Democracy Now! Daily Digest: A Daily Independent Global News Hour with Amy Goodman & Juan González for Friday, March 27, 2015
Stories:
As tens of thousands gather for the World Social Forum in Tunis, Tunisia, we speak to one of the most prominent radical thinkers in Africa — the Egyptian-born economist Samir Amin. He is considered one of Africa’s leading political economists and was one of the pioneers of describing modern human history from the perspective of the Third World, arguing that the countries of the South were not latecomers to capitalism, but were integrated into the global economy from the start in a position of dependency to the rich, industrialized North. He is presently director of the Third World Forum in Dakar, Senegal — considered a precursor to the World Social Forum — and since 1997, has been the chair of the World Forum for Alternatives. Amin has written thousands of journal articles and opinion pieces as well as more than 30 books — with titles such as "Imperialism and Unequal Development," "Global History: A View from the South" and "The Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World." The historian Ama Biney says Amin is "an intellectual titan in the canon of African radical thought."
Image Credit: flickr.com/skilllab
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We go now to Tunisia, where gunmen killed 23 people at the Bardo museum in Tunis last week. On Sunday, the Tunisian government is organizing a major march against terrorism. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of activists gathered in the city this week for the World Social Forum. On Tuesday, participants from more than 120 countries opened the forum with a March to the Bardo steps. More than 4,000 groups are attending the forum, which brings together social movements from around the world to discuss grassroots struggles for political change.
We’re joined by now one participant, the leading African writer, activist and dissident, Samir Amin. He is considered one of Africa’s leading political economists and was one of the pioneers of global history from the perspective of the Third World, arguing that the countries of the South were not latecomers to capitalism, but were integrated into the global economy from the start, in a position of dependency to the rich, industrialized North. He is presently director of the Third World Forum in Dakar, Senegal, considered a precursor to the World Social Forum, and since 1997 has been the chair of the World Forum for Alternatives.
AMY GOODMAN: Samir Amin was born in Cairo, Egypt, in the 1930s. He earned a Ph.D. in political economy in Paris in '57. He worked in Gamal Abdel Nasser's administration after returning to Egypt later that year, was subsequently director of the African Institute for Economic Development and Planning. He’s chair of the Center for Arab and [African Studies], which is an independent center of research and debates in Cairo, and remains active in political life in Egypt.
He has written thousands of journal articles and opinion pieces, as well as over 30 books, with such titles as Imperialism and Unequal Development, Global History: A View from the South and The Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World. The scholar Horace Campbell calls Samir Amin, quote, "one of the foremost theoreticians of Marxism in the 20th century." And the historian Ama Biney says Samir Amin is, quote, "an intellectual titan in the canon of African radical thought."
Samir Amin, welcome to Democracy Now! As you join us from Tunis, Tunisia, from the World Social Forum, can you share these thoughts? The World Social Forum is a gathering you have attended for many years, been a part of since the beginning. And now you are back in Tunis—it’s the second time the World Social Forum is there—at the same time that this attack took place at the Bardo museum, killing 23 people, a major march against terrorism planned for Sunday. Your thoughts?
SAMIR AMIN: Good morning, or good afternoon—I don’t know. I think it’s good morning for you. And thank you for inviting me.
I have indeed been associated with the World Social Forum from the very start—that is, the first Social Forum, which was held in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in 2001. I may say even I was one—among, with many others, the founders of the World—of the idea of the World Social Forum. We had created in 1997, a few years before, in Cairo, the World Forum for Alternatives, you see, insisting on looking after alternatives—and I’ll say later, alternatives to what—and with the support of the Organization for Solidarity Among African and Asian Peoples and with many other organizations around the world, specifically the South—Asia, Africa and Latin America. Now, we have organized the first demonstration, not a wide, mass demonstration, but a political and intellectual demonstration, 1999—that is two years before Porto Alegre—in Davos. It was the anti-Davos in Davos. And that gave the idea of having it on a much wider scale, the name of which is the World Social Forum. Now we are again in Tunis, for the second time, for a new edition of the World Social Forum.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Samir Amin, I wanted to ask you, as you—as the World Social Forum is occurring, obviously, there’s convulsions throughout the Arab and Muslim world between the West and political Islam. You’ve written often, extensively, about the nature of political Islam in our time. I’m wondering if you could share your thoughts on that, as well.
SAMIR AMIN: Yes, I’ll come to that subject. But before that, the world is wider than the Muslim counties, of course. And we are a World Social Forum, not an Arab or Islamic social forum. And therefore we should deal—we are dealing with the questions which are of interest for the people all around the world, South and North, East and West, one may say. We are—I think I will give my own opinion, which is shared with many people, but particularly within the network, or the network of networks, which name is the World Social—the World Forum for Alternatives. We are believing that the new world order, which was established as of the ’80s with the structural adjustment programs, on one hand, and with the breakdown of the Soviet Union as of 1990, this new world order, unipolar, is not viable. And it is proving that it is not viable.
We had, after World War II, for a long period, not bipolarity and Cold War. This is summarizing in a too short summary what we had. In fact, of course, there was a military bipolarity, but this military bipolarity was completed by a political and economic and social multipolar system of globalization—because we had globalization. We had globalization since a long time. Perhaps globalization started with the human—the history of humankind.
But anyway, we had a phase of globalization, which was negotiated, negotiated between a variety of partners, at least—not two—at least, I would say, four. One, the Western bloc, organized—I mean the triad: United States, at that time western and central Europe, and Japan, for the Atlantic powers, associated also in a military arrangement, NATO, which is no less important. That was one partner—not the United States alone, but the United States with its European and Japanese allies. On the other hand, we had the Soviet Union, and with its allies in eastern—or dominated allies also in eastern Europe. But we had a third partner—China—which always had a high degree of independence, whether for its internal choices of development or for its international politics. That was clear and became more clearer and clearer along with the passing of years. But we had a fourth actor, no less important, which was out of the Conference of Bandung 1955. We are celebrating the 60th anniversary this year of Bandung. We had, coming out of it, the movement of non-aligned countries, which established, on the one hand, a political solidarity between most nations and states of Asia and Africa, on the one hand, and on the other hand, at the economic level, the establishment of the group of so-called 77—they are now much more than 77—in the United Nations. Now, that was a pattern of globalization.
Well, it came for a variety of reasons, and I have no time to go into the detail, into—out of steam. And therefore, it created the conditions for what I may call—what I call a counteroffensive or an offensive of imperialism—that is, of the allied Western major powers—the U.S., the European Union and Japan—and developed the idea and the practice and attempt to establish their exclusive domination over the whole planet, including the former socialist or so-called socialist countries of eastern Europe, of the former Soviet Union, and including even China, even if China is resisting successfully to it until now, but including everybody. As I mentioned before, a pattern of recolonization, one may say, of Africa, of a new stage of Monroe Doctrine with respect to South America and Latin America, and a non-negotiable globalization—that is, a unilaterally imposed globalization.
Now, the result of that pattern of globalization was simply a disaster. And it’s a disaster for everybody. You can see it in Europe with the—particularly in southern Europe, and you can see it particularly in Greece or in Spain now, but you can see it everywhere. I think you can see it in the United States. I mean, when you had the demonstration in New York, "We, the 99 percent," indeed, 99 percent of humankind did not benefit of that pattern of globalization. Those who benefited of it are perhaps even less than 1 percent, in some cases. But let’s say 1, or even if you have 5 percent, a very small minority, which is run, which is governed, which is managed by oligarchies. Oligarchy is not a specificity, say, of Russia today. You have an oligarchy running the United States, running the European Union and the countries of the European Union. You have oligarchies also running the dependent countries of Latin America, Africa, Asia. Everywhere, oligarchy.
Now, this system is not viable. There is disaster. Of course, in the countries of the South, and particularly in countries of Africa and Asia, the social disaster which was generated by that attempt to impose a unipolar globalization to the benefit of the rich countries and societies of the North, the triad, this was that—this social disaster led to—led to struggle. And the World Social Forum is a forum. It’s not more than—it’s not a party. It’s not an international. It’s not an association of parties. It is a place where the social movements, in struggle for—in most cases, I wouldn’t say necessarily in all cases, are very legitimate struggles for this or that right, for this and that, against this and that policy. The World Social Forum has been created to that effect. And it is operating.
Now, you had some explosions where—more than explosions—they led to start to changing—to a start for a change. And that happened in Latin America and South America before it happened elsewhere. It happened with the first election of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. We should remember it. It happened in Brazil with the election of Lula. It has happened a little later in Bolivia, in Ecuador, and it may develop elsewhere in Latin America. Now they are facing—they are moving into a new stage and facing new problems, but that’s not my point. Now, you have also—you had also explosions of popular movements in many other places, after all the dictatorships, of Marcos, of Suharto in Indonesia. And I should remind, those dictatorships were supported, to the end, by the United States and by their Western allies and by Japan. Now, where—and we had in Africa the dictator, Moussa Traoré, who was overthrown 16 years ago by a popular revolt, a popular revolt, with thousands of people killed, and this dictator was also supported to the end by the Western powers—in that case, particularly France, but behind it, Europe and United States. Now—but which gave no big results, because they moved too fast into the illusion of a so-called—so-called—democracy now, summarized—summarizing democracy in pluripartism and fast elections. And history has proven that democracy is far more than multipartism and elections.
AMY GOODMAN: Samir Amin, we have to break for a moment.
SAMIR AMIN: It needs long time to develop.
AMY GOODMAN: Samir Amin, we have to take a break for a moment, but we’re going to be back—
SAMIR AMIN: Yes.
AMY GOODMAN: —to you in just 60 seconds. Samir Amin is Egyptian political economist, renowned scholar, activist and dissident, has written more than 30 books. His most recent, Capitalism in the Age of Globalization. This is Democracy Now! We’ll be back with him in Tunis, Tunisia, in a moment.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. We are spending the rest of the hour with Samir Amin, the Egyptian political economist, renowned scholar, activist, dissident, director of the Third World Forum in Dakar, Senegal, has written over 30 books. His most recent, Capitalism in the Age of Globalization. We’re speaking to him as the World Social Forum, tens of thousands of people, are gathered in Tunis, Tunisia. He has been with the World Social Forum and its precursors since the beginning. And we are also with him in the aftermath in Tunis of the attack on the Bardo museum, where 23 people, mainly foreigners, were killed. Juan?
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Samir Amin, I wanted to ask you about remarks in one of your books, Liberal Virus: Permanent War and the Americanization of the World. You wrote in that book, "I can only conclude that capitalism has entered its declining senile phase; the logic which governs the system is no longer able to assure the simple survival of half of humanity. Capitalism has become barbaric, directly calling for genocide. It is now more necessary than ever to substitute for it other logics of development with a superior rationality." Could you expound on that? And also, you’ve talked a lot about the impact of imperialism and capitalism on Africa’s agricultural population.
SAMIR AMIN: Yes. I think I should be short, because I have only a few minutes now left. I, of course, continue to subscribe to what I wrote under the title of The Liberal Virus, because this virus, unfortunately, many people have been contaminated by it—and not only the leaders of the political system, but also on a large scale, the people, the people themselves.
Anyway, what is needed today is precisely to construct what we have called sovereign projects of nations, because we start with nations. It cannot—the world has never been changed from the top, by changing the global order. It’s changing at the bottom, which is the nations, as they are, starting to change the balance of forces. And that creates the condition for eventually changing also the global order from unipolar system of domination to a negotiated—any negotiated—multipolar globalization.
That is what we mean by a sovereign project, which should be national in that sense, not in the sense of chauvinists, but in the sense having—getting its roots in the peoples of the various nations, popular in the sense, another pattern of economic development, which would ensure that the whole of the nation, 100 percent—and since nothing is perfect, let’s say at least 80 or 90 percent—of the people do benefit from the economic growth and development. And not only a small minority, the oligarchy of the 1 percent, or even a wider minority of the middle classes, say, 5 or 20 percent—no, another pattern.
And we are to know that this other pattern is precisely coming into conflict with the logic of capitalism—really existing capitalism—as it is today. And it cannot be very different from what it is today. And therefore, we ought to know that this—the management of such a project cannot be a management from the top by means which ignore democracy, but democracy being understood in that case as a wide concept, democratization as an endless historical process, not a blueprint that you just have to implement—you have multipartism, you have respect of a number of human rights, and you have elections, and that’s all. No. As a process of changing the relations between men and women, for instance—it’s, after all, the two halves of human kind; between the employee, say, the worker and the employer, whether this employer is private or public, for the management of the economy; the relation between the citizen and the power system at all levels. And this is a process, a very complex process. This is precisely what we have been discussing, how to—not to give blueprints and say to the people, "You should be do this and that," as, unfortunately, the leaders of the world today are doing in most cases, including the blueprint of the World Bank or IMF or I don’t know whom, etc. No, not a blueprint for all, but what are the ways and means to move into this direction of having sovereign, national, popular and democratic project, which would create the conditions for a global—we are not moving out of globalization. We are not going to leave the planet to another planet. No, we are bound to live together.
But to live together, not only with some degree of respect one another, of course, but we need more than that. We need to have our relations—whether economic relations of trade, of finance, and so on; whether political relations, including the security and military dimensions of it; whether cultural relations—in order to construct together a universal, higher stage of civilization, but which is not just exporting the American or the Western—and you Americans have the Western pattern; you have inherited it from Europe, and you know it—as the exclusive—
AMY GOODMAN: We have 20 seconds.
SAMIR AMIN: Yeah—as the exclusive response to the challenge. Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: Samir Amin, we want to thank you for being with us, and welcome you for the first time to Democracy Now!, speaking to us from Tunis, Tunisia, Egyptian political economist, renowned scholar, activist, dissident, director of the Third World Forum in Dakar, Senegal. His most recent book, Capitalism in the Age of Globalization.
A Saudi-led aerial bombing campaign has entered its second day in Yemen. The Saudi-led airstrikes are intended to thwart the advance of Shiite Houthi rebels after they seized control of the capital Sana’a last year and deposed President Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi last month. On Thursday, Hadi left his refuge in Aden for Saudi Arabia. At least 39 civilians have reportedly been killed so far in the airstrikes. Amnesty International reports the dead include at least six children under the age of 10. Saudi’s bombing campaign has been backed by the United States, Gulf states, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan and Sudan. We go to Sana’a to speak with Farea Al-Muslimi, a visiting scholar at Carnegie Middle East Center. He recently tweeted: "I’m a 25 year old Yemeni man. I’ve seen at least 15 wars in my country. I don’t need more. I need some help and education & economy; not guns."
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We turn now to Yemen, where a Saudi-led aerial bombing campaign has entered its second day. Saudi Arabia has targeted Houthi Shiite rebels and has been backed by the United States, Gulf states, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan and Sudan. The Saudi-led airstrikes are intended to thwart the Houthis’ advance after they seized control of the capital Sana’a last year and deposed President Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi last month. On Thursday, Hadi left his refuge in Aden for Saudi Arabia. At least 39 civilians have reportedly been killed so far in the airstrikes. Amnesty International reports the dead include at least six children under the age of 10. Many analysts fear the Yemen crisis could escalate into an all-out proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which has backed the Houthis. Iran denounced the Saudi-led assault as an attempt to, quote, "foment civil war in Yemen or disintegrate the country."
AMY GOODMAN: Saudi Arabia has reportedly mobilized 150,000 troops near the border. Egypt is saying it’s also prepared to send ground troops into Yemen if necessary. The United States has aided the bombing campaign by creating a joint planning cell with Saudi Arabia to coordinate U.S. military and intelligence support. Arab foreign ministers, meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, Thursday, endorsed the idea of forming a unified Arab military force.
We go directly to Sana’a, the capital of Yemen, to speak with Farea Al-Muslimi. He is a visiting scholar at Carnegie Middle East Center. He’s based in Sana’a. He recently wrote an op-ed headlined "Welcome to Yemen, Where Only Violence is a Certainty." He last joined us in 2013 when he was in the United States to testify before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing on the U.S. secret drone program. And if you want to know what’s going on in Yemen, just follow his tweets.
I want to welcome you to Democracy Now!, Farea Al-Muslimi. Talk about what’s happening on the ground now in the capital.
FAREA AL-MUSLIMI: Thanks, Amy. It’s good to be back with you. Sana’a right now has witnessed over the last few days multiple airstrikes led by Saudi Arabia in a big, longer plan version—new military operation called the Decisive Storm, which is backed by Saudi Arabia, other Gulf countries and other regional countries. This comes in response to the Houthis’ full seizing of power in the capital of Yemen. And since last week, the political crisis in the country has entered a new dangerous level, when the Yemen air force, under the Houthi, controlling the capital, struck the presidential palace in Aden, where fled President Hadi was living. And I think, by that point, it was the time when the Gulf and the region decided to interfere. Currently, there has been multiple civic casualties of these strikes, but most of the times they are also strikes targeting military bases around the country, which are under the loyalty of either former President Saleh or the Houthis, who are accused by the regional and internationals of cooperating in this full military coup. Obviously, this comes after four years of a poorly learned political solution in Yemen, known as the Yemen model, which was backed by the United Nations and clearly ended up creating more violence than peace in Yemen.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And what about this issue of all of these outside powers trying to effect deals or arrangements for the internal strife within the country?
FAREA AL-MUSLIMI: Say that again, please?
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I said, what about this issue of all of these outside countries—the United States, the U.N., Saudi Arabia—attempting to negotiate deals for how Yemen should be run?
FAREA AL-MUSLIMI: I mean, obviously, this is an outcome of the way that the specific model that was enforced by these countries for the last four years have ended up failing. That’s one part. But the new part in this is this has been now shifted from a political model, that was a massive story about how political transition should run, into a model of direct front lines for a regional obvious war between Saudi Arabia and the Iranians. Obviously, this is—this is, I think, a new regional order, you can now say, called the Decisive Storm. It’s getting more than—bigger—more than just about Yemen. And it’s being a new card being played by the regional states in the negotiation of the Iranian nuclear fire, obviously using Yemen as a fuel for a struggle that has nothing to do with the Yemenis.
AMY GOODMAN: Farea, you tweeted, "I’m a 25 years old #Yemen-i man. I v sen at least 15 wars n my country. I don’t need more. I need some help n education & economy ; not guns." Another tweet: "I sadly can promise you that the sir strikes cost tonight could have saved Yemen from this years ago if if was put into its economy." Talk about the situation now in Sana’a, the bombardment that you and other Yemenis are going through, and this connection that you’re describing.
FAREA AL-MUSLIMI: Obviously, Yemen has gone through a lot of conflicts in the past. And what I was trying to say in this specific tweet, probably, is that the last thing Yemen needs at the moment is an intensive military intervention in a country that is already loaded with so much conflict and over the last three years has gone through even more conflicts because of how this was run. And, obviously, this is important because even when Yemen was being promising a state, according to the Yemen model, it was not backed up with an economic Marshall Plan. The commitment to Yemen’s stability was always reactive, based on fear from al-Qaeda, which obviously has ended up in creating more violence than stopping violence.
There is a huge problem in Yemen. We have more than half of the population right now under huge—for need of humanitarian assistance. The economy is literally dead. Life has been like that. The services are bad. The already low level of low, poor services that existed are even now harder to have, like electricity, water, and basically security and safety.
So far, right now, there is a matter of—there is a problem of a slow inversion or a slow take of Yemen into a new Libyan version that will not ultimately create peace in Yemen. And, obviously, a military solution, we have tried that so many times in Yemen, and it did not win. The military—the wars happened in Sa’ada with six wars, and then in the south, and then many wars with al-Qaeda. Obviously, there is a problem with this way of handling political problems in the region.
In fact, if there is a—if there had been enough economic support, I think we could have already—you know, we could have stayed away from this chaos, how things had led to. And most importantly is, if there is a will to commit to Yemen’s stability and peace, there is a deep need to show that in an economic plan. Make Yemen part of the GCC. Give it easier for Yemeni youth to get jobs in the Gulf. A security solution have approved itself in a country like Yemen many times wrong and have counterproductive, and will always remain like that if you do not solve the roots of the problems. And the current way how things are run is obviously going anywhere but toward peace.
AMY GOODMAN: Farea Al-Muslimi, I want to thank you very much for being with us. Farea Al-Muslimi is a visiting scholar at Carnegie Middle East Center. He is speaking to us from Sana’a, Yemen. We will link to his op-ed, "Welcome to Yemen, Where Only Violence is a Certainty." And we hope you’ll join us in the days to come to continue to report on your country.
This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. When we come back, we go to London. We will be speaking with Iona Craig, a journalist who was based in Sana’a for four years, and also we’ll be joined by Brian Whitaker, former Middle East editor for The Guardian. This is Democracy Now! We’ll be back in a moment.
As Saudi Arabia and Egypt threaten to send ground troops into Yemen, we look at the roots of the crisis. While many analysts have described the fighting as a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, journalist Iona Craig says the fighting stems from a domestic conflict. "People try to frame this as an Iran versus Saudi kind of battle, which it has now become. But it is very much because of domestic politics," explains Iona Craig, who recently spent four years reporting from Sana’a. We also speak to Brian Whitaker, former Middle East editor at The Guardian, about the decades-old history of Saudi intervention in Yemen.
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: To talk more about Yemen and the Saudi-led bombing campaign, we’re joined by two guests in London. Iona Craig is back with us, journalist who was based in Sana’a for four years as Yemen correspondent for The Times of London, awarded the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2014. And Brian Whitaker is with us, former Middle East editor for The Guardian. He now runs the website Al-Bab.com, which covers Arab politics and society, where he wrote a new report on "Yemen and Saudi Arabia: A Historical Review of Relations."
Brian, let’s begin with you. Can you lay that relationship out? The significance of Saudi Arabia now bombing Yemen with the U.S. supporting Saudi Arabia?
BRIAN WHITAKER: Well, it’s a long and complicated relationship, really. You know, we have—Saudi Arabia is a rich, conservative monarchy, and on the other side, we have Yemen, which is very populous, it’s very poor, and it’s republican. And those two are separated by a border of about 1,500 miles, which is very difficult to police. I think, generally, among the Gulf monarchies, there’s a certain level of apprehension about Yemen, partly because it’s not like them.
And if we look at their relations with Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia was created as a state in 1932; within two years of that, there was a war between the Saudis and the Yemenis, which resulted in the—Yemen ceding some ethnically Yemeni territory to Saudi Arabia. And as part of that deal also, Yemenis were allowed to work in Saudi Arabia on quite generous terms, and that led to large numbers of Yemenis working in the kingdom and sending remittances back to Yemen. That was quite a rocky relationship, as well, because in the early 1990s, when the Saudis didn’t much like Yemen’s attitude to Saddam Hussein, several hundred thousand Yemeni workers were expelled from the kingdom.
We also had the North Yemeni Civil War in the 1960s, where we saw the Saudis intervening on behalf of the royalists, and the Egyptians intervening on behalf the republicans. So that was a military struggle. And then, in the mid-1990s when North and South Yemen became—have become unified, but then a war broke out between the North and the South. The Saudis were supporting the southern separatists.
And, of course, most recently, in 2009, when the president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, was having one of his six wars against the Houthis, the Saudis joined in then with a bombing campaign to help. So, there’s a long history, and also there’s a long history, apart from military things, of Saudi involvement in Yemeni politics, which has often taken the form of payments to tribes, politicians and so on—you know, the sort of things other people would probably call bribes.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: So, in effect, then, the Yemenis have functioned almost as a reserve labor force for Saudi Arabia? You were mentioning it. They also function that way for other states in the region? And also, you mentioned there were—the unification of Yemen. But for a time, there was actually—wasn’t there a left-wing government in South Yemen?
BRIAN WHITAKER: Indeed. The only Arab Marxist government was in the South, and that disappeared in 1990 when North and South became unified. Then, the southerners had second thoughts about it, and a war broke out in 2004, which lasted a few weeks. And so, basically, the Saudis were, at that stage, supporting the—as they were then, the ex-Marxists who had ruled the South. So it’s a curious relationship because, at some time or other, the Saudis have supported most of the different factions within Yemen.
AMY GOODMAN: Iona Craig, what do you feel is most important to understand right now? And can you talk about the Sharm el-Sheikh meeting that took place yesterday, a kind of Sunni meeting?
IONA CRAIG: Well, I think at the moment in Yemen, you have to realize that the situation has got to where it is now largely because of domestic politics, as well. People try and frame this as an Iran-versus-Saudi kind of battle, which it has now become, but it’s very much because of domestic politics. And the reason the Houthis have been able to get to where they are today is very much because of the support of Yemen’s former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh. He has been plotting this for some time, certainly, you know, at least since 2012, 2013. And although they’re old enemies, they are now supporting each other in this battle. So, this came about, really, because Saleh was granted immunity by the GCC in the deal that he signed at the end of 2011. And these are the very same people that are now bombing him today, so there’s quite a deep irony in the situation that’s going on right now. And although Saleh hasn’t been doing that overtly, it was clear and very evident to me when I was on the ground in September, when the Houthis took Sana’a, that those men that were in plainclothes with Houthi stickers on their Kalashnikovs were in fact the Republican Guard. They were saying it openly, and people recognized them as former Republican Guard soldiers who were under the command of Ahmed Ali, Ali Abdullah Saleh’s son. So I think you have to be—you know, it has to be quite clear that although you talk about the Houthis being supported by Iran, they’re actually, on the ground, being supported by Ali Abdullah Saleh much more than there is any evidence that they’re being supported by Iran at the moment.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Iona Craig, as the civil strife in Yemen grows, do you have any sense of what’s going on with the jihadi forces within Yemen, and obviously, the United States’ big concern, the drone strikes that have repeatedly been targeted within Yemen by the United States?
IONA CRAIG: Well, I think the issue now is the counterterrorism policy for the U.S. has pretty much vanished, in the sense that the National Security Bureau, that was really set up by the Americans, the Yemeni intelligence agency, in order to gather human intelligence to counter al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, is now the hands of the Houthis. In addition to that, the counterterrorism troops that were being trained by the Americans, that all stopped last Friday when the Americans finally left. And now the Saudis, backed by America, are bombing military bases across the country. So, it’s certainly feasible that amongst all of that the counterterrorism troops are going to be impacted by that.
Now, as far as what the jihadist groups’ reaction is to—for al-Qaeda, certainly, you know, for them, they’re going to be able to take advantage of this kind of mess that’s going on in Yemen, whether that means being able to take weapons as military bases are vacated, knowing that they’re going to be hit—if the Houthis haven’t already taken those weapons themselves. But it is going to be an opportunity for them, particularly as it’s going to polarize the society within Yemen itself. This sectarian element will become, you know, a self-fulfilling prophecy, and therefore that will, almost inevitably, in some way, drive some people into the hands of al-Qaeda. Even if they’re not before, they may find themselves fighting on the same side of al-Qaeda in order to defend themselves and their territory.
AMY GOODMAN: This issue of the U.S. role with Iran in all the different places now—working with Iran, if you will, in Iraq, although they kind of deny this; working against Iran in Yemen right now; and negotiating with Iran around a nuclear deal—Brian Whitaker, can you talk about the significance of this?
BRIAN WHITAKER: Well, obviously, there are quite a few ironies in that situation. The latest I’ve seen today, though, is that Iran doesn’t seem particularly interested in getting more deeply involved in Yemen at the moment. And that might be quite a smart move. I think the Americans would also be probably leaning on them not to step things up in Yemen, in order to secure the nuclear deal. I think that—for the Americans, I think the nuclear deal is probably the priority at the moment.
AMY GOODMAN: At this point, Iona Craig, what do you feel needs to happen? You know, we have President Obama famously recently saying that Yemen is the one major success story in the war against terrorism. What do you think, as you listen to a man I’m sure you know well, Farea Al-Muslimi, on the ground in Sana’a under the bombardment, saying, "What our country needs is investment in the economy, is education, is not more bombs"?
IONA CRAIG: I mean, certainly, most immediately, is some sort of political settlement to get out of this current crisis. But by pushing the Houthis this far, by deciding to bomb Yemen, I don’t think—the indication from the Houthis at the moment is they are not prepared to back down, which means more bombing and the possibility of even ground troops. The Houthis, you know, have been fighting in Yemen for over 10 years now. And I think the real risk is, if ground troops are involved, that this could be a very protracted and long, borne-out conflict, which is going to impact Yemenis massively.
You know, what Farea was saying was really depressing, but absolutely true. The economy has all but collapsed. The government—not that there is one, really, but there isn’t the finances to prop up the civil service indefinitely, and not even for many more weeks. You’ve got 16 million people in need of humanitarian aid, and that was before this conflict started. So, I think for Yemenis on the ground at the moment, there is this real risk for them that this becomes a long, drawn-out process, where the Saudis are saying it will be a few days of aerial bombardment in order to reduce the military power of the Houthis. But they know this territory. They’ve been fighting in Yemen, in the highlands in Yemen, for 10 years. If the Saudis or the Egyptians decide to take them on on the ground, this could be a very long process.
AMY GOODMAN: Iona Craig, we want to thank you for being with us, journalist based in Sana’a for four years as the Yemen correspondent for The Times of London, just recently awarded the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. Brian Whitaker, thanks so much for being with us, former Middle East editor for The Guardian, now runs the website Al-Bab.com. We’ll link to that. It covers Arab politics and society. Wrote the new report, "Yemen and Saudi Arabia: A Historical Review of Relations." This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.
Yemen: 39 Civilians Killed in Saudi-Led Bombings
A Saudi-led bombing campaign has entered its second day in Yemen. While the U.S.-backed campaign is targeting Houthi Shiite rebels, at least 39 civilians have been reported killed. Amnesty International confirmed at least six of the dead were children under 10. Meanwhile, deposed Yemeni President Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi has left his refuge in Aden for Saudi Arabia. We will have more on this story after headlines.
U.S. Airstrikes Cause Shiite Militias to Leave Tikrit Fight
Iraqi officials say nine of their forces have been accidentally killed in an airstrike as part of the U.S.-backed effort to retake the city of Tikrit from the self-proclaimed Islamic State. U.S.-led airstrikes began Wednesday, prompting thousands of Iranian-backed Shiite militias who were fighting alongside the Iraqis to boycott the battle and retreat. U.S. Army General Lloyd Austin, commander of U.S. Central Command, assured lawmakers, including Senator John McCain, there are no Shiite militias in Tikrit.
Gen. Lloyd Austin: "The folks that we are supporting in clearing Tikrit—"
Sen. John McCain: "Are the Shia militias still in the fight?"
Gen. Lloyd Austin: "No, sir, they’re not — they’re not a part of the clearing operations in Tikrit."
Sen. John McCain: "So, we are — the airstrikes that we’re carrying out in support are only in support of Iraqi military activities?"
Gen. Lloyd Austin: "That’s correct, sir. Preconditioned for us to provide support was that the Iraqi government had to be in charge of this operation. They had to know — we had to know exactly who was on the ground."
Report: Co-Pilot Who Crashed Plane Had History of Depression
German authorities are searching for evidence to explain why the co-pilot of a Germanwings airplane deliberately crashed in the French Alps, killing himself and all 149 others on board. Recovered audio shows the 27-year-old co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, was in the cockpit alone, while the plane’s captain was locked out, pounding on the door to get in. Earlier today, the German newspaper Bild reported Lubitz had suffered a "serious depressive episode" six years ago.
House Passes Medicare Bill in Rare Bipartisan Move
In a rare bipartisan move, House lawmakers have overwhelmingly passed a bill to overhaul Medicare’s payment system. The measure would increase payments to doctors, passing higher costs on to some recipients in the form of higher premiums. It also keeps in place a health insurance program for children. Senate leaders will wait more than two weeks to take up the bill.
Report: U.S. Soldiers, Contractors Sexually Abused 54 Children in Colombia
A new report commissioned by the Colombian government and FARC rebels has concluded U.S. soldiers and military contractors sexually abused at least 54 children in Colombia between 2003 and 2007. The investigator cites one case where 53 girls in the town of Melgar were targeted by contractors who filmed the abuse and sold the films as pornography. In another case, a 12-year-old girl was allegedly drugged and raped by a U.S. Army sergeant and a contractor. Under immunity agreements, none of the alleged abusers were ever punished. The media group FAIR notes the story has received no coverage in the U.S. corporate media. A number of U.S. outlets have reported on a new Justice Department probe which concludes U.S. drug enforcement agents in Colombia participated in "sex parties" with prostitutes hired by Colombian drug cartels.
Mexico: Parents Mark 6 Months Since Disappearance of 43 Students
Parents of 43 students missing from the Mexican state of Guerrero marched Thursday in Mexico City to mark six months since their children disappeared. The parents dispute the government’s claim local police gave the students to drug gang members, who killed and incinerated them. Epifanio Álvarez, whose son is among the missing, spoke at the march.
Epifanio Álvarez: "For us to believe, they need to give us an answer, and there has been no reply. We are the same as we started. What the government has done is hurt us, the parents, by giving us bad news after bad news, without scientific proof. But we will continue forward. We are united. Years can go by, but we will remain united."
A number of the students’ parents have come to the United States where they are traveling across the country in three caravans to draw attention to the U.S. role in the drug war.
Indiana Enacts "Religious Freedom" Bill Seen as Anti-LGBT
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence has signed a religious freedom bill critics say will give businesses license to discriminate against LGBT people. The law prevents state and local governments from imposing a "substantial burden" on religion unless the government shows a compelling reason. Pence signed the bill at a ceremony, closed to the media and public, amidst a wave of criticism from celebrities and business leaders like the CEO of Salesforce, who said the firm would dramatically curb business in the state. The measure is similar to one that caused a firestorm in Arizona last year, forcing then-Governor Jan Brewer to veto it.
Indiana Allows Needle Exchange in Response to HIV Outbreak
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence has declared a public health emergency over a spike in HIV cases in Scott County, in the southeastern part of the state. The outbreak includes 79 new cases all linked to the injection of a potent pharmaceutical painkiller. Pence will allow Scott County authorities to set up a needle exchange program to combat the spread of HIV.
Kentucky Overhauls Approach to Heroin Addiction
Kentucky will also let local health authorities set up needle exchanges as part of a major new approach to handling heroin and painkiller addiction. Under a new law, the state will also allow more people to carry naloxone, the antidote which prevents overdose deaths, and will stop criminally charging addicts who survive overdoses.
Ohio Lawmaker Discloses Her Abortion, Denounces "Inhuman" Anti-Choice Bill
Ohio House lawmakers have passed a bill that would make most abortions a felony offense. The bill would ban abortion after a fetal or embryonic heartbeat is detectable, which happens in the earliest stages of pregnancy when many women have not realized they are pregnant. Doctors who violate the law would face up to a year in prison. Ohio State Rep. Teresa Fedor rose to denounce the bill, disclosing she had had an abortion after she was raped while serving in the military.
State Rep. Teresa Fedor: "What you’re doing is so fundamentally unhuman, unconstitutional. And I’ve sat here too long. And I dare every one of you to judge me, because there is only one judge I’m going to face, and I’ve heard the word 'judge.' And you deserve my lecture right now. I dare you to walk in my shoes, and walk after I leave this chamber. And I dare you to vote for this bill, because you know it’s fundamentally inhuman for you to do so."
Earlier this month, another lawmaker in Arizona, State Rep. Victoria Steele, disclosed her experience with child sexual abuse during a debate over another anti-choice bill. The Arizona bill passed and is in the hands of Republican Gov. Doug Ducey. It bans abortion coverage in health plans purchased through the federal exchange, and requires doctors to tell women they can potentially reverse a drug-induced abortion, despite the lack of any scientific evidence.
Video: Monsanto Lobbyist Claims Glyphosate Safe to Drink, Refuses to Drink It
Agribusiness giant Monsanto has agreed to pay a fine for failing to report hundreds of uncontrolled releases of toxic chemicals at a plant in Idaho. Monsanto will pay $600,000, a tiny fraction of the more than $240 million in profits from the last quarter alone. Meanwhile, footage has emerged of a lobbyist claiming Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller is safe to drink, but then refusing to drink it. Pat Moore, a former Greenpeace activist turned corporate lobbyist, made the remarks in an interview for a documentary with the French channel Canal+.
Pat Moore: "You can drink a whole quart of it, and it won’t hurt you."
Paul Moreira: "You want to drink some? We have some here."
Pat Moore: "I’d be happy to, actually. Not, not really, but ..."
Paul Moreira: "Not really?"
Pat Moore: "I know it wouldn’t hurt me."
Paul Moreira: "If you say so, I have some glyphosate."
Pat Moore: "No, no, I’m not stupid."
Paul Moreira: "Ah, OK. So you …"
Pat Moore: "No, but I know ..."
Paul Moreira: "... said it’s dangerous, right?"
Pat Moore: "No. People try to commit suicide with it and fail, fairly regularly."
Paul Moreira: "No, no, but let’s tell the truth. It’s dangerous."
Pat Moore: "It’s not dangerous to humans. No, it’s not."
Paul Moreira: "So you are ready to drink one glass of glyphosate?"
Pat Moore: "No, I’m not an idiot. Interview me about golden rice. That’s what I’m talking about."
Paul Moreira: "We did. We did. We did."
Pat Moore: "OK. Then it’s finished."
Paul Moreira: "Except it’s ..."
Pat Moore: "Then the interview is finished."
Paul Moreira: "That’s a good way to solve things."
Pat Moore: (getting up to leave) "Yeah. You’re a complete jerk."
Earlier this week, a report by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer found glyphosate, a main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, likely causes cancer.
Illinois: National Guardsman, Cousin Arrested on Terror Charges
A member of the Illinois National Guard and his cousin have been arrested and accused of plotting to join the self-proclaimed Islamic State in Syria or carry out attacks inside the United States. Guardsman Hasan Edmonds allegedly sent messages to an undercover agent saying he would bring "the flames of war to the heart" of the United States if he could not get into Syria. His cousin, Jonas Edmonds, allegedly boasted to an agent of plans to kill up to 150 people at the Illinois military facility where his cousin had trained.
Wisconsin: Man Suspected of Killing State Trooper Tied to White Supremacy
An alleged bank robber accused of killing two people, including a state trooper, earlier this week in Wisconsin has been identified as a white supremacist with a criminal record. Steven Timothy Snyder died in a shootout with Trooper Trevor Casper Tuesday. In the mid-1990s, Snyder was part of a white supremacist group convicted of an attack on a group of African Americans and Latinos.
Michigan: Video Shows "Robocop" Beating Unarmed Auto Worker in the Head
Newly released video shows police in the Detroit suburb of Inkster pummeling and tasing a 57-year-old, unarmed African-American auto worker. The video shows Officer William Melendez approaching Floyd Dent’s car with his gun drawn. Another officer pulls Dent to the ground, and Melendez places him in a chokehold and pounds him in the head 16 times. Dent said he thought he was going to die.
Floyd Dent: "I’m lucky to be living, you know, because I think they were trying to do — they were trying to kill me, especially when they choked me. I mean, I was on my last breath. I told the officer, 'Please, I can't breathe.’"
Police claimed Dent threatened and bit them, although they have provided no evidence. They also claim they found crack cocaine in his car, but Dent says the drugs were planted, and his drug test came back clean. Melendez, the officer who pummeled Dent, is nicknamed "Robocop," and has been sued repeatedly for excessive force. During an earlier stint in Detroit, he was indicted for leading a corrupt ring of officers who planted evidence, although he was ultimately acquitted. In 1996, he and a partner shot and killed unarmed African American Lou Adkins in a case Detroit paid $1 million to settle.
Ferguson Protesters Win Curbs on Police Tear Gas Use
Protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, have won a settlement requiring police to restrict their use of tear gas following the militarized response to protests over the police shooting of Michael Brown. St. Louis City and County police, as well as Missouri State Highway Patrol, all agreed to requirements, including clear warnings for tear gas use. A judge will supervise the terms for three years. Attorneys say the St. Louis area will be one of just two police jurisdictions in the country with such a policy for tear gas.
Follow
WEB EXCLUSIVE
WEB EXCLUSIVE
SPEAKING EVENT
207 W 25th Street, 11th Floor
New York, New York 10001 United States
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment