Archive | May 9th, 2016

On Grounds of Electricity Crisis, Disaster of 3 Children burnt to Death

On Grounds of Electricity Crisis, Disaster of 3 Children burnt to Death Requires the Unity of Parties Administrating the Electricity Sector

الوصف: thumb

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) expresses its deep sorrow over the on-going tragic incidents due to electricity crisis, the last of which was a house burnt in al-Shati Refugee Camp resulting in the death of three siblings and causing their fourth brother serious burns. Since 2010, the number of victims searching for alternative energy sources has amounted to 29 civilians, including 24 children.

PCHR also expresses its deep concern over the failure in administrating the electricity crisis and the deterioration of power shortage which damaged most vital sectors necessary for the decent life of Gaza population. PCHR strongly denounces dragging of the Palestinian people into the political conflict. The Gaza Strip population has lost many lives in their search for alternative energy sources.

On 6 May 2016 in a serious incident, a house belonging to Mohammed Ali Mubarek al-Hindi (31), from al-Shati Refugee Camp in Gaza, caught fire as a lit candle fell in the only bedroom, where the five children of the abovementioned civilian were asleep. As a result, the bedroom burst into flames and three of the children were burnt to death; Yousra (4), Rahaf (2) and Naser (9 months), while the fourth child, Mohanned (7), sustained serious burns.

PCHR passes condolences to the victims’ family and condemns the ongoing failure of the parties responsible for administrating the electricity sector in the Gaza Strip to solve the power crisis which has aggravated over the last days. According to PCHR’s follow up of the consequences of the power crisis intensification in the Gaza Strip, only one of the power generators was operated to distribute electricity for 4-6 hours and then cut off for 12-14 hours daily instead of distributing electricity for 8 hours and then cutting it off for 8 hours. The suffering of Palestinian civilians has aggravated while searching for alternative power source in light of the deterioration of their economic and social conditions and increase of unemployment and poverty rates.

PCHR calls upon the Palestinian Unity Government to assume its legal and moral responsibilities towards the 1.8 million people living in the Strip who suffer a suffocating economic and social siege. Furthermore, the residents of the Strip have been suffering deteriorating health and environment services, including the deterioration of water and sewage infrastructure, as well as educational, social and economic services.

PCHR strongly condemns the complete failure to manage the electricity crises and deterioration of the power shortage which damaged most vital sectors necessary for the decent life of Gaza Strip. PCHR stresses that the current electricity crisis is completely political. It is a result of the absence of honest Palestinian Unity and the continuous political conflict despite forming a unity government.

PCHR also holds the Energy Authority in Gaza and GEDCO fully responsible for the aggravation of the crisis. Moreover, PCHR demands forming a unified administration of the electricity sector according to a unified law in order to immediately take initiative to solve the electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip depending on fair and transparent bases and hold those proven not bearing responsibilities accountable.

Public Document


Follow PCHR  on Facebook  and  Twitter
For more information please call PCHR office in Gaza, Gaza Strip, on +972 8 2824776 – 2825893
PCHR, 29 Omer El Mukhtar St., El Remal, PO Box 1328 Gaza, Gaza Strip., Webpage

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, GazaComments Off on On Grounds of Electricity Crisis, Disaster of 3 Children burnt to Death

Dreaming of the Next UN Secretary General


by Dr: Richard Falk

Image result for un logo

“I solemnly swear to exercise in all loyalty, discretion and conscience the functions entrusted to me as Secretary-General of the United Nations, to discharge these functions and regulate my conduct with the interests of the United Nations only in view, and not to seek or accept instructions in regard to the performance of my duties from any Government or other authority external to the Organisation.”

United Nations Secretary General’s Oath of Office

In 2006 Ramesh Thakur, one of the most perceptive and knowledgeable commentators on global issues, wrote a trustworthy account of what it takes to be selected as UN Secretary General, and then to be effective in the job. [Thakur, “In Selecting the New UN Secretary General,” Feb. 3, 2006, Daily Yomiuri] In many ways his assessment, although realistic, confirms the impression that the leadership potential of this titular position as head of the UN is structurally limited and inconsistent with the spirit of the oath of office.

The reason for these low expectations, as Thakur points out, is that the “most important” requirement of the job is to be regarded when selected as acceptable to the five permanent members of the Security Council (the so-called P-5), and especially to the United States.

It is a tribute to the potential of the position of SG that the P-5 governments are exceedingly careful in vetting potential candidates, and have not yet ever been deeply disappointed by selecting a rogue SG, although once in office an individual may in some instances become somewhat more responsive to the oath of office than to the secondary wishes of his or her geopolitical masters. Such unresponsiveness, especially as it involved the United States, helps explain why Boutros Boutros-Ghali failed to obtain support for a customary second term in office back in 1996.

In practice, the selection process is ultra sensitive to this overriding need for a Secretary General to be someone that will be respectful of the geopolitical winds that blow at a given time in world politics regardless of the spirit and letter of the UN Charter. Appreciating this pattern makes it misleading to read the Charter as if it is intended to provide an authoritative framing designed to regulate the behavior of its 193 member states.

It should be accepted for better and worse what it is, a constitutional framework of the UN that privileged the winners of World War II, and at the time of its founding opted for a state-centric international body that subordinated international law and the equality of sovereign states to the inequalities associated with international hierarchies of hard and soft power. In effect, the Charter itself embodies this tension between its geopolitical operating logic, as reinforced by the lack of independent funding, and the idealistic mandate of its Preamble, Purposes, and Principles.

In effect, the tension can be understood as between the affirmation of juridical equality and the constitutional loophole ensuring geopolitical inequality. The UN was intended from the outset to be an Organization that enforced standards of accountability on the multiplicity of states to the best of its ability while deferring to the discretion of those deemed in 1945 to be most powerful, a status formalized by the vesting of this unrestricted right of veto in the P-5 bolstered by permanent membership in the Security Council.

The Charter is astonishingly silent about the qualifications that should guide the selection of a secretary general, but it is clear on the procedure: a recommendation must be made by the Security Council to the General Assembly for its approval. This means that the any one of the P-5 can use their veto to block a candidate. In this context, the veto has not been necessary as the P-5 have managed, even throughout the entire Cold War, to reach agreement on an acceptable candidate for SG by reliance on this method of secret backroom negotiations, which undoubtedly included much wrangling.

The first eight secretaries general emerged from these dark shadows of great power bargaining, but this process gave rise to an increasing cascade of complaints from non-P-5 governments and from interested civil society organizations. These players objected to the secrecy and non-transparency of the way in which the SG was chosen.

In an accommodating response, the next secretary general is to be selected by a more seemingly democratic procedure: government nominations of multiple candidates, vision statements by the candidates, and give and take dialogues with civil society representatives. [For a helpful overview of the reformed selection process see Arabella Lang, “Selecting a New Secretary General,” UK House of Commons Library, Briefing Paper No. 7544, 3 March 2015] But we should not be misled.

The decisive influence in the selection process remains the Security Council, and there the preferred candidate must still win the unanimous approval of the P-5. In the past, this has produced a race to the bottom, essentially a candidate that is not objectionable to any of these governments. As a result past SGs, with a few notable exceptions, have been ‘company men’ who have been careful not to use leverage of the position to shift the balance of world opinion on a geopolitically sensitive issues. What emerges over the year is that the SG is not expected to manifest a globalist orientation or engage in strong advocacy insisting on the universality of international law.

At the same time, the nature of the office requires that the occupant be held in reasonably high regard throughout the world and have a background of credible leadership such as to ensure confidence that the administrative and ceremonial demands of the position will be competently discharged. In other words, for the sake of the UN bureaucracy and for the morale of civil society, it has been accepted that a SG should be able to run the organization and grace ceremonial occasions with uplifting rhetoric.

These secondary, but still crucial concerns, may explain why several secretaries generals have proved to be more than geopolitical placeholders, most notably Dag Hammarskjöld (1953-1961), U Thant (1961-1971), Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1992-1996), and Kofi Annan (1997-2006). Surely, some SGs have been better than others at upholding the dignity and appearance of political independence attached to the position. Kurt Waldheim and Ban Ki-moon have been embarrassments to the Organization because of their failures to project the kind of public leadership that lifts spirits without damaging structures.

Against this background, even with the welcome reforms of greater public vetting, transparency, and multiple candidacies, the end result is still likely to be the selection of someone who, above all else, can be expected not to rock the geopolitical boat. Symbolically these reforms seem a step in the right direction, especially if a woman is finally chosen, although the seeming adherence to the principle of regional rotation, which means that the chosen one seems destined to be an East European.

This does not augur well for the Organization given the available pool of candidates from that region. If indeed it is to be a woman, then let it be Helen Clark of New Zealand (who has been nominated by her government) or Angela Merkel of Germany or Michelle Bachelet, the former president of Chile (these latter two seem qualified but are unlikely to be nominated, much less selected), each a proven and principled political leader, as well as being highly experienced in managing organizations.

Yet even, as seems unlikely, Clark, Merkel, or Bachelet were to be selected, the best we can hope for is a performance that is graceful and competent but that would be less than what the world needs and what the peoples of the planet deserve. The geopolitical obstacles remain firmly in place and too strong, and even if somehow circumvented, a SG who transcended the demands of geopolitics would likely run the UN into the ground in short order.

Such a pronouncement is sad. There is a severe leadership deficit at the global level, and it centers on the absence of mechanisms to uphold the human interest, as distinct from national andgeopolitical interests. This is why I must comfort myself bydreaming of rather than hoping that the selection of the next secretary general is a person, ideally a woman, that would think and act globally as representative of the species, and not to uphold the ways and means of the established order.

We have witnessed for decades the sorry spectacle of the failure of the UN to tackle the challenges posed by the development of nuclear weaponry or by the dangers associated with global warming. Instead of serving the human interest by achieving nuclear disarmament, the world has ended up with the protection of hierarchical arrangements as embodied in the regime of nuclear nonproliferation, which allows for the development, possession, and possible use of these weapons by the most dangerous countries in the world while enforcing double standards by precluding the acquisition of these weapons by weaker states even when threatened with an overwhelming attack by stronger neighbors.

With climate change, the search for a solution involved broadening the diplomatic format to include all 193 member states, but with an end result that what was agreed upon was essentially an aggregation of national interests as well as voluntary, with what was agreed upon falling far below what the scientific consensus has determined to be necessary for the health and wellbeing of future generations.

In more flagrant disregard of the Charter itself, and signifying Western as well as P-5 hegemony, has been the reluctance of the Organization or its principal officer ever to challenge the United States and its friends when in the face of flagrant disregard of the UN Charter provisions limiting the use of force to instances of self-defense against a prior armed attack (e.g. Vietnam, after 1965, Iraq, after 2003).

What the world urgently needs at the UN is an unshackled guardian of the global public good who articulates human interests as these arose in international life, and had the institutional capabilities to take effective action. At present, we depend on a religious leader such as Pope Francis to fill this normative vacuum, and occasionally political figures such as Gandhi, Franklin Roosevelt, Nelson Mandela, and Martin Luther King rise above their national identities to represent the human interest, but such figures lack any institutional capacity to carry their words into deeds. At present, we can only dream that such a figure would be selected as the next secretary general, but we should be aware that dreams often disclose deep aspirations and can offer necessary guidance, and thus should not be ignored.

The carnage around the world, as well as the massive migrations of desperate persons, underscores the growing need for a strong United Nations led by a person who above all is dedicated to the promotion of global and human interests, and has the will and mandate to disregard geopolitical pressures. Of course, this now a private pipedream that is politically irrelevant unless it becomes embodied in a global movement for peace, justice, ecological stewardship, and the survival of the species. We have experienced the integrative wonders of neoliberal globalization, with their attendant ravaging of human wellbeing and our natural surroundings.

We have also seen the dawn of moral globalization in the rise of international human rights and the call for a global rule of law, but as yet there is not visible on the horizon an organized political undertaking capable of bringing into history these faint gropings toward humane governance of planetary proportions. We still sit around expecting the next SG to continue arranging the deck chairs on a sinking vessel. I feel we are entitled to hope that the ninth UN SG will have the awareness and courage to upset these settled expectations of business as usual.

Posted in Politics, WorldComments Off on Dreaming of the Next UN Secretary General

Brexit would make UK safer


Brexit would make UK safer

Michael Gove last night set out urgent security and border improvements that could be made if Britain votes to quit the EU.

The Justice Secretary said that in the event of Brexit, the Prime Minister would have to enact new laws ‘instantly’ to stop the influence of ‘rogue’ European courts and allow the immediate deportation of terrorists.

But Mr Gove, who is the current favourite of the Tory grassroots to take over from David Cameron, said he wanted the Prime Minister to remain in Number Ten to make the country ‘safer’, and insisted he has no desire to have his job.

He told the Daily Telegraph: ‘I don’t want to do it and there are people who are far better equipped than me to do it.’

The immediate powers Mr Gove wants No10 to take include freeing intelligence agencies from European law, allowing foreign criminals and terrorists to be deported without hindrance and freeing the British Armed Forces from Brussels diktats.

No10 has insisted it will take years to negotiate a new deal with Brussels and extricate ourselves from the EU. But Mr Gove said that it should begin immediately with a series of interim emergency laws.

The leading Leave campaigner also warns that the NHS and schools will not be able to cope with the further influx of immigrants that will come to the UK if the country stays in the EU.

He said: ‘We’ve stressed throughout that the day after we vote to leave, nothing fundamental changes and we still have the same trading arrangements and we start a process of informal talks and negotiations with our European partners.

‘But there are some things that we can change relatively quickly. And one of the things we can do is that we can deal with the European Court of Justice, which has become a rogue court.’

Mr Gove claims that the ECJ is considering a judgment on Britain’s surveillance regime in an attempt to assert ‘legal control over what our intelligence agencies can and cannot do’. He said that under the new laws ‘life in this country would change because Britain would be safer’.

The referendum campaign is due to increase in temperature tomorrow when Mr Gove and Chancellor George Osborne give rival TV interviews.

Meanwhile a senior Bank of England official has claimed the safeguards Mr Cameron secured to protect Britain and the City of London from the eurozone are not as strong as claimed.

As part of his deal with Brussels to keep Britain in the EU, the PM insisted he won guarantees that the UK would not be required to fund euro bailouts or sign up to draconian banking regulations.

He claimed a mechanism was now in place so that Britain could ‘unilaterally’ complain directly to national leaders on the European Council to ensure the country is not discriminated against.

But a letter from Bank of England deputy governor Sir Jon Cunliffe to MPs suggests that the Government has overstated its case.

It will fuel fears that Britain could be clobbered by rules designed to prop up the single currency and the region’s basket-case banks if it votes to stay in the EU on June 23.

Posted in Europe, UKComments Off on Brexit would make UK safer

The Spirit Of Nelson Mandela In Palestine: Is His Real Legacy Being Upheld?


Image result for statue of nelson mandela IN PALESTINE

I had mixed feelings when I learned that Palestine has erected a statue of
Nelson Mandela, the iconic South African anti-Apartheid leader. On the one hand,
I was quite pleased that the unmistakable connection between the struggles of
Palestinians and South Africans is cemented more than ever before. On the other
hand, I dreaded that rich, corrupt Palestinians in Ramallah are utilizing the
image of Mandela to acquire badly-needed political capital.

The six-meter bronze statue now stands in its own Nelson
Mandela Square
in Al-Tireh neighborhood in Ramallah, where the Palestinian
Authority headquarters are based. The PA is known for its endemic political
and financial corruption
In some ways, its survival is both essential for
the richest Palestinian class and also for the Israeli military Occupation.

Thus, it was quite disheartening to witness the travesty of political theater
where the likes of PA President, Mahmoud Abbas, who rules with a long-expired mandate, unveiling the statue in a ceremony attended by his ministers and foreign diplomats.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, AfricaComments Off on The Spirit Of Nelson Mandela In Palestine: Is His Real Legacy Being Upheld?

Twitter Bans US Intelligence Access To Dataminr Analytics – Report


Twitter has banned the US intelligence agencies from using a service called Dataminr, which searches through real-time tweets to detect newsworthy events, including terror attacks and protests.

Dataminr reportedly said that Twitter doesn’t want the intelligence agencies to continue using the service for the fear of the “optics,”since it could be perceived as being too close to the intelligence arm of the government, according to a source cited by the The Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

The company told RT it had no comment on the WSJ report.

The US government has been using the Dataminr for about two years. Meanwhile, Dataminr’s contract with the US Department of Homeland Security worth $255,000 is still reportedly intact.

Twitter said in a statement that “data is largely public and the US government may review public accounts on its own, like any user could.”

According to the company’s policy, a third-party user of public tweets, such as Dataminr, cannot sell their product to the government for surveillance purposes.

Dataminr is very popular among new media and the financial industry because its software searches through millions of tweets and detects patters that would point to potentially vital events, such as attacks, protests, earthquakes, etc. To verify the information, it matches up tweets with market information and geographic data. RT is one of Dataminr’s clients.

Some of Dataminr biggest feats include spitting out an alert about the Paris terror attacks shortly after they began last November. Another significant find was reportedly telling clients about the Brussels attacks in March ten minutes before all media organizations started reporting on them.

The US intelligence community finds the tool very useful to track events in real-time and hopes that the Twitter decision will be reversed.

“If Twitter continues to sell this [data] to the private sector, but denies the government, that’s hypocritical,” John C. Inglis, a former deputy director of the National Security Agency (NSA), told the WSJ. “I think it’s a bad sign of a lack of appropriate cooperation between a private-sector organization and the government.”

Dataminr is the only firm authorized by Twitter to use its real-time stream of public tweets and sell the product to clients. Twitter actually has a 5 percent stake in the company.

Posted in USAComments Off on Twitter Bans US Intelligence Access To Dataminr Analytics – Report

(Anti-) Corruption Experts? Who’s Who At Cameron’s Post-Panama Papers Transparency Summit

Zionist David Cameron

Prime Minister David Cameron’s anti-corruption summit will bring together a bevy of political leaders, officials from the financial world and sports representatives of FIFA and UEFA. RT takes a closer look at exactly who’s coming.

Cameron has pledged to use Thursday’s summit in London, organized before the Panama Papers leaks, to clinch an agreement committing world leaders to tackling corruption and ensuring greater financial transparency.

As RT finds, many attendees have question marks hanging over their own records.

Muhammuda Buhari  

Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari, the self-described “people’s president,” will be among those in attendance. Since taking office last May, Buhari has embarked on a sweeping anti-corruption crusade. Critics, however, have slammed the campaign as politically motivated witch-hunt, accusing Buhari of using corruption as a pretext to weed out opposition politicians.

Despite having the highest paid public officials in the world and Africa’s biggest economy, oil-rich Nigeria is one of the largest beneficiaries of UK aid. Britain has committed to spending £860 million in foreign aid to the country.

The Mail Online reports that Buhari’s youngest daughter, 16-year-old Hanan, who attends a £26,000-a-year English school, was flown first-class from London to Nigeria in April in violation of Buhari’s own ban on premium travel for officials.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani 

Afghanistan’s President Ghani will also be among the politicians at the summit. Ghani took office in 2014 amid rampant allegations of fraud, pledging to eradicate corruption. The contested election was settled with a controversial power sharing agreement between Ghani and his rival Abdullah Abdullah, who assumed the newly created role of chief executive officer, similar to the position of prime minister.

Corruption across the country is widely believed to have worsened during his tenure. Transparency International (TI) downgraded Afghanistan to third from the bottom on in its corruption ranking in 2015.

The US, European Union and other foreign donors have all cited corruption as the greatest threat to rebuilding Afghanistan. Ghani announced last month the launch of a new anti-corruption body to coordinate work against graft throughout government agencies and push forward corruption cases which have stalled.

Christine Lagarde 

IMF managing director Christine Lagarde is scheduled to be a panelist at the conference. Lagarde is embroiled in a scandal of her own and will stand trial in France for failing to prevent a multimillion euro fraud when she was French finance minister in 2008. Lagarde was cleared in 2014 of any direct role in a €403 million settlement paid by the government to tycoon Bernard Tapie, but will now face charges of negligence for failing to block the payment.

PM David Cameron 

After coming under intense scrutiny in the wake of the Panama Papers when it emerged his late father Ian ran an offshore fund, British Prime Minister David Cameron admitted he too had owned shares in a Panama incorporated fund.

Between 1997 and 2010, he and his wife Samantha Cameron owned shares in Blairmore Investment Trust, a multimillion-pound offshore trust fund.

Read more



The summit is also expected to address the issue of corruption in sport with representatives from football governing bodies FIFA and UEFA due attend. Cameron’s anti-corruption adviser, Eric Pickles, told the Guardian last week that heads of the bodies will be expected to sign a joint statement pledging to take a stance against corruption in their organizations, committing them to fight bribery and gambling.

Since last spring, the global football governing body has been embroiled in a mass corruption scandal, resulting in the arrests and indictments of dozens of key executives and the putting an end to the career of FIFA President Sepp Blatter as well as UEFA President Michel Platini. A host of officials were indicted on charges of“rampant, systemic and deep-rooted corruption.”

Those not coming 

Notably, with just two days to go, Cameron has yet to persuade the leaders of offshore havens such as the British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands at the center of the Panama Papers leaks to send representatives to the summit. Downing Street says the UK government is in “discussions” with officials from overseas territories and UK crown dependencies about their attendance.

Cameron has faced criticism for failing to secure agreements from UK territories to establish publicly accessible registers of company owners in their jurisdictions.

The current deal ensures that only UK law enforcement and tax agencies have access to these registers, which will be held by the companies themselves.

Posted in UKComments Off on (Anti-) Corruption Experts? Who’s Who At Cameron’s Post-Panama Papers Transparency Summit

Once, Most Jews Viewed ‘Israel’ As The Anti-Semite’s Best Friend


It was an assessment no one expected from the deputy head of the Israeli military. In his Holocaust Day speech last week, Yair Golan compared current trends in Israel with Germany in the early 1930s, as Nazism took hold.

In today’s Israel, he said, could be recognised “the revolting processes that occurred in Europe … There is nothing easier than hating the stranger, nothing easier than to stir fears and intimidate.”

The furore over Golan’s remarks followed on the heels of a similar outcry in Britain at statements by former London mayor Ken Livingstone. He observed that Hitler had in practice been “supporting Zionism” in 1933 when the Nazis signed a transfer agreement, allowing some German Jews to emigrate to Palestine.

In their different ways both comments refer back to a heated argument among Jews that began a century or more ago about whether Zionism was a blessing or blight. Although largely overlooked today, the dispute throws much light on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Those differences came to a head in 1917 when the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, a document promising for the first time to realise the Zionist goal of a “national home” for the Jews in Palestine.

Only one minister, Edwin Montagu, dissented. Notably, he was the only Jew in the British cabinet. The two facts were not unconnected. In a memo, he warned that his government’s policy would be a “rallying ground for anti-Semites in every country”.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Once, Most Jews Viewed ‘Israel’ As The Anti-Semite’s Best Friend

Revival of the ‘Concert of Europe’ in Its Worst Form


Image result for Concert of Europe PHOTO

By Sajjad Shaukat

Renowned historians agree that in the post-Napoleonic era, the Treaty of Chaumont which was made in March 1814, by Great Britain, Russia, Prussia and Austria…even the Vienna Settlement (1815) and various conferences of the Concert of Europe (1815-22) were used for the purpose of suppressing nationalism and liberalism everywhere in Europe and restoring the status quo…sealed the triumph of reaction and restored the pre-revolutionary conditions” [of the French Revolution]…the same four Powers tried at the Congress of Vienna to effect a regeneration of the political system of Europe…the Powers devoted to the grand interests they had in common…it was in this way that the Concert of Europe was formed.”

Prince Metternich, the emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire did what he could by subjugating the alien peoples by employing every possible techniques of state terrorism. It was due to his influence that the principle of intervention in the internal affairs of other states was accepted in 1820 by the Congress of Troppau which gave the European powers, the right to interfere in the internal affairs of those states where revolutions took place. The Protocol enabled Metternich to police the whole of Europe and crush liberalism and nationalism wherever it raised its head.

When revolutions had broken out in Naples, Spain and Portugal and the people had forced their kings to give them liberal constitutions, it was in pursuance of this policy that Austria was able to crush the revolts in Naples and Piedmont. France also interfered in Spain.

Under the cover of the welfare of the world, the European powers also called upon the King of Sweden to explain why he had ignored the treaty rights with regard to Norway and Denmark.

The ruler of Monaco was ordered to improve the administrative system of his country. The principle of intervention in the internal affairs of the states divided the European powers into two camps. In 1822, despite the opposition of the Great Britain, France intervened in Spain and the former withdrew from the Congress of Vienna. The era of Congresses collapsed with the withdrawal of Great Britain.

In fact, Metternich stood for the maintenance of the status quo in Europe, and an international alliance of the like-minded rulers. He followed a reactionary policy in Austria-Hungary. He did all that he could to crush liberalism and nationalism within the country. In this regard, Carlsbad Decrees were enacted in 1819 to curb secret societies or revolutionary activities. He set himself to suppress the nationalist and democratic movements of Germany and Italy, and to counter the aspirations of the people of the Balkans for independence through military terrorism.

According to Indian historian, V. D. Mahajin, “Terrorism at that stage initially appeared as the mode of activity of the small conspiratorial groups, such as student bodies and secret societies, which grew up throughout Europe in the aftermath of the post-Napoleonic restoration. These early days were exciting, since Europe still abounded (as indeed it did until 1918) with kings, emperors and tsars to be eliminated because they were using the machinery of state terrorism in suppressing the genuine aspirations of peoples such as liberty, freedom and justice…the French Revolution of 1789 stood for certain principles and those were Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

The example of France became the inspiration of Europe and from there of the whole world. Her ideas dominated the European politics throughout the 19th century…Metternich was the enemy of the French Revolution and all that it stood for. He described it as “the disease which must be cured, the volcano which must be extinguished…Metternich had to admit that he was fighting for a lost cause, and the empire disintegrated, resulting in the independence of Italy, unification of Germany, Bulgaria and other states whose secret societies had been waging wars of In the words of Hayes, “in spite of the efforts of Metternich the old regime was doomed and could not be saved.”

This is of particular attention that with the elimination of the Cold War and the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, the US and European thinkers evolved a new concept of balance of power to justify their interest in the aftermath of the changed circumstances in the world’s changed arena. In their writings, they paid a serious consideration on the system of collective security, maintained by the major powers of the Concert of Europe.

In this connection, George W. Downs remarked in relation to ‘The Pew Project’ which supported the research for the case of collective security in the aftermath of the Cold War, “The timing of the project is a function of both real-world events and theoretical developments…inspiration is also due to the strategic behaviour in environments where the enforceability of agreements by a central agent is absent” and “where individuals are motivated by self-interest…although the emphasis of this approach on actors, motivated by self-interest makes it natural extension of classic realism…its achievements lie largely in explaining the conditions under which self-interested agents…be they individuals, companies, or nation-states will cooperate.”

Stephen M. Walt, Michael W. Doyle and Charles Lipson favoured a system of collective security among the big powers of the West and America like the Concert of Europe of the past with a view to stopping any hostile revolution in the world. They opined, “Believing that balances of power often fail to form…balance-of-threat theory as a refinement of balance-of-power theory.

States respond to imbalances of power in balance-of-power theory, and balancing and bandwagoning are defined in terms of power…the success of the Vienna Congress suggests that great powers can forge durable cooperation and provide a significant measure of collective security for themselves…the New World Order we are now entering is a new rendition of the classical balance of power…international accommodation among liberal states, together with opposition to non-liberal states…rather than the opposition of power to power…interaction under anarchy…this is because for liberals, threats are defined in institutional political terms (liberals versus non-liberals) rather than in power terms (capabilities versus capabilities). Liberal states therefore balance against the political threats that non-liberal states seem to pose.”

Even, Henry Kissinger offered an eloquent portrait of a more developed strategic model with the statesman as the architect of the balance of power. According to Kissinger, “Stability is a product of legitimacy and legitimacy is not natural or automatic, but created…the international order is not also up for dispute…Europe rescued stability from seeming chaos [at the close of the Napoleonic Wars] was primarily the result of the work of two great men: of Castlereagh, the British Foreign Secretary, who negotiated the international settlement, and of Austria’s Foreign Minister, Metternich, who legitimized it. Great statesmen succeed in creating international orders within the balance of power by reconciling what their societies regard as just with what the resources of their nation and its allies make feasible.

Metternich sought to create a conservative order that forestalled revolutionary change; Castlereagh, to create an international order that contained aggressive change…the Congress of Vienna reflected the success of those two projects…Metternich established a concert system that would intervene against revolutionary These political scholars strongly favoured the system of collective security which could be formed by the United States and its Western, especially European partners in meeting any world threat collectively.

They proposed a definition based on the commitment of a group of states to maintain a security norm within them which is consistent with the realist theory of balance of It should be kept in mind that in the aftermath of the Cold War, particularly America and its other Western allies had declared the so-called Islamic fundamentalism its new threat and enemy which was used by them against the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda which was created by the CIA was funded and armed by America and Saudi Arabia.

However, both American and some Western prominent political scholars had started equating that new threat of the so-called Islamic fundamentalism with terrorism, also emanating from the non-liberal, uncivilized and failed states. As the Soviet threat was over, the new balance-of-power theorists had given one more shape and a new meaning to the balance of power—the liberal versus non-liberal states which means US-led Western world versus Islamic fundamentalism or terrorism.

These thinkers justified the Concert of Europe, formed under the leadership of Metternich who had united the conservative powers against revolutions.

Nevertheless, their theory is quite opposite to the real definition of balance of power. In this context, famous scholars of international relations, Lord Castlereagh, Quincy Wright, Hans J. Morgenthau and Kenneth Waltz agree by remarking, “Checking the unusual dominance and hegemony of the world by a single power is very essential for the survival of other states which live in anarchic situation where there is no international agency to impose international law and to provide security…the concept of balance of power rests with the basic assumption that excessive power in the system is a threat to the existence of other units and that the most antidote After the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, power-vacuum was created in the world.

Waltz and other thinkers expected “unipolarity to give way quickly to multipolarity as other major powers of Europe and Asia would move individually and collectively to balance the preponderant power of the United States.”

Unfortunately, other major nuclear powers or any prospective alliance did not challenge America’s hegemony in accordance with the system of balance of power. In that backdrop, the US emerged as the sole superpower in the unipolar world. In consultation with his Zionist-advisers, American former President Bush, (The Senior) replaced the old bipolar order with the New World Order, with the US acting as a kind of global policeman to protect the political and economic interests of Israel and the American Jews who are owners of many big cartels—multinational corporations, oil companies, banks etc., including print and electronic media of the US in particular and the world in general. Thus, by dominating American internal policies, Zionist Jews mould country’s foreign policy for their own interests, devoted to Israel.

It is noteworthy that neo-colonialism is the most dangerous form of colonialism, which is prevalent in the present world. In the past, the most developed countries had direct control on the less developed countries, but most of the colonies got independence after the World War 11. As regards neo-colonialism, in theory a less developed or developing country is free, but in practice, its government and economy are controlled by a developed country indirectly.

In the unipolar world, even the United Nations became an instrument of the US policy to establish American hegemony in the world. The Third World and a majority of Muslim countries were compelled to realign their domestic policies according to Washington’s dictates. In order to obtain the hidden agenda of Jews, the US imposed its sudden terms of globalization such as free markets, privatization and de-nationalization etc. on the ill-prepared developing countries, which left behind shattered nations and a global financial crisis. It further widened the gap between the poor and the rich countries or G-7 countries. The corporations and international financial institutions like IMF and World Bank which are indirectly controlled by Zionist Jews have continued to drive the project of globalization through the sole superpower.

This is mentionable that the New World Order, decreed after the fall of the Soviet Union, lays down that no social change is permissible outside the logic of capitalism, which in the case of periphery, can only be dependent capitalism. This policy is enforced through financial and trade means, and in case of failing, force is applied either by the pro-US government or directly by the sole superpower. Attempts at changing the social relations through force, as in Venezuela, Colombia, Nicaragua, EI Salvador, Guatemala etc., were of course crushed as illegitimate.

After 9/11, like the Concert of Europe, almost all the major Western countries including NATO states also joined the global war on terror.

Besides, in the name of war on terror, the US and NATO attacked Afghanistan and then without mandate of the UN Security Council, American-Anglo forces invaded Iraq. In both cases, the US-led countries justified their invasions under the mask of right of self-defence and Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMDs). However, the main aim of these major countries was to occupy the energy resources of Central Asia and Iraq.

In this context, about the double game, Hans J. Morgenthau, and Palmer and Perkins opine, “Just as power became the instrument of ambitious nationalism and state’s leaders, it has now become the tool of ideologies. The true nature of the policy is concealed by ideological justifications and rationalization. Therefore, the ideology provides a mask behind which the ulterior motives are Like Metternich, US-led forces also employed state terrorism by special military operations, extra-judicial assassinations and heavy aerial bombardment, which killed several innocent persons especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. And suspected Muslims were also kept in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Graib and other cells, established in some Islamic countries and small European states where personnel of the CIA, the FBI, and the military employed various methods of torture like physical violence and even murder.

In order to fulfill the unfinished agenda of the US President George W. Bush, in the name of war on terror, President Barack Obama continued the same policies in their worst form to secure the illegitimate interests of Israel. Obama-led Administration went on with various techniques of ruthless terror and extrajudicial killings of the innocent persons through illegitimate drone attacks—assisting undemocratic forces, toppling the elected government in Egypt, and like Iraq, creation of more collapsed states such as Libya, Yemen and Syria which opened the doors for Al-Qaeda and ISIS which were already being supported by the CIA and Israeli Mossad.

While, Islamic movements everywhere had been equated with terrorism since September 11, but, like the Concert of Europe, India and Israel who jumped Bush’s anti-terrorism bandwagon were given green signal by Washington to crush wars of liberation in the Indian-held Kashmir and Israeli-occupied territories of the Palestinians. The death squads and security forces of these alien powers used every brutal tactic to suppress the genuine rights of self-determination—the very basis of the unification of Germany and Italy, including other European states which got Notably, in 2008, a rights group reported unmarked graves in the Indian-controlled Kashmir.

In its report, China’s leading News Agency Xinhua unearthed more unmarked graves in Poonch of the Indian-occupied Kashmir. The report quoted the statement of Sofi Aziz Joo, caretaker of a graveyard as saying, “Police and Army used to bring those bodies and direct me to bury them.

The bodies were usually bullet-ridden, mutilated, faces disfigured and sometimes without limbs and heads.” In this respect, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) officially acknowledged in its report that 2,156 unidentified bodies of the innocent civilians killed in the two-decade conflict had been buried in unmarked graves in various regions of the Indian-held Kashmir.

Similarly, since its creation and during various phases of the Palestinian Intifada, Israeli forces used chemical and radiological materials against the unarmed Palestinians and thus killed several innocent people, including women and children. Undoubtedly, if the double game of President Bush franchised Al-Qaeda on global level, President Obama’s dual policy franchised both Al-Qaeda and ISIS as part of the anti-Muslim campaign and left no stone unturned in advancing the agenda of the Zionists, Israeli lobbies and the neoconservatives in the pretext of global war on terror.

Secretly, Obama authorized CIA to create ISIS. His perennial covert support to the Israeli atrocities on the Palestinians, silence over the supply of oil by ISIS to some European countries whose governments have also not taken action against those companies which are exporting oil from the ISIS-controlled regions of Iraq, including CIA-assisted Al-Qaeda (Al-Nusra Front) and ISIS militants to topple the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime might be cited as instance. Thus, under the cover of democratization of the Middle East, the region was deliberately thrown in worst form of terrorism and civil wars.

In the phenomena of the post-terror attacks in Paris and Belgium and under the cover of countering Russia, American President Obama sent additional troops in Syria, and its Western partners (NATO) are also supporting the US in this respect. The above mentioned drastic developments and various other developments such as American support to Kurds, exaggeration of the threat of the so-called threat of Islamophobia in the West-especially Europe, persecution of the Muslims in the continent, implications of the migrant-crisis, controversial Turkish-EU refugee deal, forced returns of refugees by the Turkish authorities to war-ravaged Syria, protests and violence at the Greek border against the refugees can simply remind readers of the revival of the Concert of Europe in its worst form.

Emulating Metternich, at present, the US has been siding with the reactionary regimes in the developing world, especially in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and United Arab Emirates to maintaining status quo. The chief aim of the US-led West is to encourage every effort in maintaining the status quo in the world, as it secures their collective interests at the expense of the weak states. By blindly following their anti-Russia rhetoric, now, the US and its Western friends have totally ignored the dangers of their flawed strategy. Even, they do not bother for violation of the sovereignty of an independent state, as noted in case of Syria.

So the current situation resembles with past era of Metternich and such events as the Concert of Europe, rise of revolutionary movements etc. It should be emphasized that while US foreign policy has shifted from multilateralism to unilateralism, non-recognition of a world beyond the borders of North America and Europe to a growing sense that the developing world is complex, the pregnant powers in the United States like Zionist Jews are not, emphatically, ready to revise the current world order, in which wealthy nations dominate the world economy to the detriment of most of the citizens of the globe.

There is no likelihood, either in political Washington or in the corporate boardrooms of America, that the US will play a role in changing the inequitable distribution of wealth or income. Yet without real change in the distribution of wealth, the developing world will never be able to achieve its social goals; without significant change in the distribution of income, billions will continue to endure poverty, preventable illness and lowered expectations. Whatever the specific causes of terrorism, its breeding grounds are that malignant mixture of despair and rage which is a concomitant of living in dire poverty in a world where material wealth abounds, but is not shared.

Without paying attention on the actual causes of new brand of terrorism, counter-terrorism becomes the overriding theme of the US-led West like Metternich. Particularly, British Prime Minister David Cameron who is famous due to his anti-Muslim approach and has left no stone unturned in supporting America against Russia and Syrian President Assad, while covertly following the US-led Israeli policies must know that the era of Congresses (The Concert of Europe) had collapsed with the withdrawal of Great Britain which had opposed the interference in the internal affairs of states.

Perhaps, in pursuance of the past era of Metternich in wake of the modern world of social media and international trends like renunciation of war, peaceful settlement of disputes and economic development, US and its allies have forgotten that they produce ‘surplus’ which is being exported to the Third World, especially the Islamic countries. Latest machines produce products quickly and rapid means of communication and correspondence through internet or email have accelerated the business transactions. In the present world, terrorism is being manipulated by the Zionist Jews—the indirect arbiters of the global politics and economy.

Hence, if the revival of the Concert of Europe continued by the US-led West in its worst form, it would bring about further political and economic instability in the world by jeopardizing global and regional interests of these Western powers in wake of increasing threat of terrorism. And their irresponsible approach could result in to Clash of Civilizations in the sense of Huntington.


Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants,
Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations
Courtesy Veterans Today

Posted in EuropeComments Off on Revival of the ‘Concert of Europe’ in Its Worst Form


sy hersh israel

by Jonathan Azaziah

Seymour Hersh is a sneaky, sneaky Zionist subversive. During the early stages of the hegemonic powers’ criminal invasion of Iraq when the Abu Ghraib scandal arose, Hersh wrote a couple of critically-acclaimed pieces in the New Yorker–a Zionist rag if there ever was one–supposedly “documenting” how all the torture was the fault of two men, the war criminals Donald Rumsfeld and Stephen Cambone. What Hersh deliberately failed to mention however, firstly, was that Rumsfeld himself was nothing but the mere front man for Cerberus Global Investments, an immensely powerful holdings firm run by the Jewish supremacist billionaires Michael Steinhardt and Stephen Feinberg, and Cambone was just the literal underling of ultra-Zionist Douglas Feith. And secondly, Hersh COMPLETELY left off the fact that the barbaric, utterly satanic torture tactics used on Iraqis in that hellhole were in fact ‘Israeli’, taught to the American occupation military by IOF, Shin Bet, Mossad and Aman “experts” (read: torturers of Lebanese and Palestinians) brought in by the Jewish neocons Paul Wolfowitz, the aforementioned Feith, Richard “Prince of Darkness” Perle, William Schneider, Abram Shulsky (who ran the OSP) and others.

Hersh was absolutely destroyed for this abominable cover-up by the ever-brilliant, always-militant Professor James Petras in the fourth chapter (entitled Exposing the Exposé: Seymour Hersh and the Missing Zionist ‘Israeli’ Connection) of his must-read book “The Power of ‘Israel’ in the United States”. And more destruction is necessary, because Hersh has never, EVER covered the abyssal Jewish-Zionist-‘Israeli’ role in the butchering and attempted dismemberment of Iraq, from the economic warfare carried out by Maurice Greenberg-owned Marsh & McLennan Companies/AIG shabbos goy Paul Bremer and his Judaic handlers Dan Senor and Michael Fleischer, to the 100 some odd Mossad-linked firms gobbling up Arab-Islamic lands in Iraq’s Kurdish-controlled northern regions (his “Plan B” piece simply dealt with ‘Israeli’ training of Kurdish commandos, a known fact reported by numerous US and British outlets), to the greatest and least-discussed crime of the entire war on Iraq, the Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG), an agency created by the Zionist-run Defense Science Board to literally unleash ethno-communal false flag terrorism across Iraqi society, and even more. Hersh, in clear protection of his coreligionists, spoke of none of these matters even though they were all well within his sphere of research and investigation. Petras summed it up fiercely and beautifully, “Hersh attempted to head off the anti-Zionist headhunting coalition by focusing on the two Goyim.”

In April 2014, several months after the chemical weapons false flag attack in Eastern Ghouta, Hersh wrote a massive article called “The Red Line and The Rat Line” for the London Review of Books laying all the blame for the atrocity on the Neo-Ottoman madmen in Ankara. He did not mention the Zionist entity ONCE! NOT EVEN ONCE! And this is despite the fact that it was reported immediately after the chems were fired by several mainstream outlets that it was in fact the ‘Israeli’ entity which provided the intelligence to the Obama regime about “Assad forces” being the guilty party right off the rip. AIPAC subsequently led the charge for a “regime change” war, openly declaring that Washington needed to act as a means of sending a strong message to Hizbullah and Iran, the usurping Jewish entity’s greatest adversaries.

Did Turkey play an operational role in the event? Undoubtedly. But if Hersh was being honest, he would’ve written about the Jewish-Zionist ‘Clean Break’ document, which discussed ‘Israel’ working with the Turkish regime (and Jordan) to “roll back” Syria. Also, if Hersh was being genuine, he would’ve written about the historical precedent of ‘Israel’ lying to America to trigger and/or expand wars for Zionist interests, i.e. Operation Susannah (the Lavon Affair), the USS Liberty attack, the Sabra and Shatilah massacre, Operation Trojan (which led to the bombing of Libya in April ‘86) and yes, the mother and father of them all, 9/11 and Iraq’s WMDs. But Hersh, his (borderline euphorically hysterical) praise in the alternative press aside, isn’t a person of truthfulness but seditiousness who goes out of his way to deflect attention off the Zionist enemy. Indeed, a December 2015 piece of Hersh’s entitled “Military To Military” laughably asserts that ‘Israel’ is indirectly providing the Syrian Arab Army with intelligence to kill Takfiri terrorists, the very same Takfiri terrorists that ‘Israel’ is backing on all levels to… well… you know… fight the Syrian Arab Army and overthrow Syrian President Dr. Bashar al-Assad! Ridiculous isn’t even the word. The propaganda services Hersh provides for the artificial Jewish entity are seemingly boundless!

And now, as if the egregious obfuscations on Iraq and Syria weren’t bad enough, in the wake of the ongoing Western-Zionist media hasbara tsunami about Al-Saud’s role in 9/11, Hersh, ever the opportunist, jumps on the bandwagon in an interview with Alternet to spin a tremendously Talmudic yarn about the Wahhabi despots in Riyadh bribing Pakistan not to tell America where Bin Laden was… when the reality is… Bin Laden died 15 damn years ago in late December 2001 and it was reported by Pakistani, Egyptian, Iranian and even American media (Fox News)! The shitshow that Obama put on in May 2011, complete with the utterly farcical “proper Islamic burial” at sea, was just that, a shitshow, scraped out of the bowels of Zionist Hollywood to give the American ZOG a “win” in its continuing illegal intervention in the Arab-Islamic world. Here’s the grand slam though. Later on in the interview, Hersh remarkably declares, “My guess is, we don’t know anything really about 9/11. We just don’t know. We don’t know what role was played by whom.” No, Mr. Hersh. You’re wrong. Dead wrong. We know EXACTLY who carried out the heinous, ritualistic massacre on September 11th, 2001: ‘ISRAEL’, through an intricate criminal network of Zionist agents, regardless of counter-culture “Jewish savior” types like you refusing to touch the subject and doing all you can to avoid it like the plague.

Is the pattern of protecting Zionism not blatantly clear here? And keeping up with this pattern, I recall Seymour Hersh famously saying that the assassination of the 35th American President, John F. Kennedy, was a form of justice. At the time, Hersh cited JFK’s cruel, imperialistic policies towards Cuba as the reason behind his shocking comment. But considering all of the above, maybe, just maybe, it wasn’t the crimes against the revolutionary government in Havana that motivated Hersh’s point of view at all but rather JFK’s quiet war with David Ben-Gurion over the Zionist entity’s monstrously dangerous, utterly felonious nuclear program. This quiet war ultimately led to JFK’s killing at the hands of Mossad, a revelation that is documented in full by the late, great Michael Collins Piper in his masterpiece work “Final Judgment”. Hersh, in passing, touched on the conflict between Kennedy and Ben-Gurion in his own book, “The Samson Option”, but failed to push the envelope on just how bitter, explosive and devastating this spat was. Nor would he ever dare go to the lengths Piper went to. And it’s not because he can’t, but because he won’t due to his closeted attachment to the usurping Jewish entity.

In the final analysis, it is imperative to note that Zionist subversives like Hersh are the ones who do the most damage to our cause and our discourse. Even Hersh’s widely quoted piece “The Redirection”, which speaks of US-Saudi-‘Israeli’ backing of Takfiris to break the Resistance Axis, renders the ‘Israelis’ to a background role, basically just one more cog in the ‘imperial’ machine, when the training of gangster-like proxies and fueling ethno-communal terror to balkanize our region is Zionist in origin going back to Oded Yinon’s 1982 plan on paper and the relationship with the Kurdish Barzani family since the 1950s in praxis. Besides, why do we need an Ashkenazi Jew to tell us what Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei and leaders of the Iraqi Mouqawamah had been telling us for months and years prior to the release of Hersh’s piece?

Such persons infiltrate our ranks directly in the role of “activists” or indirectly by becoming hero-worshiped as “investigative journalists” and may drop a nugget here or a nugget there from time to time as a way of gaining our trust and getting us to hang on their every word. But when it comes down to what really matters, i.e. exposing ‘Israel’ as the hegemon which wants to crush all forms of Resistance and which is behind every single drop of chaos from the Nile to Euphrates and beyond, not to mention its global machinations and intrigues as well, these interlopers don’t just run away but attempt to convince us we’re being delusional, off-base, unread or “anti-Semitic”. Seymour Hersh is a sneaky, sneaky Zionist subversive and shilling for ‘Israel’ on the issues of Syria, Iraq, 9/11 and the JFK murder is what he does best. Time to stop treating him like our friend and our ally… ‘Cause he damn sure ain’t.


India: CPI(ML) and AICCTU May Day Events


Image result for MAY DAY IN INDIA PHOTOS

May Day saw gatherings all over India protesting the attacks on workers’ rights and the open and covert erosion of labour laws by the Modi Government.

In Delhi, workers and students charged with ‘sedition’ showed solidarity with each other. Jawaharlal Nehru University students have been punished by the University authorities for hosting or supporting a poetry reading event against atrocities in Kashmir. On May Day, contractual workers of the University, including sanitation and mess staff, who are part of the AICCTU-affiliated All Indian General Kamgar Union marched with students on the campus to the spot where 19 students are on hunger fast against the vindictive punishments. Comrades Urmila and Anju, who are leaders of the Union, reminded people that it was united student and worker protests that forced contractors and the University to implement minimum wage laws, maternity entitlements, provide gloves and masks, and so on. N 2007, students protesting for these workers’ rights had been rusticated by the University. They said the Government and University was branding those students as ‘anti-national’, who had stood up for the rights of workers and all oppressed people. The protest was also addressed by JNUSU GS Rama Naga and other hunger striking students, JNUSU VP Shehla Rashid and CPIML Politburo member Kavita Krishnan. In the evening, as a token of their love and solidarity, the workers also presented ‘PRICOL Solidarity’ postcards (supporting the workers of the Pricol factory of Coimbatore who have been unjustly convicted) to the hunger striking students.

In the evening, a massive march by all trade unions was held in Delhi, from Ramlila Grounds to the Town Hall, calling for a campaign to make the All India Workers’ Strike of September 2 a success.

AICCTU and Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha jointly organized a rally and meeting on the occasion of May Day at Rasmarha Industrial area in Durg district, which was addressed by Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha leaders Bhimrao Bagde and Janaklal Thakur, AICCTU leaders Brijendra Tiwari, Ashok Miri, and others. The speakers condemned the anti-worker policies of the Raman Singh government.

At 5 PM a joint trade union meeting was held at Ambedkar Chowk, Power House, Bhilai, attended by AITUC, AICCTU, HMS, CMM, and AIUTUC. A workers’ meeting was held at the stone quarry in Mura, Raipur. A meeting of AICCTU activists was held at Korba which was addressed by BL Netam and others. CMM organized a meeting at Kota, Bilaspur.

In Punjab May Day rallies were organised in Barnala and Gurdaspur in which several hundreds of workers participated.

In Hyderabad, the May Day was celebrated by holding a programme with building construction workers in the city.

May Day programmes were also held in Guwahati, Nagaon and Tinsukia. In Chennai and Ambattur of Tamil Nadu, workers from OLG, Innovator, Jay Engineering, Standard Chemicals, Mercury Fittings and TI Diamond Chain assembled in front of their respective factory gates in the morning and hoisted red flags. In the evening, a Public meeting was organized in Ambattur Industrial estate, thronged by workers belonging to both organized and unorganized sectors. The meeting was addressed by Comrade Kumarasamy, All India President of AICCTU and the MLA candidate for the Ambattur constituency, Com. Palanivel, a worker in TI Diamond Chain factory. In Coimbatore red flags were hoisted at Pricol plant 1, plant 3, Suba Plastics and Shanthi Gears factories. Mass meeting here were addressed by AICCTU, Pricol Union and CPIML leaders as well as Comrades Velmurugan and Natraj, MLA candidates of Goudampalayam and Mettupalayam constituencies. After the meeting, 200 workers joined the election campaign for these candidates. In Tiruvellore, Namakkal and several other districts also, after the hoisting of the flag, the workers left to campaign for CPIML candidates in the Assembly elections. In Tirunelveli, a motorbike rally marched through main streets of the town and culminated at Metal Factory at Industrial Estate.

In Puducherry also May Day was observed with much enthusiasm in midst of election campaign.

AITUC, AICCTU and CITU observed May Day together in Bhubaneshwar.

In Jharkhand, the Labour Ministry in Ranchi to snatch May Day from the workers. The Ministry tried to lure the workers by presenting them with shoes and caps and trying to convince them that the unions were no longer needed as they governments were taking care of them. The workers rebuffed these attempts and independently observed May Day in protest against the rampant violations of labour laws by State and Central Governments.

Colliery workers under the banner of the CMWU observed May Day in several areas of Dhanbad District. CMWU held a ‘May Day Week’ with week-long gatherings and protest events in the district. Colliery workers also held events in the Ara and Topar Collieries in the Kujju area. In Bokaro, the AICCTU organised a gathering of construction workers. In the evening, AICCTU together with CITU and UTUC held a May Day mass meeting. A march was held in Bermo and a mass meeting at Chandankyari. AICCTU, CITU and AITUC held a mass meeting together at Giddisi in Ramgarh district, announcing their intention to hold a May Day Week with week-long events. Workers at the Steel Plant in Hesla also held a mass meeting.

Workers of the Banjhedih Thermal Plant in Koderma District held a meeting at the Plant gate. Workers held meetings at Gumla and Palkot in Gumla district. Mid Day Meal workers in Garhwa District held a May Day mass meeting together with the Karmchari Mahasangh employees association. The Akaal Virodhi Manch (Platform Against Drought) comprising CPIML, All India People’s Forum, Jharkhand Jan Sangharsh Morcha, the Daily Wagers Union and other groups held a May Day street corner meeting. Workers marched on May Day in Kundhit block, Jamtada district. The Construction Workers’ Union held a March in Ranchi.

The Mid Day Meal Workers Union – Rasoiya Sangh held meetings all over Ranchi, Palamu and Hazaribagh districts.

– See more at:

Posted in IndiaComments Off on India: CPI(ML) and AICCTU May Day Events

Shoah’s pages