By Stephen Bell
On the 14 September, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) published its report, 'Libya: Examination of intervention and collapse and the UK’s future policy options'. Published immediately after David Cameron’s retirement from Parliament, the reception given to the report concentrated on his culpability for the political and economic collapse in Libya. But this convenient response ignored how deeply compromised the British government’s intervention actually is. That policy continues to evade parliamentary control; involves fighting on both sides of a civil war, and adds to the chaos facing the people of Libya.
The following article by Stephen Bell, on British policy on Yemen, was previously published by Stop the war coalition.
For some time now international pressure has been building up against the Saudi led war upon Yemen. In February this year, the European Parliament voted for an EU wide arms embargo on Saudi Arabia. Recently, 64 members of the US Congress, from both Democrats and Republicans, called upon President Obama to “postpone sales of new arms” to Saudi Arabia.
On 20 and 21 August the 'International Conference in support of the people in Yemen' was held in London. 23 countries were represented at the conference, the aim of which was to highlight the Saudi led war, and to promote action to bring the war to an end.
The defeat of the attempted coup in Turkey is an important victory. The overthrow of the elected President Morsi in Egypt demonstrates the sort of fatalities and repression that follow such actions. This time, a mass mobilisation of the Turkish people opposed the tanks. This mobilisation was supported by the major opposition parties, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), and the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP). In Egypt, the comparable parties supported the coup, and guaranteed the success of the counter-revolution. For Turkey, the united front of all those defending democracy was sufficient to stop the coup.
On 12 July, the Arbitration Court at The Hague handed down judgment on the case brought under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by the Philippines against China. In a pre-arranged declaration, the Court ruled comprehensively against China’s claims in the South China Sea.
Progressive people are being asked to endorse the statement below supporting democracy in Brazil.
Economic targets for China were announced during the National People’s Congress of at least 6.5% annual GDP growth during the 13th Five Year Plan in 2016-20 and 6.5%-7.0% for 2016. Some Western economists claim such targets cannot be achieved. In fact, analysis of supply side factors, which will primarily be relied on to achieve these goals, shows clearly why China can achieve its 6.5% minimum growth goal.
The following article by John Ross, setting out why the Chinese economy will not have a hard landing, was previously published by Socialist Economic Bulletin.
Some US hedge funds, echoed by parts of the international media, are currently trotting out the perennially inaccurate myth that China's economy is about to suffer a "hard landing." This invariably incorrect prediction has been periodically repeated for decades since China launched economic reforms in 1978. The claim then was that by failing to privatize companies, not adopting what became known as "shock therapy" in Russia and Eastern Europe, China condemned itself to stagnation. Instead in 1978-2015, China experienced average annual 9.6 percent GDP growth - the fastest by a major economy in human history.
On February 25th, the European Parliament approved an EU wide arms embargo against Saudi Arabia until alleged breaches of international humanitarian law in Yemen have been fully investigated.
The article below by Ian Richardson, reviews the book A World to Build: New Paths toward Twenty-First Century Socialism by Marta Harnecker, and was originally published by Counterfire.
Enter your email address:
Delivered by FeedBurner