
Ebola, which it considers a matter of
national security. In addition, the US
pledged 65 clinicians and support
staff, to treat infected health care
workers, but not civilians.
The import of these few lines is
great. Cuba, a poor country with a
population smaller than the metropolitan area of New York City and a country under a 50-year embargo imposed
by the US, is sending more medical
staff to combat the Ebola virus than
any other country and a multiple of
what the US is sending. And, as is
quite typical, the USs chief contribution is the sending of soldiers. This
is a repeat of the situation in Haiti after the 2010 earthquake when the US
sent 14,000 soldiers while Cuba and
Venezuela, with doctors already on
the ground, were the backbone of the
effort to fight the ensuing cholera epidemic.
The USs decision to send soldiers to fight disease says it all. Every
problem to the US a country which
is armed to the teeth and which has
become the proverbial hammer of the
world looks like a nail. This state of
affairs has become dangerous for the
world which fears the US more than
any other country, and for the US itself which has been drained of treasure and the blood of its young fighting men and women who have been
sent to fight far-flung wars which, lets
face it, have largely caused more
problems than they have solved.
Cuba is sending more
medical staff to combat
the Ebola virus than any
other country.
Just to recap a few of its latest
military adventures, the US mobilised
and supported Islamic extremists in
Afghanistan to fight the Marxist government there in the late 1970s, and
then to combat the Soviets who invaded just as the US had intended they
would, only to be attacked by some
of those extremists, including Osama
bin Laden, in 2001. The US has been
involved in a war in Afghanistan since
2001 against the Taliban, which naturally grew out of the extremist movement the US helped organise back in
the 1970s to ostensibly fight communism.
Meanwhile, the US fought two
major wars in Iraq to combat (at least
allegedly) aggression and terrorism,
only to unleash much more terrorism
in that country terrorism which we
are now again mobilising to fight.
Beginning in 2007, the US began secretly backing and inciting Islamic
extremists in Syria in order to underTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
28
mine the government there. And now,
frightened by these extremists, the US
is planning to attack them. Finally, the
US watches as Libya collapses and is
overrun by extremists as a direct consequence of the US-led bombing campaign against the Libyan government
in 2012.
As a consequence of all this warmaking, the US is trillions of dollars
poorer and the world is more insecure
than ever. We have truly reaped a
whirlwind from our own violence, and
shall continue to until it is stopped by
the only force that can make it stop
the American people.
Meanwhile, little Cuba, with the
help of Venezuela, sends doctors
throughout the world to combat disease, and is winning the worlds praise
as a result. Maybe the US, instead of
vilifying Cuba and Venezuela, should
learn a lesson from them. Instead of
trying to combat every problem, real
and imagined, with military might, the
US may wish to solve problems more
constructively by engaging with
other countries and peoples peacefully
and helping to alleviate their poverty
and their illness.
Is it possible that such a course
of action, prescribed by the JudeoChristian values we claim to espouse,
might lead the world to hate us less
and dry up the recruitment of young
men and women by extremist groups?
Certainly, this could be no less effective than the violent means we have
chosen to use for these too many decades.
ÿu
Dan Kovalik is a human and labour rights lawyer
living in Pittsburgh, USA. He has been a peace
activist throughout his life and has been deeply
involved in the movement for peace and social justice
in Colombia and Central America. This article is
reproduced from The Huffington Post
(www.huffingtonpost.com).
WORLD AFFAIRS
The bases of war in the
Middle East Over the past 35 years, the US has covered the Middle East with military bases
and troops. David Vine considers the effects of such garrisoning on the region.
WITH the launch of a new US-led war
in Iraq and Syria against the Islamic
State (IS), the United States has engaged in aggressive military action
in at least 13 countries in the Greater
Middle East since 1980. In that time,
every American president has invaded, occupied, bombed or gone to
war in at least one country in the region. The total number of invasions,
occupations, bombing operations,
drone assassination campaigns and
cruise missile attacks easily runs into
the dozens.
As in prior military operations in
the Greater Middle East, US forces
fighting IS have been aided by access
to and the use of an unprecedented
collection of military bases. They occupy a region sitting atop the worlds
largest concentration of oil and natural gas reserves and which has long
been considered the most geo-politically important place on the planet.
Indeed, since 1980, the US military
has gradually garrisoned the Greater
Middle East in a fashion rivalled only
by the Cold War garrisoning of Western Europe or, in terms of concentration, by the bases built to wage past
wars in Korea and Vietnam.
In the Persian Gulf alone, the US
has major bases in every country save
Iran. There is an increasingly important, increasingly large base in
Djibouti, just miles across the Red Sea
from the Arabian Peninsula. There are
bases in Pakistan on one end of the
region and in the Balkans on the other,
as well as on the strategically located
Indian Ocean islands of Diego Garcia
and the Seychelles. In Afghanistan
and Iraq, there were once as many as
800 and 505 bases, respectively. Recently, the Obama administration
inked an agreement with new Afghan
President Ashraf Ghani to maintain
around 10,000 troops and at least nine
The US al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar hosts around 9,000 troops and contractors who
are coordinating much of the new war in Iraq and Syria.
major bases in his country beyond the
official end of combat operations later
this year. US forces, which never fully
departed Iraq after 2011, are now returning to a growing number of bases
there in ever-larger numbers.
In short, there is almost no way
to overemphasise how thoroughly the
US military now covers the region
with bases and troops. This infrastructure of war has been in place for so
long and is so taken for granted that
Americans rarely think about it and
journalists almost never report on the
subject. Members of Congress spend
billions of dollars on base construction and maintenance every year in the
region, but ask few questions about
where the money is going, why there
are so many bases, and what role they
really serve. By one estimate, the
United States has spent $10 trillion
protecting Persian Gulf oil supplies
over the past four decades.
Approaching its 35th anniversary,
the strategy of maintaining such a
29
structure of garrisons, troops, planes
and ships in the Middle East has been
one of the great disasters in the history of American foreign policy. The
rapid disappearance of debate about
our newest, possibly illegal war
should remind us of just how easy this
huge infrastructure of bases has made
it for anyone in the Oval Office to
launch a war that seems guaranteed,
like its predecessors, to set off new
cycles of blowback and yet more war.
On their own, the existence of
these bases has helped generate radicalism and anti-American sentiment.
As was famously the case with Osama
bin Laden and US troops in Saudi
Arabia, bases have fuelled militancy,
as well as attacks on the United States
and its citizens. They have cost taxpayers billions of dollars, even though
they are not, in fact, necessary to ensure the free flow of oil globally. They
have diverted tax dollars from the
possible development of alternative
energy sources and meeting other
WORLD AFFAIRS
critical domestic needs. And they have
supported dictators and repressive,
undemocratic regimes, helping to
block the spread of democracy in a
region long controlled by colonial
rulers and autocrats.
After 35 years of base-building
in the region, its long past time to
look carefully at the effects Washingtons garrisoning of the Greater Middle East has had on the region, the US
and the world.
Vast oil reserves
While the Middle Eastern base
buildup began in earnest in 1980,
Washington had long attempted to use
military force to control this swath of
resource-rich Eurasia and, with it, the
global economy. Since World War II,
as the late Chalmers Johnson, an expert on US basing strategy, explained
back in 2004, the United States has
been inexorably acquiring permanent
military enclaves whose sole purpose
appears to be the domination of one
of the most strategically important
areas of the world.
In 1945, after Germanys defeat,
the secretaries of War, State and the
Navy tellingly pushed for the completion of a partially built base in Dharan,
Saudi Arabia, despite the militarys
determination that it was unnecessary
for the war against Japan. Immediate construction of this [air] field,
they argued, would be a strong showing of American interest in Saudi Arabia and thus tend to strengthen the
political integrity of that country
where vast oil reserves now are in
American hands.
By 1949, the Pentagon had established a small, permanent Middle East
naval force (MIDEASTFOR) in Bahrain. In the early 1960s, President
John F Kennedys administration began the first buildup of naval forces
in the Indian Ocean just off the Persian Gulf. Within a decade, the Navy
had created the foundations for what
would become the first major US base
in the region on the British-controlled island of Diego Garcia.
In these early Cold War years,
though, Washington generally sought
to increase its influence in the Mid-
US soldiers in Iraq. US forces, which never fully departed the country after 2011, are
now returning to a growing number of bases there in ever-larger numbers.
dle East by backing and arming regional powers like the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia, Iran under the Shah, and
Israel. However, within months of the
Soviet Unions 1979 invasion of Afghanistan and Irans 1979 revolution
overthrowing the Shah, this relatively
hands-off approach was no more.
Base buildup
In January 1980, President
Jimmy Carter announced a fateful
transformation of US policy. It would
become known as the Carter Doctrine.
In his State of the Union address, he
warned of the potential loss of a region containing more than two-thirds
of the worlds exportable oil and
now threatened by Soviet troops in
Afghanistan who posed a grave
threat to the free movement of Middle East oil.
Carter warned that an attempt by
any outside force to gain control of
the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of
America. And he added pointedly,
Such an assault will be repelled by
any means necessary, including military force.
With these words, Carter
launched one of the greatest base construction efforts in history. He and his
successor Ronald Reagan presided
over the expansion of bases in Egypt,
Oman, Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region to host a Rapid
30
Deployment Force, which was to
stand permanent guard over Middle
Eastern petroleum supplies. The air
and naval base on Diego Garcia, in
particular, was expanded at a quicker
rate than any base since the war in
Vietnam. By 1986, more than $500
million had been invested. Before
long, the total ran into the billions.
Soon enough, that Rapid Deployment Force grew into the US Central
Command, which has now overseen
three wars in Iraq (1991-2003, 200311, 2014-); the war in Afghanistan and
Pakistan (2001-); intervention in
Lebanon (1982-84); a series of
smaller-scale attacks on Libya (1981,
1986, 1989, 2011); Afghanistan
(1998) and Sudan (1998); and the
tanker war with Iran (1987-88),
which led to the accidental downing
of an Iranian civilian airliner, killing
290 passengers. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan during the 1980s, the CIA
helped fund and orchestrate a major
covert war against the Soviet Union
by backing Osama bin Laden and
other extremist mujahidin. The command has also played a role in the
drone war in Yemen (2002-) and both
overt and covert warfare in Somalia
(1992-94, 2001-). During and after the first Gulf
War of 1991, the Pentagon dramatically expanded its presence in the region. Hundreds of thousands of troops
were deployed to Saudi Arabia in
preparation for the war against Iraqi
autocrat and former ally Saddam
WORLD AFFAIRS
Hussein. In that wars aftermath, thousands of troops and a significantly
expanded base infrastructure were left
in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Elsewhere in the Gulf, the military expanded its naval presence at a former
British base in Bahrain, housing its
Fifth Fleet there. Major air power installations were built in Qatar, and US
operations were expanded in Kuwait,
the United Arab Emirates and Oman.
The invasion of Afghanistan in
2001 and of Iraq in 2003, and the subsequent occupations of both countries,
led to a more dramatic expansion of
bases in the region. By the height of
the wars, there were well over 1,000
US checkpoints, outposts and major
bases in the two countries alone. The
military also built new bases in
Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan (since
closed), explored the possibility of
doing so in Tajikistan and Kazakhstan,
and, at the very least, continues to use
several Central Asian countries as
logistical pipelines to supply troops in
Afghanistan and orchestrate the current partial withdrawal.
While the Obama administration
failed to keep 58 enduring bases in
Iraq after the 2011 US withdrawal, it
has signed an agreement with Afghanistan permitting US troops to stay
in the country until 2024 and maintain access to Bagram Air Base and at
least eight more major installations.
An infrastructure for war
Even without a large permanent
infrastructure of bases in Iraq, the US
military has had plenty of options
when it comes to waging its new war
against IS. In that country alone, a significant US presence remained after
the 2011 withdrawal in the form of
base-like State Department installations, as well as the largest embassy
on the planet in Baghdad, and a large
contingent of private military contractors. Since the start of the new war, at
least 1,600 troops have returned and
are operating from a Joint Operations
Center in Baghdad and a base in Iraqi
Kurdistans capital, Erbil. In early
November, the White House announced that it would request $5.6
billion from Congress to send an ad-
Bahrain is now the headquarters for the US Navys entire Middle Eastern operations,
including the Fifth Fleet.
ditional 1,500 advisers and other personnel to at least two new bases in
Baghdad and Anbar Province. Special
operations and other forces are almost
certainly operating from yet more undisclosed locations.
At least as important are major
installations like the Combined Air
Operations Center at Qatars al-Udeid
Air Base. Before 2003, the Central
Commands air operations centre for
the entire Middle East was in Saudi
Arabia. That year, the Pentagon
moved the centre to Qatar and officially withdrew combat forces from
Saudi Arabia. That was in response
to the 1996 bombing of the militarys
Khobar Towers complex in the kingdom, other al-Qaeda attacks in the region, and mounting anger exploited
by al-Qaeda over the presence of nonMuslim troops in the Muslim holy
land. Al-Udeid now hosts a 15,000foot runway, large munitions stocks,
and around 9,000 troops and contractors who are coordinating much of the
new war in Iraq and Syria.
Kuwait has been an equally important hub for Washingtons operations since US troops occupied the
country during the first Gulf War.
Kuwait served as the main staging
area and logistical centre for ground
troops in the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq. There are still an estimated 15,000 troops in Kuwait, and
the US military is reportedly bombing Islamic State positions using aircraft from Kuwaits Ali al-Salem Air
Base.
31
As a transparently promotional
article in the Washington Post on 9
November confirmed, al-Dhafra Air
Base in the United Arab Emirates
(UAE) has launched more attack aircraft in the present bombing campaign
than any other base in the region. That
country hosts about 3,500 troops at
al-Dhafra alone, as well as the Navys
busiest overseas port. B-1, B-2 and
B-52 long-range bombers stationed
on Diego Garcia helped launch both
Gulf Wars and the war in Afghanistan.
That island base is likely playing a
role in the new war as well. Near the
Iraqi border, around 1,000 US troops
and F-16 fighter jets are operating
from at least one Jordanian base. According to the Pentagons latest count,
the US military has 17 bases in Turkey. While the Turkish government
has placed restrictions on their use, at
the very least some are being used to
launch surveillance drones over Syria
and Iraq. Up to seven bases in Oman
may also be in use.
Bahrain is now the headquarters
for the Navys entire Middle Eastern
operations, including the Fifth Fleet,
generally assigned to ensure the free
flow of oil and other resources
through the Persian Gulf and surrounding waterways. There is always
at least one aircraft carrier strike group
effectively, a massive floating base
in the Persian Gulf. At the moment,
the USS Carl Vinson is stationed
there, a critical launch pad for the air
campaign against the Islamic State.
Other naval vessels operating in the
WORLD AFFAIRS
Gulf and the Red Sea have launched
cruise missiles into Iraq and Syria.
The Navy even has access to an afloat
forward-staging base that serves as a
lilypad base for helicopters and patrol craft in the region.
In Israel, there are as many as six
secret US bases that can be used to
preposition weaponry and equipment
for quick use anywhere in the area.
Theres also a de facto US base for
the Navys Mediterranean fleet. And
its suspected that there are two other
secretive sites in use as well. In Egypt,
US troops have maintained at least
two installations and occupied at least
two bases on the Sinai Peninsula since
1982 as part of a Camp David Accords
peacekeeping operation.
Elsewhere in the region, the military has established a collection of at
least five drone bases in Pakistan;
expanded a critical base in Djibouti
at the strategic chokepoint between
the Suez Canal and the Indian Ocean;
created or gained access to bases in
Ethiopia, Kenya and the Seychelles;
and set up new bases in Bulgaria and
Romania to go with a Clinton administration-era base in Kosovo along the
western edge of the gas-rich Black
Sea.
Even in Saudi Arabia, despite the
public withdrawal, a small US military contingent has remained to train
Saudi personnel and keep bases
warm as potential backups for unexpected conflagrations in the region
or, assumedly, in the kingdom itself.
In recent years, the military has even
established a secret drone base in the
country, despite the blowback Washington has experienced from its previous Saudi basing ventures.
Dictators, death and disaster
The ongoing US presence in
Saudi Arabia, however modest,
should remind us of the dangers of
maintaining bases in the region. The
garrisoning of the Muslim holy land
was a major recruiting tool for alQaeda and part of Osama bin Ladens
professed motivation for the 9/11 attacks. (He called the presence of US
troops the greatest of these
aggressions incurred by the Muslims
since the death of the prophet.) Indeed, US bases and troops in the Middle East have been a major catalyst
for
anti-Americanism
and
radicalisation since a suicide bombing killed 241 Marines in Lebanon in
1983. Other attacks have come in
Saudi Arabia in 1996, Yemen in 2000
against the USS Cole, and during the
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Research has shown a strong correlation
between a US basing presence and alQaeda recruitment.
Part of the anti-American anger
has stemmed from the support US
bases offer to repressive, undemocratic regimes. Few of the countries
in the Greater Middle East are fully
democratic, and some are among the
worlds worst human rights abusers.
Most notably, the US government has
offered only tepid criticism of the
Bahraini government as it has violently cracked down on pro-democracy protesters with the help of the
Saudis and the UAE.
Beyond Bahrain, US bases are
found in a string of what the Economist Democracy Index calls authoritarian regimes, including Afghanistan, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Yemen. Maintaining
bases in such countries props up autocrats and other repressive governments, makes the United States
complicit in their crimes, and seriously undermines efforts to spread
democracy and improve the well-being of people around the world.
Of course, using bases to launch
wars and other kinds of interventions
does much the same, generating anger, antagonism and anti-American
attacks. A recent UN report suggests
that Washingtons air campaign
against the Islamic State had led foreign militants to join the movement
on an unprecedented scale.
And so the cycle of warfare that
started in 1980 is likely to continue.
Even if US and allied forces succeed
in routing this militant group, retired
Army colonel and political scientist
Andrew Bacevich writes of the Islamic State, there is little reason to
expect a positive outcome in the region. As bin Laden and the Afghan
32
mujahidin morphed into al-Qaeda and
the Taliban and as former Iraqi
Baathists and al-Qaeda followers in
Iraq morphed into IS, there is, as
Bacevich says, always another Islamic State waiting in the wings.
The Carter Doctrines bases and
military buildup strategy and its belief that the skillful application of US
military might can secure oil supplies
and solve the regions problems was,
he adds, flawed from the outset.
Rather than providing security, the
infrastructure of bases in the Greater
Middle East has made it ever easier
to go to war far from home. It has
enabled wars of choice and an interventionist foreign policy that has resulted in repeated disasters for the region, the United States and the world.
Since 2001 alone, US-led wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Yemen
have minimally caused hundreds of
thousands of deaths and possibly
more than one million deaths in Iraq
alone.
The sad irony is that any legitimate desire to maintain the free flow
of regional oil to the global economy
could be sustained through other, far
less expensive and deadly means.
Maintaining scores of bases costing
billions of dollars a year is unnecessary to protect oil supplies and ensure
regional peace especially in an era
in which the United States gets only
around 10% of its net oil and natural
gas from the region. In addition to the
direct damage our military spending
has caused, it has diverted money
and attention from developing the
kinds of alternative energy sources
that could free the United States and
the world from a dependence on Middle Eastern oil and from the cycle
of war that our military bases have
fed.
ÿu
David Vine is associate professor of anthropology
at American University in Washington, DC. He is
the author of Island of Shame: The Secret History
of the US Military Base on Diego Garcia. He has
written for the New York Times, the Washington
Post, the Guardian and Mother Jones, among other
publications. His new book, Base Nation: How US
Military Bases Abroad Harm America and the
World, will appear in 2015 as part of the American
Empire Project (Metropolitan Books). He is a
regular contributor to TomDispatch.com, from which
the above article is reproduced. For more of his
writing, visit www.davidvine.net.
WORLD AFFAIRS
The Islamic State: A monster
empire created
Given the United States historical support for extremist groups, most notably in
Afghanistan, it should come as no surprise that the US has also been directly
involved in enabling the rise of the Islamic State, says Jerome Roos.
AS the jihadi militants of the Islamic
State IS, formerly known as ISIS
rampage through Syria and Iraq, wantonly beheading infidels and sending
hundreds of thousands scurrying for
safety, the Western media is quick to
reduce the rapidly escalating conflict
to a sectarian struggle between Sunnis
and Shias, or a broader clash of civilisations between Muslims and everyone else between Islam and other
religions, between Islam and non-believers, or between Islam and the
modern world.
But, its own practices and ideological narratives aside, the Islamic
fundamentalism of IS is not some kind
of barbaric relic from an
unenlightened religious past, nor can
the ongoing wars in the Middle East
be reduced to a simplistic binary narrative. Like European fascism, Islamic fundamentalism is a decidedly
modern phenomenon, and wherever
we look in modern history, we find
that the Western powers have always
played a major role in its rise. The
Islamic State is no exception.
The jihadists of IS and its antecedent groups initially rose to prominence in the vacuum left by the USled invasion and occupation of Iraq.
When the US toppled Saddam
Hussein in 2003, they did not only
purge the state apparatus of his
Baathist allies, but they purged it of
the entire Sunni minority of which
Saddam himself had been a part. Most
dramatically, large parts of the majority-Sunni army were disbanded, leaving tens of thousands of combat-savvy
and frustrated young men without pay
and without any meaningful influence
on the new Shia-dominated and USbacked political establishment in the
country.
As was already obvious to many
The searing public image of the Islamic State: A still taken from a video showing an
IS militant holding a knife next to US journalist James Foley before the latter was
executed.
observers back then, the US invasion
thus set the stage for a disastrous
backlash. Many of Saddams former
Sunni soldiers ended up joining the
jihadist insurgency against the US
occupation, giving Al Qaeda a new
foothold in Iraq a country where it
had previously had no influence. The
bloody sectarian strife that subsequently broke out, killing hundreds of
thousands of Iraqis and preparing the
ground for further radicalisation, was
not the cause but the outcome of the
destabilisation of the Iraqi state at the
hands of the occupying forces.
In fact, the link between the US
occupation and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq is more direct
than most realise. In August, the New
York Times ran a fascinating background article about Abu Bakr alBaghdadi, the Muslim cleric and ruthTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
33
less leader of IS who just crowned
himself Caliph of the Islamic world,
which noted that, at every turn, Mr.
Baghdadis rise has been shaped by
the United States involvement in Iraq
most of the political changes that
fuelled his fight, or led to his promotion, were born directly from some
American action.
When the US army first detained
Baghdadi in Fallujah in early 2004,
he was considered little more than a
street thug. But according to Hisham
al-Hashimi, an Iraqi scholar who studied Baghdadis background for Iraqs
intelligence agency, the current IS
leader underwent a process of
radicalisation during his five years
imprisonment in a US detention facility. Iraqi to the core, the Times
writes, his extremist ideology was
sharpened and refined in the crucible
WORLD AFFAIRS
of the American occupation.
In subsequent years, Baghdadi
surrounded himself with former members of Saddams Baathist party, who
despite their lack of credentials as
radical Islamists turned out to be key
allies in the establishment of Al Qaeda
in Iraq (the immediate antecedent to
ISIS) as an insurgent movement, replete with its own army of jihadists,
its own base of taxation (or extortion),
its own oil revenues from the fields it
managed to capture, and increasingly
its own public services (like local
transport and religious education) in
the areas under its control.
On the Syrian front
But while the worlds morbid fascination with IS stems from its lightning advances and its campaign of
brutality in western Iraq last June, it
was in Syria as the world largely
looked the other way that the group
groomed its warrior feathers, gaining
a strategic stronghold, mopping up
moderate Islamist groups to significantly expand its own numbers, rooting out the Free Syrian Army, attacking the Kurdish resistance, and obtaining various additional sources of income that were to prove crucial in its
further campaigns and its efforts to
cement itself as a self-sustaining parastate.
Meanwhile, as it brandished its
anti-Shia credentials, ISIS received
lavish financial support from one of
the United States main allies in the
region: Saudi Arabia. The other Gulf
states Qatar, Kuwait, the United
Arab Emirates are also implicated
in directly or indirectly financing various extremist groups in Syria, including Jabhat al-Nusra, the second biggest faction after ISIS. But as one senior Qatari official affirms, ISIS has
been a Saudi project. Patrick
Cockburn, a long-term Middle East
correspondent, notes that Saudi Arabia has created a Frankensteins monster over which it is rapidly losing
control.
Given the United States historical support for extremist groups
most notably its sponsoring of the
mujahideen in their struggle against
An Islamic State military parade. The Western powers have played a major role in the
rise of Islamic fundamentalism.
communism in Afghanistan, which
directly paved the way for the rise of
the Taliban and Al Qaeda it should
not come as a surprise that, this time
around, the US has also been directly
involved in enabling the rise of ISIS.
In fact, it turns out that leading US
lawmakers, including Republican
Senator John McCain, have been actively pressing their allies to support
the Syrian opposition and oust Assad.
Thank God for the Saudis and Prince
Bandar, and for our Qatari friends,
McCain exclaimed as recently as February 2014. (Prince Bandar is alleged
to be the Saudi point man behind the
funding of ISIS.)
At the same time, another important US ally in the region, Turkey a
NATO member provided a crucial
hub for ISIS by deliberately opening
its 500-mile border to allow Syrian
rebels to fall back onto Turkish territory and to permit Western jihadists
alienated young Muslim men from
Europe, Australia and the US to join
their comrades in Syria. Consistent
rumours have been doing the rounds
that the head of Turkeys intelligence
services, Hakan Fidan, a key confidante of President Erdogan, was personally responsible for the countrys
covert support for ISIS.
Greatly strengthened by Gulf financing and an influx of foreign fighters, with Turkey providing a muchneeded organisational hub and thorTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
34
oughfare, and with the Obama administration actively refusing to support
the democratic Syrian resistance, ISIS
quickly destroyed and eclipsed the
moderate opposition, solidly growing
into the main rebel group in Syria and
finishing off the last remaining strongholds of the Syrian revolution until
it deemed itself powerful enough to
launch back into Iraq and march right
up to Tikrit without encountering any
serious resistance.
Now, in one of the greatest ironies of all, the United States finds itself back in Iraq, 11 years after its
original invasion, bombing its own
tanks, its own artillery pieces and its
own armoured personnel vehicles
once provided to the Iraqi army during the eight-year occupation and
summarily seized by ISIS as it sacked
deserted bases across western Iraq
to stem the advances of an extremist
enemy that its own imperial
misadventures have given rise to.
Once again, the US and its allies have
created a monster they can no longer
control. Once again, they will go to
war to try to eradicate it. And once
again, they will only end up making
an even bigger mess in the process.u
Jerome Roos is a PhD researcher in International
Political Economy at the European University
Institute, and founding editor of ROAR Magazine
(roarmag.org). This article was written for his
weekly column for the teleSUR English website
(www.telesurtv.net/english), from which it is
reproduced here.
WORLD AFFAIRS
There are no moderate Syrian
rebels
Ben Reynolds argues that the whole policy of the US to train so-called moderate
Syrian rebels to fight the Islamic State is based on an illusion.
FOR the past three years journalists
and foreign policy elites have spoken
of the moderate rebels to distinguish
legitimate opponents of the Syrian
regime from dangerous Islamist
groups like ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra.
The Obama administration recently
made arming and training these moderate rebels a cornerstone of its strategy to battle ISIS without aiding the
regime of President Bashar al-Assad.
President Obama recently requested
authorisation from Congress to
achieve this difficult aim, and Congress obliged. Theres just one tiny
problem with this strategy: these moderate Syrian rebels dont exist.
There are only three rebel organisations with considerable manpower,
equipment and territory inside Syria:
ISIS, Jabhat-al Nusra and the Islamic
Front. ISIS has an estimated 20,000
to 31,500 fighters in Syria and Iraq,
and controls large areas of eastern
Syria. Jabhat al-Nusra is al-Qaedas
official branch fighting in the Syrian
civil war, and boasts around 5,000 to
6,000 fighters. The Islamic Front is
an umbrella organisation of Islamist
brigades supported by Saudi Arabia,
and probably consists of around
40,000 to 50,000 combatants. Together these forces account for almost
all of the estimated 100,000 fighters
of the Syrian opposition.
The Free Syrian Army (FSA) and
the Syrian National Council, the
vaunted bulwarks of the moderate
opposition, only really exist in hotel
lobbies and the minds of Western diplomats. On the ground, Jabhat alNusra, the Islamic Front and other
rebel groups have joined together in
fighting against the regime, the Kurds
and ISIS. While coordination between
rebel groups is often pragmatic, fighters and weapons tend to bleed between them. Units nominally under
the command of the FSA joined
Jabhat al-Nusra in 2013, and Nusra
forces have merged into ISIS. There
is simply no real separation between
moderate rebel groups and hardline
Salafists allied with al-Qaeda. As
Aron Lund of the Carnegie Endowment stated, You are not going to find
this neat, clean, secular rebel group
that respects human rights and that is
waiting and ready because they dont
exist.
In fact, there is only one signifi-
There is simply no real
separation between
moderate rebel groups
and hardline Salafists
allied with al-Qaeda.
cant moderate, secular rebel group
fighting in Syria: the Kurdish YPG.
The YPG, or Peoples Protection
Units, have carved out a de facto autonomous region in northeastern
Syria, and now spend much of their
resources fighting against ISIS. The
Kurds are not fond of the Assad regime, but the YPG has actually cooperated extensively with the Syrian
army to fight against both ISIS and
the rest of the opposition. This is not
an indication that the YPG are tools
of the Syrian regime. If the Kurds
would rather work with Assad than the
opposition, it is clear that the opposition poses a serious threat to actual
moderates in Syria and minority
groups.
The Obama administrations new
plan hinges on Saudi Arabias support
for the training effort, including an
offer to host training camps on Saudi
soil. The Saudis are in no way a reliable partner for the US in the Syrian
conflict. Even discounting the fact that
35
Saudi-purchased anti-tank rockets
somehow found their way into ISISs
hands, the Saudis have a notorious
history of supporting unsavoury
groups in the Syrian conflict, including Salafists in the Islamic Front. The
greater Saudi Arabias involvement in
the training programme is, the greater
pressure there will be for Islamic
Front fighters to receive US arms and
training. After Congress balked at the
Obama administrations request for
$500 million, the Saudis offered to
fund the training and arming of the
Syrian rebels. This means that there
is a large chance the US will directly
support groups who work closely with
Jabhat al-Nusra.
There is no doubt that the Obama
administration knows this. Classified
US intelligence is simply better than
publicly available sources, particularly in the case of an important conflict like Syria. It defies common
sense that the administration would
somehow be unaware that the moderate opposition exists in name only.
Contrary to popular belief, the United
States does not stumble blindly and
hopelessly through the Middle East.
It stands to reason that there is an important motive behind choosing to
back the non-ISIS Syrian opposition
rather than tacitly supporting the
Assad regime to counter ISIS.
The United States wants the
Assad regime to fall because it is the
lynchpin of the regional alliance between Iran, Syria and Hezbollah. US
allies like Saudi Arabia and Qatar
overwhelmingly desire Assads overthrow because they feel significantly
more threatened by Iran than by any
Islamist militant group, even ISIS.
Even though the US wants to destroy
ISIS, it faces significant pressures to
avoid aiding Assads regime, and Iran
by proxy. While hardline Islamists
stand less of a chance of eliminating
WORLD AFFAIRS
ISIS than the Syrian Army, they will
still certainly weaken Assad and require both Hezbollah and Iran to continue pouring resources into Syria. If
this is correct, the United States may
rather support al-Qaeda-aligned
forces than give the Iranian axis a victory in Syria.
Weve seen this play before. The
US often turns a blind eye to the activities of local allies if they seem
to provide a means of countering regional adversaries. In the 1980s, the
US supported the mujaheddin fighting in Afghanistan against the Soviet
Union, only to ultimately see the
Taliban win the resulting civil war and
provide a safe haven for al-Qaeda.
During the Libyan civil war, the US
and its allies bombed Qaddafis forces
while providing arms to the opposition. Libya has now descended into a
bloody civil war, and arms from Libya
have flooded the Syrian conflict for
years, oftentimes with the aid of the
US and its allies. Once they are dispersed, the use and transfer of arms
cannot be controlled. Like those in
Libya, arms sent to Syria will ultimately find their way to future conflicts throughout the region.
American policymakers have
been protected from the consequences
of these decisions by virtue of the
USs geographic position, but the
Middle East has not. Libya is in tatters. Afghanistan is awash in violence
and the Taliban will probably make
significant gains there when US
forces ultimately depart. There is no
end in sight for the Syrian civil war,
and there is little confidence even in
Washington that the administrations
new strategy will bring an end to the
conflict. Expanding the arming and
training of the Syrian opposition
would be a disastrous mistake. Unfortunately, the administrations plan
passed Congress. If the US programme goes forward, the blood from
a renewed wave of violence in the
Middle East will be on Americas
hands.
ÿu
Ben Reynolds is a writer and foreign policy analyst
who graduated from the College of William and
Mary in the US. He lives in Alexandria, Virginia.
This article is reproduced from the CounterPunch
website (www.counterpunch.org). Unpacking the Issue of Counterfeit
Medicines
K M Gopakumar & Sangeeta Shashikant
Numerous anti-counterfeiting initiatives driven by an
intellectual property enforcement agenda have
emerged in international organisations.
The World Health Organisation has also
accelerated action against counterfeit medicines,
through the International Medical Product AntiCounterfeit Taskforce (IMPACT). The WHOs
approach has resulted in concerns that legitimate
generic medicines may get caught up in the web of
definitions and enforcement of counterfeit products,
with adverse consequences for access to medicine
as well as legitimate trade.
This book discusses the background to the issue
of counterfeit medicines in the WHO as well as the
problems of using the term counterfeit (in
connection with intellectual property rights
violations) to refer to products with compromised
quality, safety and efficacy issues against a
background of anti-counterfeiting initiatives in the
context of IP enforcement aggressively being
pushed by businesses and governments of the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD).
The book also discusses origins of the IMPACT
and analyses issues and concerns about the
Malaysia
Price
RM10.00
US$7.00
US$10.00
ISBN: 978-967-5412-23-3
72pp
Taskforce pertaining to
legitimacy, transparency,
accountability, links to IP
enforcement, and the
creation of barriers to trade
in, and access to, affordable
generic medicines.
Postage
RM1.00
US$3.50 (air); US$2.00 (sea)
US$5.00 (air); US$2.00 (sea)
Orders from Malaysia please pay by credit card/crossed cheque or postal
order.
Orders from Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore,
Thailand, UK, USA please pay by credit card/cheque/bank draft/international
money order in own currency, US$ or Euro.If paying in own currency or Euro,
please calculate equivalent of US$ rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that
the agent bank is located in the USA.
money order in US$ or Euro. If paying in Euro, please calculate equivalent of
US$ rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that the agent bank is located in the
USA.
All payments should be made in favour of: THIRD WORLD NETWORK
BHD., 131 Jalan Macalister, 10400 Penang, Malaysia. Tel: 60-4-2266728/
2266159; Fax: 60-4-2264505; Email: [email protected]; Website:
www.twn.my
I would like to order .............. copy/copies of Unpacking the Issue of
Counterfeit Medicines.
American Express
A/c No.:
Visa
Mastercard
Expiry date:
Signature:
Name:
Address:
36
WORLD AFFAIRS
Pro-Israel hawks take wing over
extension of Iran nuclear talks
Israel supporters in the US Congress are jubilant that the recent talks between the
US (and five other powers) and Iran on the latters nuclear programme failed to
reach a comprehensive agreement. Jim Lobe comments.
BUOYED by the failure of the US and
five other powers to reach a comprehensive agreement with Iran over its
nuclear programme after a week of intensive talks in November, pro-Israel
and Republican hawks are calling for
Washington to ramp up economic
pressure on Tehran even while talks
continue, and to give Congress a veto
on any final accord.
We have supported the economic
sanctions, passed by Congress and
signed into law by the president, in
addition to sanctions placed on Iran
by the international community, Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham
and Kelly Ayotte, three of the Republicans leading hawks, said in a statement released shortly after the announcement in Vienna that the oneyear-old interim accord between the
so-called P5+1 and Iran will be extended until 1 July while negotiations
continue.
These sanctions have had a negative impact on the Iranian economy
and are one of the chief reasons the
Iranians are now at the negotiating
table, the three senators went on.
However, we believe this latest
extension of talks should be coupled
with increased sanctions and a requirement that any final deal between Iran
and the United States be sent to Congress for approval. Every Member of
Congress should have the opportunity
to review the final deal and vote on
this major foreign policy decision.
Their statement was echoed in
part by at least one of the likely Republican candidates for president in
2016.
From the outcome of this latest
round, it also appears that Irans leadership remains unwilling to give up
their nuclear ambitions, said Florida
Senator Marco Rubio, a favourite of
Negotiations in Vienna between Iran and the P5+1 (the US, Britain, France, Russia,
China plus Germany) failed to yield a comprehensive agreement in November.
pro-Israel neo-conservatives. None
of this will change in the coming
months unless we return to the pressure track that originally brought Iran
to the table.
Call for patience
At the same time, however, senior Democrats expressed disappointment that a more comprehensive
agreement had not been reached but
defended the decision to extend the
24 November 2013 Joint Programme
of Action (JPOA) between the P5+1
the US, Britain, France, Russia,
China plus Germany and Iran by an
additional seven months, until 1 July.
Echoing remarks made earlier by
Secretary of State John Kerry, who
held eight meetings with his Iranian
counterpart Javad Zarif over the week
of talks in November, Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Dianne
Feinstein noted that Iran has lived up
to its obligations under the interim
agreement and its nuclear programme
37
has not only been frozen, it has been
reversed. Today, Iran is further away
from acquiring a nuclear weapon than
before negotiations began.
I urge my colleagues in Washington to be patient, carefully evaluate the progress achieved thus far and
provide US negotiators the time and
space they need to succeed. A collapse
of the talks is counter to US interests
and would further destabilise an already-volatile region, she said in a
statement.
The back and forth in Washington came in the wake of Kerrys statement at the conclusion of intensive
talks in Vienna. Hopes for a permanent accord that would limit Irans
nuclear activities for a period of some
years in exchange for the lifting of US
and international sanctions against
Tehran rose substantially in the course
of the week only to fall sharply on 23
November when Western negotiators,
in particular, spoke for the first time
of extending the JPOA instead of concluding a larger agreement.
WORLD AFFAIRS
Neither Kerry nor the parties,
who have been exceptionally tightlipped about the specifics of the negotiations, disclosed what had occurred to change the optimistic tenor
of the talks.
Kerry insisted on 24 November
that this latest round had made real
and substantial progress but that significant points of disagreement remain unresolved.
Most analysts believe the gaps
involved include the size and scope
of Irans uranium enrichment programme specifically, the number of
centrifuges it will be permitted to operate and the number of years the
programme will be subject to extraordinary curbs and international inspections.
Kerry appealed to Congress not
to act in a way that could sabotage
the extension of the JPOA under
which Iran agreed to partially roll
back its nuclear programme in exchange for an easing of some sanctions or prospects for a successful
negotiation.
I hope they will come to see the
wisdom of leaving us the equilibrium
for a few months to be able to proceed without sending messages that
might be misinterpreted and cause
miscalculation, he said. We would
be fools to walk away.
The aim, he said, was to reach a
broad framework accord by March
and then work out the details by the 1
July deadline. The JPOA was agreed
last 24 November but the specific details of its implementation were not
worked out until the latter half of
January.
The Israel lobby
Whether his appeal for patience
will work in the coming months remains to be seen. Republicans, who,
with a few exceptions, favoured new
sanctions against Iran even after the
JPOA was signed, gained nine seats
in the Senate and will control both
houses in the new Congress when it
convenes in January.
If Congress approves new sanctions legislation, as favoured by
McCain, Rubio and other hawks,
President Barack Obama could veto
it. To sustain the veto, however, he
would have to keep at least two-thirds
of the 40-some Democrats in the upper chamber in line.
That could pose a problem given
the continuing influence of the Israel
lobby within the Democratic Party.
Indeed, the outgoing Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair,
Robert Menendez, who reluctantly
tabled a sanctions effort earlier this
year, asserted on 24 November that
the administrations efforts had not
succeeded and suggested that he
would support a two-track approach
of diplomacy and pressure in the
coming period.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the leading Israel lobby group, also called on
24 November for new bipartisan
sanctions legislation to let Tehran
know that it will face much more severe pressure if it does not clearly
abandon its nuclear weapons programme.
Its message echoed that of Israeli
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu,
who had reportedly personally lobbied each of the P5+1s leaders over
the weekend of the Vienna talks and
who, even before the extension was
officially announced, expressed relief
at the failure to reach a comprehensive accord against which he has been
campaigning non-stop over the past
year.
The agreement that Iran was
aiming for was very bad indeed, he
told the BBC, adding that the fact that
theres no deal now gives [world powers] the opportunity to continue to
toughen [economic pressures] against
Iran.
The Iran task force of the Jewish
Institute for National Security Affairs
(JINSA), co-chaired by Dennis Ross,
who held the Iran portfolio at the
White House during part of Obamas
first term, said, in addition to increasing economic pressure, Washington
should provide weaponry to Israel that
would make its threats to attack Iran
more credible.
The hardline neo-conservative
Emergency Committee for Israel
(ECI) said Congress should not only
38
pass new sanctions legislation, but
strip Obamas authority to waive
sanctions.
Theres no point waiting seven
months for either another failure or a
truly terrible deal, ECI, which helped
fund several Republican Senate campaigns this fall, said. Congress
should act now to reimpose sanctions
and re-establish US red lines that will
prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear
weapons capability. To that end, such
legislation must limit the presidents
authority to waive sanctions, an authority the president has already signalled a willingness to abuse in his
desperate quest for a deal with the
mullahs.
Sabotage
Most Iran specialists in Washington believe that any new sanctions
legislation will likely sabotage the
talks, fracture the P5+1, and thus undermine the international sanctions
regime against Iran and strengthen
hardliners in Tehran who oppose accommodation and favour accelerating
the nuclear programme.
The worst scenario for US interests is one in which Congress overwhelmingly passes new sanctions,
Iran resumes its nuclear activities, and
international unity unravels, wrote
Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran specialist
at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, on the Wall Street
Journal website on 24 November.
Such an outcome would force the
United States to revisit the possibility of another military conflict in the
Middle East.
Such arguments, which the administration is also expected to deploy, could not only keep most Democratic senators in line, but may also
persuade some Republicans worried
about any new military commitment
in the Middle East.
Senator Bob Corker, who will
likely chair the Foreign Relations
Committee in the new Congress, issued a cautious statement on 24 November suggesting that he was willing to give the administration more
time. Tougher sanctions, he said,
could be prepared should negotiations fail. IPS
ÿu
WORLD AFFAIRS
Phantoms of the past
Britains vote on Palestine is a
non-starter
The recent non-binding vote by the British House of Commons to recognise
the state of Palestine would be nothing more than a symbolic gesture but for
the fact that Britain was a party to the Middle Easts most protracted conflict.
Ramzy Baroud explains.
IT would be intellectually dishonest
to reflect on the British House of
Commons vote of 13 October on a
Palestinian state without digging
deeper into history. Regardless of the
meaning of the non-binding motion,
the parliamentary action cannot be
brushed off as just that of another
would-be country to recognise Palestine, as was the Swedish government
decision on 3 October.
Unlike Sweden, and most of the
130-plus countries to effectively recognise Palestine, Britain is a party in
the Middle Easts most protracted
conflict. In fact, if it were not for Britain, there would be no conflict, or
even Israel, of which to speak. It is
within this context that the British
vote matters, and greatly so.
As I listened to the heated debate
by British MPs which preceded the
historic vote of 272 in favour and 12
against, phantoms of historical significance occupied my mind.
When my father was born in historical Palestine in 1936, he found
himself in a world politically dominated by Britain. Born and raised in
the now long-destroyed Palestinian
village of Beit Daras which, like the
rest of historical Palestine, has now
become part of Israel proper he
along with his family were entrapped
between two anomalies that greatly
scarred the otherwise peaceful landscape of the Palestinian countryside.
A Jewish colony called Tabiyya, along
with a heavily fortified British police
compound that was largely aimed at
safeguarding the interests of the
colony, subjugated Beit Daras.
The residents of the village, still
The British House of Commons debates the motion on the recognition of Palestine.
unaware of the plan to dispossess
them from their homeland, grew wary
of the dual treachery with time. But
by 1947-48, it was too late. The British-coordinated withdrawal from Palestine was aimed at creating space for
a Jewish state, todays Israel. The Palestinians, for 66 years and counting,
have suffered from not only homelessness and dispossession, but also a
military occupation and countless
massacres, ending with the most recent Israeli war on Gaza. In what Israel called Operation Protective Edge,
nearly 2,200 Palestinians, mostly civilians, were killed and fivefold more
were wounded. Yet, Palestinians continue to resist, with greater ferocity
than ever.
Because of this, and the fact that
the British government remains a
member of the ever-shrinking club of
Israels staunch supporters, the vote
in the British parliament greatly matters. Symbolic and non-binding
though it may be, it still matters. It
39
matters because the Israeli arsenal is
rife with British armaments. Because
the British government, despite strong
protestation from its people, still behaves towards Israel as if the latter
were a law-abiding state with a flawless human rights record. It matters
despite the dubious language of the
motion, linking the recognition of
Palestine alongside Israel to securing a negotiated two-state solution.
But there can be no two states in
a land that is already inhabited by two
nations who, despite the grossness of
the occupation, are in fact interconnected geographically, demographically and in other ways as well. Israel
has created irreversible realities in
Palestine, and the respected MPs of
the British parliament should know
this.
The MPs votes were motivated
by different rationales and reasons.
Some voted yes because they have
been long-time supporters of Palestinians, others are simply fed up with
WORLD AFFAIRS
Israels behaviour. But if the
MPs are furious over Israels
vote largely reflected an attempt
violent, expansionist and antiat breathing more life into the
peace conduct, including those
obsolete two-state solution to
who were once strong allies of
a conflict created by the British
Israel. That must not be denied.
themselves, then the terrible
But it is hardly enough.
British legacy in Palestine
When the British government
which has lasted for nearly a
insists on maintaining its procentury will continue unabated.
Israeli policies, and when those
British army boots walked
who truly hold the reins of
on Palestinian soil as early as
power in London generally re1917, after the British army demain committed to a farce vifeated Turkey, whose vast Otsion of two-states, defending
toman Empire, which included
Israel and disempowering PalPalestine, was quickly disinteestinians at every turn, the
grating under the combined
Balfour vision of old will repressure of European powers.
main the real guidelines for
As soon as Jerusalem was capBritish policy regarding Palestured by British forces under the
tine.
command of General Sir
Sixty-six years after ending
Edmund Allenby in December
its mandate in Palestine, Brit1917, and the rest of the counain remains a party in a bloody
try by October 1918, the will of
conflict where Israel is still carthe Palestinian people fell hos- When my father was born in historical Palestine in rying out the same policies of
tage to the British Empire. The 1936, he found himself in a world politically dominated colonial expansion, using Westnumber of Palestinian Arabs by Britain. Picture shows British High Commissioner ern including British funds,
who were killed, wounded, tor- in Palestine Sir Arthur Wauchope (left) outside arms and political support. Only
tured, imprisoned and exiled by Government House in Jerusalem in 1937.
when Britain fully and comBritain since that date, until the
flecting sheer arrogance and disregard pletely ends its support of Israel and
establishment of the Israeli state in of Palestinians and their rights. In one financing of its occupation, and works
1948, is beyond depressing.
of his letters at the time, Balfour so diligently and actively towards corHowever, Britains integral role conceitedly wrote:
recting the injustice it had imposed on
in the suffering of the Palestinians and
For in Palestine we do not pro- the Palestinians a century ago, can one
the establishment of Israel was hardly pose even to go through the form of
consider that a real change in British
a coincidental policy necessitated by consulting the wishes of the present
policy is finally taking hold.
the nature of its immediate colonial inhabitants of the country The four
Without a clear course of action
ambitions. It was calculated and great powers are committed to Zionto help Palestinians gain their freerooted in political and diplomatic in- ism, and Zionism, be it right or wrong,
dom, the British vote will remain antrigues that go back to the 19th cen- good or bad, is rooted in age-long tratury. It was also predicated on an un- dition, in present needs, in future other symbolic gesture in a conflict
mistakable element of racism, ram- hopes of far profounder import than in which military occupation, war,
pant in the colonial culture at the time. the desire and prejudices of the siege, death and destruction are very
Its manifestations still bring shame to 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that much real. And when British leaders
Britain today, which still refuses to ancient land. In my opinion that is like Conservative Prime Minister
David Cameron continue to parrot
fully and unconditionally reverse that right.
early policy.
Encouraged by the overwhelm- their unconditional support for Israel,
It is inexplicable that one century ing recent vote in favour of Palestine even after the Gaza wars and massaafter the British involvement in Pal- at the parliament (although nearly half cres, one will also continue to seek
estine, the astounding failure of which of the MPs didnt show up or ab- even moderate proof that the Balfour
is proven, the current British foreign stained), one can hardly deny the legacy has truly and finally ended. u
policy is not far removed from the signs that both the British public and
language and policies executed by the many in the countrys political estab- Ramzy Baroud is a PhD scholar in Peoples History
at the University of Exeter in the UK. He is the
British Empire when Foreign Secre- lishment are simply disenchanted by Managing Editor of Middle East Eye. Baroud is an
tary Arthur James Balfour promised Israels continued war and occupa- internationally syndicated columnist, a media
Palestine for a Jewish state. The tion, which are the main reason be- consultant, an author and the founder of
Balfour Declaration is dated 2 No- hind the destabilisation of the region PalestineChronicle.com, from which this article is
reproduced. His latest book is My Father Was a
vember 1917, before Palestine was long before the Syrian civil war and Freedom Fighter: Gazas Untold Story (Pluto Press,
even occupied by the British, thus re- other upheavals began. Many British London).
40
WORLD AFFAIRS
Climate change, land grabs and
revolution in Burkina Faso
In October, a popular movement in Burkina Faso ended the 27-year presidential
rule of Blaise Compaoré, a favourite of the Western powers. Alexander Reid Ross
explains the significance of this move.
LIKE virtually every country in
largely urban revolution has deAfrica, Burkina Faso has been
veloped through popular
assailed by North Atlantic milimobilisations and insurrectiontary intervention over the past
ary strikes against symbols of
four decades, as well as an escathe established regime. It
lation of land grabs since 2008.
emerges as a popular rejection
More land has been grabbed in
of two decades of political deAfrica over the past 15 years than
centralisation, wherein adminin the rest of the world combined
istrative powers and resources
more than 55 million hectares,
were supposed to be liberalised
according
to
Blessing
and granted to local councils.
Karumbidza of the Global Jus- Ex-President Blaise Compaoré (pic) ruled Burkina But at the same time, it is being
tice Ecology Project. The eco- Faso for 27 years after ousting his predecessor supported by the leaders of the
nomic tensions between local Thomas Sankara.
West, who seek to use it as an
producers and international powexhaust valve for popular reers that have contributed to the revo- Guinea-Bissau ascended to power, sentment, enabling them to
lutionary dissatisfaction with the es- and the Peoples Republic of Benin strengthen their grasp on the region
tablishment in Burkina Faso can be was declared. West Africa was unit- through the elections to come.
found in virtually any country subject ing under common dreams of liberaLiberalisation and land
to the harsh and cruel conditions of tion fuelled by the legacy of Kwame
the global land grab and the crisis of Nkrumah, Sekou Toure and other
Sankaras death at the hands of
climate change. The revolution in noteworthy West African leaders of
Burkina Faso represents a crucial the 1950s and 1960s. After the impris- a putsch led by his comrade Blaise
break, summoning the revolutionary onment of Nelson Mandela and the Compaoré opened up an economic
leaders of past generations to main- assassination of Amílcar Cabral, opportunity for neoliberals at the end
tain a legacy of popular control.
Sankara appeared among the most of the Cold War. The BBC puts the
The popular movement that has important radical leaders in all of Af- point diplomatically: [Compaoré]
spread throughout the small African rica. The current revolution, with its largely followed the economic orthostate contains the process of libera- rekindling of Sankaras legacy, can be doxy prescribed by international fition both inspired by and inspiring seen as a return to the legacy of na- nancial institutions. But Burkina
different forms of political engage- tional liberation not just as a youth Faso did not escape the poverty trap.
ment throughout the continent. While movement, but a rejection of the It remains one of the least developed
some, including the present military neoliberal trajectory set into place af- countries in the world. In point of
fact, no country that has adopted IMF
junta, insist that we are seeing a youth ter Sankaras death.
rebellion, the revolution has formuThis rekindling can be seen in the strictures has escaped the poverty
lated a deeper, systemic challenge. movements strategy and tactics. The trap, because the institutions of
The promise of Thomas Sankara, the absence of genuine movements linked neoliberal reform are themselves
Che Guevara of Africa who ruled to an intergenerational leadership led dedicated to underdevelopment exBurkina from 1983 until his assassi- to the decline of social mobilisations traction-based economics designed to
nation in 1987, was the suture of the in many places. For instance, the stu- loot natural resources.
Since 1991, privatisation of nageneration gap and the progression of dent movement of Sierra Leone disegalitarian economic policies.
integrated into what the leaders of the tional services in Burkina Faso has
While Sankara emerged as a RUF would call the bush path to de- moved in step with the localisation
powerful leader in Burkina Faso in the mocracy (and what scholar Ibrahim of powers. Decentralisation reached
1970s, a powerful student movement Abdullah correctly deems the bush a new institutional height in 2006,
broke through in nearby Sierra Leone, path to destruction). Rather than de- following on the heels of what has
the independence movement of scending into civil war, Burkinas been seen as the dissolution of the
41
WORLD AFFAIRS
state mining company by
the World Bank (although
the Bank claims the company went bankrupt on its
own). As droughts expand
in the Sahel, agriculture becomes increasingly problematic, shifting the economic sector from cotton to
gold mining in the absence
of alternatives for subsistence.
As the cost of land has
increased, displacement led
to the growth of urban areas, and Compaoré began
to enact land reform laws
to the effect of an official
agribusiness strategy. Installed at the beginning of
the 21st century, formalised The uprising that overthrew Blaise Compaoré.
by a 2009 land reform law
and a 2012 elaboration, this policy has production within the World Bank
allowed domestic business interests to project known as Aid for Trade, which
grab hundreds of hectares of land in encompasses the EIF, includes
the countrys south. Much of this land mainstreaming trade transforming
remained uncultivated and is either local industries and domestic producleveraged for speculation or managed ers into international markets and
by unskilled financial powers, while transnational corporations. The G8the decentralisation of authority has brokered Cooperation Framework
afforded the opportunity for local of- with Burkina Faso, signed in 2012
ficials to garner revenue through new around the same time as the EIFs
taxes and registration fees for new workshop, increases investment from
settlements, allotments of land and multinationals in order to develop
attempts to formalise the small-pro- more than 50,000 hectares of agricultural lands. A plan to resettle people
ducer sector.
The organisation providing the displaced by the development is also
resources and support for Compaorés called for, but details are sketchy.
land reform package is the MillenThe West African gold rush
nium Challenge Corporation, a US
foreign aid agency praised by the HerSparked by the same climate
itage Foundation and established under the Bush administration with a bi- change-induced droughts that dispartisan effort in the US Congress. placed agrarian workers in the late
The objective for the Millennium 1980s, the gold rush has increased
Challenge Corporation is to assign a with the formalisation of the mining
human rights ideology to US devel- sector in recent years a process exopment funding. In 2012, Burkina pedited after the housing market crash
Faso hosted the Enhanced Integrated in the US caused investors to look for
Framework (EIF) monitoring and greater potential abroad. As the North
evaluating workshop for French- Atlantic strove to maintain low interspeaking countries, which further en- est rates after the crash, the price of
trenched its position as a testing gold rose; as the banks and equity
ground for the World Banks plans for firms looked for safe investments in
Africa (in particular, plans to cultivate assets that maintain such conditions
sesame, an oilseed that grows better of low inflation, gold mines stuck out
in the changing climatic conditions). as a profitable venture.
According to official figures, the
The emphasis on private sector
42
production of gold increased in
Burkina Faso by 32% in 2011. The
next year, British mining company
Amara Gold purchased the Canadian
company Orezones gold mine in
Burkina Faso in 2012. A year later,
another Canadian company,
TrueGold, completed the feasibility
study on its Karma Project a low
cost, heap-leach open-pit gold mine,
and the Cayman Islands-based Endeavour Mining, which started one
gold mine in the country in 2008,
completed the feasibility study on
another mine. The greenwashing Canadian firm RoxGold has also become
deeply involved.
The gold mining industry, which
still remains largely in the hands of
the central government, is perhaps the
main site of struggle within decentralisation. Until recent years, the
mining industry has been dominated
by artisanal miners in the region. Up
to 50% of artisanal miners are children between 5 and 17 years old who
toil in environmentally hazardous
conditions for around $2 a day. Yet
groups dedicated to formalising the
industry and halting the mercury poisoning of the land through such gold
mining practices are often tied to the
World Bank, whose agenda is actually to increase and legitimise the formal mining sector, i.e., enormous
open-pit mines where workers and
WORLD AFFAIRS
odious mining projects
throughout the Global
South, as well as the Department of Foreign Affairs and International
Trade. Their main focus
is the formalisation of
artisanal mining, which
fits in nicely with the
development schemes
projected by the World
Bank.
Thomas Sankara (pic), the Che Guevara of Africa who
ruled Burkina Faso from 1983 until his assassination in
1987.
local communities are still subject to
hazardous environmental conditions.
One of the principal organisations
attempting to transform the artisanal
mining sector through sustainable
development is the Artisanal Gold
Council, a Canadian non-profit whose
Executive Director boasted at this
years Precious Metals Conference
in Dubai of a collaborative relationship with the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility, a booster
for the notorious greenwashing strategy REDD+ which is responsible for
the dispossession of the Sengwer people in Kenya, among other problems.
According to its website, the Artisanal
Gold Council is partnered with Canadas Ministry of Natural Resources,
the ministry responsible for the tar
sands expansion and innumerable
Against the
comprador state
While the increase in gold mining activities is seen as providing development for the country, independent rural development expert Seydou
Yabré reflected the spirit of the revolution when he told journalist Kingley
Kobo, Those World Bank and IMF
figures are seen only on paper and not
in the pockets of the Burkinabes.
The tethering of Burkina Fasos
economy to the global commodities
market, specifically gold, has caused
economic turmoil rather than development. When the price of gold fell
last year, the economic growth of
Burkina Faso declined by a quarter,
from 9% to 6.9%. Even with a 7%
growth rate, per capita income remains a mere $790. Rising interest
rates and projections that interest rates
will continue to rise, as the European
Processing facilities at a gold mine in Burkina Faso. The tethering of Burkina Fasos
economy to the global commodities market, specifically gold, has caused economic
turmoil rather than development.
43
Central Bank seems to turn back on
its promises to expedite quantitative
easing strategies, suggest that things
are not likely to get better under the
present neoliberal system.
On 4 October, the price of gold
slid to a four-year low; a few days
later, French President Francois
Hollande wrote Compaoré asking him
to resign, promising him an important
post in international diplomacy. In a
matter of weeks, Compaoré, a favourite of the North Atlantic elites for 27
years, was gone. The way that
Hollande, Obama and the rest of the
Free World have abandoned their
erstwhile ally suggests that he has
served his purpose the process of
neoliberal transformation has been
largely accomplished, and the unpopular consequence requires a political transformation to vent popular
anxiety over the decline in growth and
lack of alternatives. The ongoing decline in the price of gold will be externalised and suffered by the people
of gold-producing states like Burkina
Faso, not by those corporations extracting the metal.
Those looking to the legacy of
Sankara recall that, as university student Ibrahim Sanogo tells Kobo,
Sankara was not just fighting imperialism for the sake of politics but he
wanted the Burkinabe people to develop themselves and their land and
rely essentially on themselves instead
of the West. The claims that the modern revolution in Burkina Faso has
centred on demands for greater development are misguided unless they
confront how the development is taking place, and who is responsible. The
comprador state has been overthrown,
but, to paraphrase another great African leader, there is no easy path to liberation.
ÿu
Alexander Reid Ross joined the Earth First! Journal
Collective in 2009, and is a co-founding moderator
of the Earth First! Newswire (earthfirstjournal.org/
newswire), from which this article is reproduced. His
work can be found in Life During Wartime: Resisting
Counterinsurgency, CounterPunch, The Ecologist,
and Climate and Capitalism, and he is the editor of
the recent anthology Grabbing Back: Essays Against
the Global Land Grab. This article was also
published on the CounterPunch website
(www.counterpunch.org).
WORLD AFFAIRS
Ayotzinapa protests awaken
Mexico from a nightmare
The disappearance of 43 students whirls Mexico into a political crisis, but the social
movement that has risen up in response could change it forever.
THE political and humanitarian crivehicles, never to be heard of since.
Maggie Blanca and Jeremy
sis in the southern Mexican state of
The response of the government
Crowlesmith
Guerrero marks a new low in a counwas riddled with exceptional incomtry marred by corruppetence, as the foltion and drug violowing events reveal.
lence. More than a
The day after the
month after the disapdrama, the responsipearances of 43 stuble mayor of Iguala
dents there is still no
requested a leave of
sign of them, while
absence and went on
official government
the run. Meanwhile,
search efforts are
the governor of
laced by ambiguities
Guerrero and the
to say the least.
president of the reAt the same time
public have been inAn unparalleled and broad social movement has arisen in response to the
the disappearances
volved in a ping-pong
disappearance of 43 students in Mexicos Guerrero state.
have stirred up a horgame of finger-pointnets nest that has taken the form of unsurprisingly, has gained the repu- ing to avoid responsibility. The rean unparalleled and broad social tation of being a breeding ground for spected human rights centre
movement in all corners of Mexico. radical activism.
Tlachinollan, located in Guerrero, has
Mexico, with Guerrero at its epiContemporary students are the pointed out the serious deficiencies in
centre, seems torn between despair children of farmers and indigenous the official investigation and the
and hope. Despair from the horror of families living in the poorest and most search for the students. Consequently,
the atrocious events in Iguala, and marginalised areas of Mexico. The the parents of the disappeared students
hope from the structural change prom- schools position as a hotbed of ac- have announced they would only trust
ised by the societal response. Which tivism has not gone unnoticed and has the findings of a foreign team of insocial and political processes have constantly forced students to face state vestigators. Mexicans have lost all
erupted, exactly, and what does this repression in the form of chronic trust in the authorities to bring the crimean for the possibilities of social underfunding, police violence and sis to a just end.
change in Mexico?
criminalisation.
A breeding ground for
revolutionaries
The entrance of the Rural Normal school in Ayotzinapa welcomes
her students with murals of Che
Guevara, Vladimir Lenin, Friedrich
Engels and Carlos Marx. The disappeared students come from a school
with a history of left politics embedded in a special national education
programme set up to train primary
school teachers. Started in 1920, this
programme has the express goal of
social emancipation of the poor. The
school has produced two of
Guerreros most important guerrilla
leaders in the 1970s and,
The disappearances
On 25 September, a group of
Ayotzinapa students went to the
nearby town of Iguala to organise
transport to the remembrance protest
of the 1968 Tlatelolco student massacre. For lack of money, the students
appropriated three buses on the fateful night; in response, the mayor of
Iguala gave orders to stop the buses
no matter what. Enforcing the orders, the local police opened fire on
several buses, killing six students and
bystanders and leaving 25 wounded.
The night deteriorated into a headhunt
for the fleeing students, 43 of whom
were eventually abducted in police
44
A public secret revealed
The Iguala events have irrefutably revealed ties between powerful
drug cartels, the local police force and
the responsible mayor. The interwoven nature of local governments with
organised crime is no secret. But the
revelations brought to light by the recent events have forced the government to break with their policy of official denial. As President Enrique
Peña Nieto stated at a press conference, the Iguala events have revealed
the naked truth.
Ayotzinapa has become the paragon of institutional ties with drug cartels and represents the sickness that
has been ailing Mexican society in the
WORLD AFFAIRS
form of corruption, extreme violence
and impunity for years.
The movement that has risen in
response to the Iguala events breathes
a certain sense of relief. A family
member of an Ayotzinapa student who
disappeared a few years ago relates
how the movement has helped her:
Without Ayotzinapa our voices
would still be shrouded in silence.
Where people used to whisper,
they now openly agitate against the
narcogobierno (drugs government).
This sea change must not be underestimated in the context of the extreme
violence and repression which would
normally make a public expression of
this nature a dangerous act.
Ayotzinapa has finally laid bare this
public secret.
The perfect storm?
The disappearance of the students
has mobilised and brought together
diverse local groups from all social
strata and regions of Mexican society. Committees of support have been
set up in the most remote corners of
Mexico, the Zapatistas have held a
silent march in Chiapas and famous
Mexican actors have declared their
solidarity. However, the heart of the
movement is located in Iguala, in the
Asamblea Nacional Popular (ANP)
headed by the parents and schoolmates of the disappeared students.
The strength of the Ayotzinapa
movement is based in the coalition of
student and teacher organisations.
This coalition seems to be the recipe
for a perfect storm. Both are at the
forefront of the struggle and are flooding Mexican streets with staggering
numbers, of which the 50,000-strong
demonstration on 22 October in
Mexico City has been the largest so
far.
In Guerrero, epicentre of the
struggle, highways are blockaded
daily, government buildings are
torched and radio stations occupied
and taken over. Students and teachers
of leading universities have called
various strikes, and there is talk of a
general strike to come. To top all this
off, teachers associations have set
themselves the goal of taking over all
of Guerreros town halls. At the time
of writing, the count is set at 22 out
of a total of 81.
In recent Mexican history, teachers and students have been the vanguard of social struggles, which has
given them an important symbolic
value. It also provides the current
movement with the needed practical
experience and organisational structures to build upon.
Roots of the movement
Mexican universities are well
known for their militant and radical
student movements. The latest revival
took place in the form of a national
movement called #YoSoy132
(#IAm132). The movement started
during the presidential election campaigns of 2012 when the students agitated for the democratisation of the
media because of their partial reporting, which favoured erstwhile presidential candidate Peña Nieto. The
movement is organised horizontally
and made up of 130 local and autonomous assemblies spread all over
Mexico, coordinating in its national
Interuniversitaria, which has now
taken up the cause of the Ayotzinapa
students.
Just like #YoSoy132, the radical
teachers organisations besmirched
the start of the presidential term of
Peña Nieto with large-scale protests
when he announced controversial
neoliberal reforms in education, energy and telecommunications. The
democratic section of the national
teachers union CNTE, well known for
their role in the Oaxaca uprising of
2006, has led the protests against the
attempt to privatise Mexican education.
In Guerrero, these militant protests were led by the teachers organisation CETEG, which has united the
forces of farmers, indigenous people,
students and community police,
thereby broadening the struggle
against the entire neoliberal offensive
of the new government. Besides the
education reforms, they protested the
privatisation of the energy sector, destructive mining projects, repression
of political activists and the lack of
public security.
The Interuniversitaria, CNTE and
CETEG are the motor of the current
Ayotzinapa movement.
45
Insecurity unites a diverse
movement
Alive they took them, alive we
want them back. Recurrent in all protests, this slogan expresses the most
important demand of the movement:
the unharmed return of the students
and the punishment of all those responsible for their disappearance.
Banners and social media also often
show
the
hashtag
# Ay o t z i n a p a S o m o s T o d o s
(#WeAreAllAyotzinapa). This sends
the clear message that this could have
happened to anybody in Mexico.
This sad reality of the structural insecurity caused by the deep ties between
the corrupt government and organised
crime speaks to a diversity of Mexicans and is the glue that binds the
Ayotzinapa movement.
A current in the movement articulates Ayotzinapa as a systemic problem. It is mainly the radical teachers
organisations which are determined
not to settle for the usual course of
events in Mexican political crises,
namely a reshuffling of the political
cards and then back to business as
usual. The protesters response to the
resignation of Guerreros governor
says it all. It will not solve anything,
was the loud response after which the
mobilisation and protests continued
with unrelenting zeal. Indeed, the appointment of an interim governor of
Guerrero was answered immediately
with the demand for his dismissal
since he was not chosen by el pueblo,
the people, but by the federal government. On its own terms, the
Ayotzinapa movement demands the
dissolution of the municipal, state and
federal governments. As they say in
Mexico, The cob must be stripped of
all its corn.
The broad coalition that makes up
the Ayotzinapa movement has its internal complexities and tensions. The
issue of insecurity speaks just as well
to people who want a properly functioning liberal democracy as to radical groups that would like to see farreaching political change. This is evident from the following examples.
A few days after the disappearance of the students, shopkeepers and
merchants of Guerreros capital
Chilpancingo joined the protest demanding the resignation of the gov-
WORLD AFFAIRS
ernor. The extreme violence in the
region has been seriously affecting
commerce in Chilpancingo, leading to
these groups participation. Under a
similar pretext of insecurity, 200 striking police officers in Acapulco joined
the struggle. While the middle classes
focus on the issue of insecurity, a
group of socialist students of the
Ayotzinapa movement choose a more
fundamental focus.
The students have decided to
temporarily occupy two mega-stores
in Chilpancingo to hand out food and
basic supplies. Electronics and luxury
items remain untouched, which makes
it different from ordinary plundering,
but rather sends a clear political statement that inequality is at the root of
the problems in Mexico. This message
also resonates in many of the highway blockades, where the Ayotzinapa
movement gives civil vehicles free
passage but denies it completely to the
trucks of multinationals like CocaCola and BIMBO, symbols of the inequality of the capitalist system.
The different currents that feed
the Ayotzinapa movement are its
strength because of the broad support.
At the same time, the divergent currents carry with them the risk of fragmentation.
From de-escalation to
militarisation
During the first month of protests,
the government was surprisingly
peaceful in its response. Even when
more militant actions occurred, like
setting fire to government buildings
or occupations of town halls, the authorities did not intervene. The government seemed to be hoping for a
fiery but shortlived movement that
would burn out by itself. Besides, this
de-escalation strategy was at the time
the only realistic course of action
since a new victim of state violence
would only have further fuelled the
flames of discontent.
However, the government did
employ its usual tactic of discrediting the students and teachers by labelling them as dangerous and radical vandals. More recently it has even
stooped to the level of accusing the
Ayotzinapa students of being allied to
a drug cartel. Strikingly enough, these
accusations have not had the soughtafter effect on the people.
On 29 October, more than a
month into the protests, the first violent confrontation with the military
police forces took place when teachers of CETEG attempted to occupy
the Casa Guerrero, the White House
of Guerrero. Meanwhile, the government is taking over control of the cities of Guerrero as well as 12 municipalities. A large-scale militarisation of
the region is taking place, denounced
by the teachers organisations as an
attempt to suppress the movement.
Now that more and more anger is directed towards the president himself,
the chances of a violent intervention
are growing by the day.
Self-organisation: leading by
example
The longstanding community
police forces of Guerrero are an inspiration to the Ayotzinapa movement. When people speak of real solutions to rising insecurity, they are
quick to refer to the self-organised
community police, where the people
do it themselves.
Indigenous communities, mostly,
have organised their police groups
based on their own culture and organisational structures. The police are directly responsive to the community
which governs and controls their activities. The areas where the community police are active are seen as the
safest places in Guerrero.
UPOEG is one of the community
police organisations which has gained
a lot of respect by immediately organising search parties for the disappeared students, coordinating their
efforts with the parents. As such,
UPOEG is filling the void left by the
government and shows the power and
possibilities of self-organisation. Besides its policing role, UPOEG is also
putting forward a plan to create a
fourth level of government next to
the existing federal, state and municipal structures of Mexico. This would
take the shape of a council of community leaders with the aim of pullTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
46
ing political power to the bottom of
Mexican society: the communities.
Self-organisation in Guerrero is
referred to by the Ayotzinapa movement as an example of what another
Mexico might look like.
The importance of
international pressure
The fear that political instability
will disrupt Mexican commercial interests makes the country highly susceptible to international pressure. This
was apparent when the Zapatistas rose
up in 1994 during the implementation
of the NAFTA free trade agreement.
The pressure exerted on Mexico as a
response to the international solidarity movement was of crucial importance in the course of the Zapatista
struggle.
The Mexican government does
not want to lose her image as stable
and open for business. The protesters in Mexico are well aware of this
fact. They have made a satirical version of the cover of the influential
Time magazine and spread it far and
wide via social media. The image
parodies an edition of Time with Peña
Nieto Saving Mexico on the front
cover. The parody depicts the president as Death with a scythe in his
hand, accompanied by the text Slaying Mexico. This is a firm call for
international pressure.
International intellectuals supported the struggle with a critical open
letter to President Peña Nieto signed
by Noam Chomsky, Umberto Eco and
more than 2,000 other academics.
Once more, it is of crucial importance that the eyes of the world are
turned to Mexico to restrain its government from using all-out repression
against the Ayotzinapa movement.
The course of struggle is unclear, and
a burst of violence lurks in every corner, just like the possibility for social
change. One thing is certain though:
a diverse group of Mexicans is envisioning Another Mexico, which, now
more than ever, is possible.
u
Maggie Blanca is an independent journalist and
PhD student in Cultural Anthropology. Jeremy
Crowlesmith is an independent journalist based in
Utrecht, the Netherlands, with a background in
student organising and independent media. This
article is reproduced from ROAR Magazine
(roarmag.org).
WORLD AFFAIRS
The forgotten coup
How America and Britain crushed the
government of their ally, Australia
Gough Whitlam, who became Australias Prime Minister in 1972, died in October.
John Pilger recounts how the US and Britain worked together to topple him from
power in 1975.
ACROSS the political and media elite
in Australia, a silence has descended
on the memory of the great, reforming prime minister Gough Whitlam,
who has died. His achievements are
recognised, if grudgingly, his mistakes noted in false sorrow. But a critical reason for his extraordinary political demise will, they hope, be buried with him.
Australia briefly became an independent state during the Whitlam
years, 1972-75. An American commentator wrote that no country had
reversed its posture in international
affairs so totally without going
through a domestic revolution.
Whitlam ended his nations colonial
servility. He abolished Royal patronage, moved Australia towards the
Non-Aligned Movement, supported
zones of peace and opposed nuclear
weapons testing.
Although not regarded as on the
left of the Labor Party, Whitlam was
a maverick social democrat of principle, pride and propriety. He believed
that a foreign power should not control his countrys resources and dictate its economic and foreign policies.
He proposed to buy back the farm.
In drafting the first Aboriginal land
rights legislation, his government
raised the ghost of the greatest land
grab in human history, Britains colonisation of Australia, and the question
of who owned the island-continents
vast natural wealth.
Latin Americans will recognise
the audacity and danger of this breaking free in a country whose establishment was welded to great, external
power. Australians had served every
British imperial adventure since the
Boxer rebellion was crushed in China.
In the 1960s, Australia pleaded to join
the US in its invasion of Vietnam, then
Gough Whitlams government drafted Australias first Aboriginal land rights legislation,
thereby raising the question of who owned the continents vast natural wealth. Picture
shows his symbolic act of handing back the lease of Wave Hill Station to Aboriginal
traditional owners.
provided black teams to be run by
the CIA. US diplomatic cables published last year by WikiLeaks disclose
the names of leading figures in both
main parties, including a future prime
minister and foreign minister, as
Washingtons informants during the
Whitlam years.
Whitlam knew the risk he was
taking. The day after his election, he
ordered that his staff should not be
vetted or harassed by the Australian
security organisation, ASIO then, as
now, tied to Anglo-American intelligence. When his ministers publicly
condemned the US bombing of Vietnam as corrupt and barbaric, a CIA
station officer in Saigon said: We
were told the Australians might as
well be regarded as North Vietnamese collaborators.
Whitlam demanded to know if
and why the CIA was running a spy
base at Pine Gap near Alice Springs,
a giant vacuum cleaner which, as
Edward Snowden revealed recently,
allows the US to spy on everyone.
47
Try to screw us or bounce us, the
prime minister warned the US ambassador, [and Pine Gap] will become a
matter of contention.
Victor Marchetti, the CIA officer
who had helped set up Pine Gap, later
told me, This threat to close Pine Gap
caused apoplexy in the White House
... a kind of Chile [coup] was set in
motion.
Pine Gaps top-secret messages
were decoded by a CIA contractor,
TRW. One of the decoders was
Christopher Boyce, a young man troubled by the deception and betrayal
of an ally. Boyce revealed that the
CIA had infiltrated the Australian political and trade union elite and referred to the Governor-General of
Australia, Sir John Kerr, as our man
Kerr.
Kerr was not only the Queens
man, he had longstanding ties to
Anglo-American intelligence. He was
an enthusiastic member of the Australian Association for Cultural Freedom, described by Jonathan Kwitny
WORLD AFFAIRS
Whitlam, seen here at the United Nations, moved Australia towards the Non-Aligned
Movement, supported zones of peace and opposed nuclear weapons testing.
alarmed member of the audience as
an incitement to the countrys business leaders to rise against the government.
The Americans and British
worked together. In 1975, Whitlam
discovered that Britains MI6 was operating against his government. The
Brits were actually decoding secret
messages coming into my foreign affairs office, he said later. One of his
ministers, Clyde Cameron, told me,
We knew MI6 was bugging Cabinet
meetings for the Americans. In the
1980s, senior CIA officers revealed
that the Whitlam problem had been
discussed with urgency by the CIAs
director, William Colby, and the head
of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield. A
deputy director of the CIA said: Kerr
did what he was told to do.
On 10 November 1975, Whitlam
was shown a top-secret telex message
sourced to Theodore Shackley, the notorious head of the CIAs East Asia
Division, who had helped run the
coup against Salvador Allende in
Chile two years earlier.
Shackleys message was
read to Whitlam. It said that
the prime minister of Australia was a security risk in
his own country. The day
before, Kerr had visited the
headquarters of the Defence
Signals Directorate, Australias NSA, where he was
briefed on the security crisis.
On 11 November the
day Whitlam was to inform
Parliament about the secret
CIA presence in Australia
he was summoned by Kerr.
Invoking archaic vice-regal
reserve powers, Kerr
sacked the democratically
elected prime minister. The
Whitlam problem was
solved, and Australian politics never recovered, nor the
nation its true independence. ÿÿÿu
of the Wall Street Journal
in his book The Crimes of
Patriots as an elite, invitation-only group ... exposed in Congress as being
founded, funded and generally run by the CIA. The
CIA paid for Kerrs travel,
built his prestige ... Kerr
continued to go to the CIA
for money.
When Whitlam was reelected for a second term,
in 1974, the White House
sent Marshall Green to
Canberra as ambassador.
Green was an imperious,
sinister figure who worked
in the shadows of Americas deep state. Known as
the coupmaster, he had
played a central role in the
1965 coup against President Sukarno in Indonesia
which cost up to a million
lives. One of his first
speeches in Australia was
A newspaper article reporting the sacking of Whitlam by
to the Australian Institute of
Governor-General Sir John Kerr on 11 November 1975.
Directors described by an
48
John Pilger is an Australian-born
journalist, author and filmmaker. This
article is reproduced from his website
www.johnpilger.com.
HUMAN RIGHTS
Coca-Cola and human rights in
Colombia
Coca-Colas activities in Colombia have been a permanent attack on labour and
trade union rights.
The transnational corporation CocaCola settled in Colombia in 1940,
through a franchise granted to the
Indega S.A. bottling company in the
central, northern coastal and northeastern regions of Colombia. The bottling companies under Indega S.A.
were bought out in 1995 by Panamco
Beverages, Inc., with 25% of its
shares held by Coca-Cola. In May
2003, Fomento Mexicano S.A.
bought Panamco through the CocaCola Femsa S.A. franchise, with
Coca-Cola retaining 31.6% of the
shares. This is the company that holds
the franchise in Colombia, and
through which it operates in most
Latin American countries.
Through this offshore legal
framework, Coca-Cola produces and
sells its products keeping ownership
of the brands, capital control and a
presence on the board of directors of
the local enterprises. It also controls
all the processes regarding raw materials, supplies, production, distribution and labour policy, avoiding liability for the human rights violations
committed.
Coca-Colas activities in Colombia affect the environment and health,
among others. But, above all, the history of Coca-Cola in Colombia is that
of a permanent attack on labour and
trade union rights, including the killing of at least 10 trade unionists and
links with paramilitary groups.
Obstacle
Working time extensions and
pace-of-work increases have allowed
the transnational corporation to operate with five Coca-Cola Femsa bottling plants and close 11 in 2003, laying off hundreds of workers. Members of Sinaltrainal, the national food
industry union in Colombia, started a
A poster in the campaign against Coca-Cola highlighting the murder of trade unionists
in Colombia.
hunger strike in March 2004, in order
to try to prevent wide-scale layoffs.
In 2014, with the opening of a large
bottling plant that the company is
building in Tocancipá, Cundinamarca,
new bottling plant closures and layoffs are planned.
According to company documents known to Sinaltrainal union
leaders, such as Dia D, Plan
Pandrino and el Corrientazo,
Sinaltrainal is considered as an obstacle to reducing labour costs, since it
opposes subcontracting, which accounts for some 70% of the over
7,000 workers involved in the companys production. Such subcontracting is carried out through front companies, many of which belong to the
transnational corporation itself, including Atencom S.A.S., Imbera,
OXXON, FL Colombia S.A.S. They
simulate direct working contracts,
thus preventing payment of benefits
provided for under the collective labour contract. Sinaltrainal is opposed
to the so-called positive human resources plan, which is how the company weakens the trade union (that at
49
present has only 287 affiliated workers), in order to eliminate the collective labour contract and to put illegal
pressure on the workers so as to make
them give up their work contracts.
On 10 August 2004, the
transnational corporation, with the
consent of the Ministry of Labour, revoked Sinaltrainals by-laws, thus
hindering membership by outsourced
workers. The company tried to persuade judges to declare illegal
Sinaltrainal sections in Bogotá,
Girardot, Santa Marta, Cali and
Villavicencio, among others, but it did
not succeed. It has tried this several
times, and now we face case No.
0240-2012 in the Bogotá Labour
Court, where the Coca-Cola
Villavicencio bottling plant is again
requesting that the union be declared
illegal. Coca-Cola has also tried
with no success to get a permit from
the judiciary to fire labour leaders.
In order to terrorise workers so
they either do not join Sinaltrainal or
give up membership, the company
resorts to criminalising the victims:
the company administration carries
HUMAN RIGHTS
out systematic stigmatisation
campaigns
against
Sinaltrainal members by publishing images of workers and
their families, accusing the
union members of vandalism
and damage to property, or
gathering workers against
their will so as to show them
graphics accusing members
of Sinaltrainal of being the
guilty ones. They have caused
moral and material damage,
putting the lives and the integrity of several members of
Sinaltrainal at stake, because
they have been involved in
criminal cases charging unionists with slander, calumny,
damage to property, conspiracy to commit crime, rebellion and terrorism, among
other things, with at least 12
leaders of Sinaltrainal unfairly
imprisoned. An arrest warrant The headquarters of Coca-Cola in Atlanta, US.
was issued against them, and
the corporation took advantage of this tifiably accused by the Administrative
to give them notice of dismissal for Department of Security (DAS) of bejust cause. But the company was ing a threat to national security. Cocacompelled to rehire them when they Cola has been implicated in having
links to and supporting the war that
were acquitted.
In order to hinder freedom of as- the state security forces are carrying
sociation, the transnational corpora- on. An example of this is the gathertion militarises repression for protest- ing of people from Coca-Cola bottling
ing. As in many other cases, there are plants in February 2010 at the
the events that happened in the Tolemaida military base. Under the
Medellín bottling plant on 17 Decem- slogan Guided by Pride and dressed
ber 2010, where police entered with in military uniforms, they participated
armoured cars to force the removal of in war manoeuvre training.
subcontracted and Sinaltrainal affiliKillings and threats
ated workers who refused to move the
distribution vehicles. Some individuAlso worth noting are the 68
als, on behalf of Coca-Cola and esworkers,
members of Sinaltrainal
corted by policemen, went to the
working
for
Coca-Cola bottling plants
workers homes with dismissal nosince
1984,
who have received death
tices.
threats,
those
exiled and displaced
The state and transnationals such
with
their
families
that the company
as Coca-Cola use the social, political
refuses
to
relocate
to other cities,
and armed conflict that continues in
workers
imprisoned
under false
Colombia after more than 50 years as
charges
and
the
11
who
were killed,
a pretext to carry out an anti-trade
five
of
whom
worked
in
the Carepa
union policy, aiming to link trade unAntioquia
bottling
plant.
One
of them
ion activities, workers claims and

Isidro
Segundo
Gil

was
killed
inprotests with actions by outlaw orside
the
premises
on
5
December
ganisations or organisations guilty of
violent crimes. Several members of 1996, the day for the company to start
Sinaltrainal who work for Coca-Cola negotiations on Sinaltrainals list of
bottling companies have been unjus- demands. The same killers knocked
50
down the doors of
Sinaltrainal headquarters and
burnt the facilities.
On 26 December 1996,
another Coca-Cola worker in
Carepa was forcibly removed
from the bottling plant by
presumed members of the
paramilitary forces and was
killed near the Chigorodó
cemetary (Antioquia). In the
case of the murder of Adolfo
de Jesús Munera López, a
single person was convicted;
in the other case the investigations resulted in no convictions.
In 2002, a criminal complaint against Coca-Cola, directed at its head office in Atlanta in the US, was filed before a judge of the Court of
Miami District, for the companys supposed involvement
in the killing of Colombian
trade unionists.
We want justice and want the
people to know the truth about what
happened in Colombia against CocaCola workers, said Javier Correa,
president of Sinaltrainal. The complaint was linked to the killing of
Segundo Gil in 1996, not long after
Richard Kirby, the North American
owner of a bottling plant in Carepa,
Antioquia, said that he would do anything necessary to kill and disappear
workers who tried to join trade unions and who is said to have made an
agreement with gunmen towards this
end.
The main question, says Terry
Collingsworth, a jurist of the International Labour Rights Fund, is: Why
didnt Coca-Cola intervene to put an
end to the violence? He adds: CocaCola, like many other companies,
controls the product and gathers the
profits, but states that it has no liability as regards workers.
Coca-Colas response was to file
a complaint against workers of
Sinaltrainal before the public prosecutor, because they had brought the case
to US courts. On 11 August 2009, a
US court dismissed the case against
Coca-Cola, declaring it lacked jurisdiction to hear it.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In April 2006, the Peoples Permanent Tribunal, Colombia chapter,
found Coca-Cola and other
transnational corporations, including
Nestlé, guilty of violating workers
human rights and of attempting to
destroy Sinaltrainal, as well as of pillaging Colombias natural resources,
in particular water.
Owing to international pressure,
the Carter Center in the United States
met with representatives of Coca-Cola
and Sinaltrainal and negotiations with
the company started in 2007, but the
company was just buying time, seeking to defuse the pressure of the claim
against it and influence the conditions
of any future settlement.
Sinaltrainal has addressed the International Labour Organisation
(ILO) Committee on Freedom of Association with a complaint that has
been expanded several times for human rights violations committed by
Coca-Cola in Colombia, but the recommendations that were issued have
not been respected since they are not
binding.
Given the harassment that workers of Coca-Cola bottling plants are
facing, and the danger to their lives
and physical integrity, the InterAmerican Commission on Human
Rights has ordered precautionary
measures for 26 Sinaltrainal members.
On 9 October 2012, the European
Centre for Constitutional and Human
Rights (ECCHR) and the Colectivo
de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo
(CAJAR) of Colombia, with the support of the Central Unitaria de
Trabajadores (CUT), submitted a
communication to the Office of the
Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, requesting the opening of a criminal
inquiry with respect to anti-trade
union violence in Colombia. Among
the cases that were submitted are several of the murders of Sinaltrainal
leaders.
In 2008, the ILO conducted a
mission in Colombia in order to assess the situation but did not take into
account past facts killings, death
threats, attacks, kidnapping attempts,
attacks on the union, layoffs en masse,
A solidarity protest against Coca-Colas human rights violations in Colombia.
environmental damage nor did it
accept or consider any evidence of
those facts submitted by Sinaltrainal.
The impunity that Coca-Cola
continues to enjoy for the human, labour and trade union rights violations
in Colombia shows the need for a legally binding international instrument
to control the activities of
transnational corporations and their
impacts on human rights as well as to
guarantee justice and redress for victims.
Only a legally binding international instrument for transnational
corporations can generate the legal,
social and political pressure on them
to put an end to their attacks on trade
unions and the increasing precariousness of work, and oblige the state of
Colombia to judge and punish those
liable for harassment of Colombian
trade unionists.
For all the abovementioned reasons, the Europe-Third World Centre
(CETIM) urges the government of the
United States to comply with its duty
to make sure that transnational corporations based within its territory do
not violate human rights, in particular while carrying out their activities
in other countries, and, should that be
the case, to grant victims access to justice. We appeal in particular to the
government of the United States to
intervene in order to put an end to the
incessant attacks by Coca-Cola on
human, labour and trade union rights
in Colombia, and to ensure that victims obtain justice and redress.
51
The CETIM also requests the
Colombian government to comply
with its duty to respect and protect
human rights in Colombia, in particular labour and trade union rights and
the freedom of peaceful association,
and to take, urgently, all necessary
measures so as to guarantee the security and physical integrity of
Sinaltrainals trade unionists. We appeal in particular to the government
of Colombia to put an end to CocaColas permanent attacks against human rights in Colombia and to guarantee justice and redress for the victims of its activities.
The CETIM requests the United
Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions and the Special Rapporteur
on the Right to Freedom of Peaceful
Assembly and Association to monitor this case closely and to pay a visit
to Colombia.
Further, the CETIM requests the
UN Human Rights Council to create
an intergovernmental working group
with the mandate to develop a binding international treaty in order to
monitor transnational corporations
and to guarantee access to justice for
the victims of their activities.
ÿu
The above is an edited version of a statement, drafted
in collaboration with Sinaltrainal, presented to the
26th session of the UN Human Rights Council in
June 2014 by the Europe-Third World Centre
(CETIM). The full statement with endnotes is
available on the CETIMs website www.cetim.ch. The
Geneva-based CETIM is concerned with NorthSouth relations and promoting economic, social and
cultural rights.
WOMEN
Against all the odds: Maternity
and mortality in Afghanistan
Afghanistan has one of the worst maternal mortality ratios in the world, a fact which
highlights the plight of women in this war-torn country.
Karlos Zurutuza
NASRIN Mohamadi, a mother of
four, has promised herself never to set
foot in an Afghan public hospital
again. After her first experience in a
maternity ward, she has lost all faith
in the states healthcare system.
The doctors said that I had not
fully dilated yet so they told me to
wait in the corridor. I had to sit on the
floor with some others as there wasnt
a single chair, Mohamadi tells Inter
Press Service (IPS), recalling her experience at Mazar-e Sharif hospital,
425 km northwest of Kabul.
They finally took me into the
room where three other women were
waiting with their legs wide open
while people came in and out. They
kept me like that for an hour until I
delivered without [an] anaesthetic,
and not even a single towel to clean
my baby or myself, adds the 32-yearold.
Immediately afterwards the doctors told me to leave as there were
more women queuing in the corridor.
Even after she left the hospital,
Mohamadis ordeal was far from over.
The doctors told her not to wash herself for 10 days after the delivery, and
as a result her stitches got infected.
I paid between $600 and $800
to give birth to my other three children after that; it was money well invested, she says.
This is a steep price to pay in a
country where the average daily income is under $3 and 75% of the
population live in rural areas without
easy access to health facilities.
Many women have no other option than to rely on public services,
and the result speaks volumes about
Afghanistans commitment to maternal health: some 460 deaths per
Afghan women give birth to an average of six children. A lack of information about
birth spacing means mothers seldom have time to fully recover between deliveries,
causing a range of health issues for the mother and a lack of milk for the newborn
child.
100,000 live births give the country
one of the four worst maternal mortality ratios (MMR) in the world outside of sub-Saharan Africa.
While this represents a significant
decline from a peak of 1,600 deaths
per 100,000 births in 2002, far too
many women are still dying during
pregnancy and childbirth, according
to the United Nations. In 2013 alone,
4,200 Afghan women lost their lives
while giving birth.
The lack of specialised medical
attention during pregnancy or delivery for a great bulk of Afghan women
is partly responsible. Few have access
to health centres because these are
only reachable in urban areas. The
lack of both security and proper roads
forces many women to deliver at
home.
This does not bode well for the
6.5 million women of reproductive
age around the country, particularly
since Afghanistan only has 3,500 midwives, according to the UN PopulaTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 290/291
52
tion Fund (UNFPA)s latest State of
the Worlds Midwifery report.
I delivered without [an]
anaesthetic, and not even
a single towel to clean my
baby or myself.
This means that the existing
workforce of midwives meets only
23% of womens needs. The situation
is poised to worsen: UNFPA estimates
that midwifery services in the country will need to respond to 1.6 million pregnancies per annum by 2030,
73% of these in rural settings.
Even women with access to toplevel urban facilities, such as the Kabul-based Malalai Maternity Hospital, are not guaranteed safety and comfort.
For instance, Sultani (name
changed), a mother of four, tells IPS
WOMEN
A graduation ceremony of Afghan midwives. The existing workforce of midwives in
Afghanistan meets only 23% of womens needs.
she is far from satisfied with her experience.
I gave birth through caesarean
section to my four children in this
hospital but the doctors who attended
to me were unskilled, she remarks
bluntly. A majority of them had only
completed three years of medical
[school].
On a scale of one to 10, I can
only give Malalai a four, she concludes.
Sultanis opinion may be specific
to her own experience, but it finds
echo in various reports and studies of
the countrys health system. A 2013
activity report by Doctors Without
Borders (MSF) labelled Afghanistan
one of the riskiest places to be a pregnant woman or a young child due to
a lack of skilled female medical staff.
Private clinics are unaffordable
for most Afghans and many public
hospitals are understaffed and overburdened, reports the organisation,
which runs four hospitals across the
country.
Many rural health clinics are
dysfunctional, as qualified health staff
have left the insecure areas, and the
supply of reliable drugs and medical
materials is irregular or non-existent,
Afghan women awaiting treatment. Few have access to healthcare centres as they
are only reachable in urban areas.
53
continues the report.
This is a sobering analysis of a
country that will need to configure its
health system to cover at least 117.8
million antenatal visits, 20.3 million
births and 81.3 million post-partum/
postnatal visits between 2012 and
2030, according to UNFPA.
Given that contraceptive use is
still scarce, reaching only 22% of reproductive-age women, large families
continue to be the norm. Afghan
women give birth to an average of six
children, a practice fuelled by a cultural obsession with bearing at least
one son, who will in turn care for his
parents in their old age.
A lack of information about birth
spacing means mothers seldom have
time to fully recover between deliveries, causing a range of health issues
for the mother and a lack of milk for
the newborn child.
Findings from a 2013 survey conducted by the Afghan Ministry of Public Health indicate that only 58% of
children below six months were exclusively breastfed.
Still, this is an improvement from
a decade ago and represents small but
hopeful changes in the arena of
women and childrens health. The
same government survey found, for
instance, that stunting among children has decreased by nearly 20%
from 60.5% in 2004 to 40.9% in
2013.
Dr Nilofar Sultani, who practises
at the Malalai Maternity Hospital, tells
IPS that medical assistance in Afghanistan has improved significantly over the last 10 years. There
are more health centres, and [they are]
far better equipped. The number of
skilled doctors has also grown, explains Sultani, a gynaecologist.
But the most important change,
she says, has been in womens attitude towards medical care. Before,
very few women would come to the
hospitals but today, the majority of
women come forward on their own.
Theyre slowly losing their fear [of]
doctors, notes Sultani, adding that
health centres are among the very few
places where Afghan women can feel
at ease without the presence of a man.
IPS
ÿu
VIEWPOINT
Building an egalitarian economy
in Myanmar
As Myanmar comes under predatory international pressure to open up all sectors
of its economy to private and foreign investors, Ramesh Shrestha warns of the
need to ensure that strong regulatory mechanisms are put in place to meet the
development aspirations of its people.
AS Myanmar embraces democratic
governance, people are aspiring to
equal opportunities in all aspects of
the countrys political economy,
which at the moment remains dominated by a small group of elites.
Myanmars long-term stability depends on how effectively the government is able to translate its reform
programme into far-reaching economic benefits. Well into the fourth
year of the countrys reforms, a major question looms over the next four
years and beyond: Can Myanmar develop its economy on an egalitarian
basis and fend off predatory international pressure and practices wherein
the privatisation of national assets has
become the norm?
Income inequality is already severe in Myanmar and could get worse
if national economic policies are dictated solely by a private sector whose
interests are largely based on exploitation of natural resources and cheap
labour. Myanmar is often referred to
as a latecomer to the development
arena. While the countrys long isolation certainly has brought many
negative effects, being a latecomer
also provides a good opportunity to
learn from countries that have already
travelled the turbulent path to democracy. There are also lessons to be
learned from failed economies in middle- and high-income countries. An
inclusive national economic policy
that benefits all citizens is key to resolving Myanmars political problems, and the countrys notable
progress toward national reconciliation will be complemented by sound
economic management.
Myanmar geographically links
South Asia, South-East Asia and
China, giving it geopolitical sway in
A protest by Myanmars poor against land seizures. An inclusive national economic
policy that benefits all citizens is key to resolving Myanmars political problems.
the realms of trade, tourism and regional economic cooperation. Because the country is at the crossroads
of a market of three billion consumers, a well-planned economic policy
with a long-term perspective could
yield unprecedented benefits for
Myanmar, but could also increase its
vulnerability. There are many policy
advisers representing diverse interest
groups who see Myanmar through a
purely geopolitical lens, with no consideration for the development aspirations of its people. Myanmars leaders must weigh all offers of assistance
against the risks that they bring.
Myanmar is under pressure to
deregulate, cut red tape and open up
for businesses. It is indeed necessary
to simplify its labyrinthine bureaucracy but at the same time steps must
be taken to strengthen public institutions to protect Myanmars citizens,
the majority of whom will not benefit
from an unshackled private sector, at
54
least in the immediate future. The
government must ensure that the right
investments are being made and that
the returns from such investments are
beneficial to the people and the country, not just to the few who are
partnering with foreign and local investors.
Free trade is en vogue among a
majority of todays economists because it provides choices. But for
countries and people who are just getting out of poverty, guaranteeing basic necessities should be prioritised
ahead of having a choice.
Moreover, free trade does not
work between a strong partner and a
weak partner. Free trade encourages
choice, promotes wastage and further
widens social divisions. Modern-day
free trade encourages developing
countries to sell their resources to affluent nations and expects them to
then import fancy products from these
countries to improve living standards.
VIEWPOINT
It is not a free trade it is a way of
creating dependency.
This is why strong regulatory
mechanisms are still necessary to protect developing countries economies.
Even in fully developed economies,
the private sector often employs
strong lobbies to help shape the regulatory environment, resulting in a variety of abuses that was perhaps most
spectacularly manifested in the 2008
collapse of the US financial system.
As Myanmar develops economic
policies, it must realise that trade
should be free but mindful of the
predatory actions of multinational investors pushing consumption to no
end.
The world continues to witness
but not fully accept the fact that
growth by any means is based on
greed of the few and is responsible
for economic inequality everywhere.
There are many examples of newly
democratised countries where free
market-driven economic policies have
gone very wrong, with markets controlling societies and not societies
controlling the market.
Myanmars economic policies
and regional interactions must be
based on a shared political vision and
mutual benefit. It should not be lured
by promises of bilateral aid tied to
hidden agendas. It would be a catastrophic mistake to be driven by the
immediate benefits of a myopic focus on extractive industries. Many an
environment has been ravaged by a
rush for quick profit.
Opponents of an egalitarian economic approach might argue that it is
at odds with notions of democracy and
freedom, but in fact it is about creating an equality of opportunity for all.
There is ample space for a discussion
about how best to go about this, and
an exchange of ideas and criticism is
a healthy democratic process, as long
as the government makes decisions
based on transparency and takes accountability for its actions. Though
there is a strong desire for results now,
people must be made to understand
that it takes generations to develop a
stable egalitarian economy that will
benefit all.
ÿu
Ramesh Shrestha is a former UNICEF country
representative to Myanmar. This article is
reproduced from the Irrawaddy website
(www.irrawaddy.org).
Socio-economic Considerations in GMO
Decision-Making: International Agreement in
Context
The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
establishes the right of Parties to take
socio-economic considerations into
account when deciding on imports or
domestic measures relating to genetically
modified organisms (GMOs). While the
specifics of putting this into practice have
not been fleshed out in the Protocol, it
does require Parties to exercise the right
in a manner consistent with their
international obligations.
The discussion papers compiled in
this book look at how Parties to the
Protocol can incorporate socio-economic
considerations in GMO decision-making
while remaining faithful to their
obligations under other international
agreements. These agreements can
include not only trade treaties but also
those that deal with human rights,
indigenous peoples rights, food and
agriculture, and the environment.
Addressing these issues will be key to
Malaysia
Price
RM8.00
US$4.00
US$6.00
ISBN: 978-967-0747-02-6 60 pp
ensuring
proper
and
consistent treatment of socioeconomic considerations
surrounding the impact of
GMOs on the conservation
and sustainable use of
biodiversity.
Postage
RM2.00
US$2.00 (air); US$1.00 (sea)
US$3.00 (air); US$1.00 (sea)
Orders from Malaysia please pay by credit card/crossed cheque or postal order.
Orders from Australia, Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand,
UK, USA please pay by credit card/cheque/bank draft/international money order
in own currency, US$ or Euro.If paying in own currency or Euro, please calculate
equivalent of US$ rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that the agent bank is
located in the USA.
money order in US$ or Euro. If paying in Euro, please calculate equivalent of US$
rate. If paying in US$, please ensure that the agent bank is located in the USA.
All payments should be made in favour of: THIRD WORLD NETWORK BHD.,
131 Jalan Macalister, 10400 Penang, Malaysia. Tel: 60-4-2266728/2266159;
Fax: 60-4-2264505; Email: [email protected]; Website: www.twn.my
I would like to order .............. copy/copies of Socio-economic Considerations in
GMO Decision-Making: International Agreement in Context.
American Express
A/c No.:
Visa
Mastercard
Expiry date:
Signature:
Name:
Address:
55
POETRY
The poet laureate of the Philippines, Amado V Hernandez (1903-1970) was also a
journalist and labour activist who suffered long years of incarceration on account of
his fight for social justice.
A poem on poetry
Amado V Hernandez
Like God:
there is a poem in all things
the dawn as fragrant as a chosen bride,
the beauty of night where darkness gleams;
in the fields, life; in cities, music.
Like God:
those who can recognise a poem are rare,
diamond is often taken for carbon,
the sky is seen as reflected in ditch-water,
the outlaws a patriot and the patriot a fraud.
Like Man:
a poem is created by one who is also a god;
the mind of the poet often performs miracles
a few coarse-grained words, apprehended,
become bullets and roses.
Like Man:
a poem bears its own measure, melody, rhythm,
the three elements of its loveliness;
and freedom is the wing of a poem
that makes it soar.
Like God:
a poem is a unique riddle whose answer
lies in the throb of each sentient heart,
it is riches in poverty, brilliant light in darkness,
and pure honey in the bitter poison.
Like Man:
it is a rocky mountain and a nugget of gold,
a camel that passes through the needles eye
the true poem is an arrow
that pierces the target it chooses point-blank!
Translated by E San Juan, Jr
56