asiapacificresearch--2020-06-24--COVID-19 and the Dire Living Conditions of India’s Bottom Half Billion

If you have ever walked by Mumbai ’ s southern seacoast , you may have noticed a strange-looking tower rising above the apartment complexes .
Measuring 27-stories high and featuring three helipads , an 80-seat theater and an 168-car garage , among other amenities , the skyrise is the residence of India ’ s wealthiest man , Mukesh Ambani .
It ’ s estimated to be worth at least $ 1 billion , making it the most expensive private home in the world .
Go less than eight miles north along the coastline and you will reach Dharavi , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Measuring .81 sq mi , the slum is home to over 1 million Indians , making it one of the most densely populated areas on Earth .
Entire families cram into one-room houses inside Dharavi ’ s labyrinthine neighborhoods , where diseases run rampant because of the confined and unsanitary conditions people live in .
This is not the first time the opulence of Ambani ’ s home has been compared to Dharavi , which was famously depicted in the film “ Slumdog Millionaire.
” Since it was erected in 2010 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the quintessential metaphor that captures the absurd scope of India ’ s economic inequality , which is among the worst in the world .
But the economic fallout of Covid-19 is exacerbating India ’ s inequality to a point beyond what metaphors can capture .
Economic forecasts estimate that India ’ s GDP will contract by 4-5 % in the coming year , severely impacting major industries and India ’ s emerging middle class .
But it is India ’ s informal economy , where nearly 81 % of Indians work , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half of India , as Nobel laureate Abhijit Banerjee calls it , is not simply facing an economic crisis but an existential one as they struggle to put food on their tables .
These are the people who earn daily wages , work on a contract basis and have no safety net or personal insurance of any kind .
They may not succumb to Covid-19 , but they will succumb to lack of access to food and health care .
The plight of India ’ s migrant workers offers a glimpse of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Covid-19 economic fallout .
When India entered a state of lockdown on March 24 — the largest lockdown in the world — more than 100 million men and women who had migrated from their rural towns and villages to look for work in big cities and slums such as Dharavi were suddenly left jobless .
The vast majority live hand to mouth , depending on their daily earnings to meet their needs , and many of them don ’ t own homes but sleep at their place of employment .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across India started to emerge of a mass exodus of people walking 310 , 621 or even 932 miles ( 500 , 1,000 , 1,500 km , respectively ) under the scorching sun to reach their hometowns , most of them in the north .
Lack of public transportation — which was either unaffordable for many or closed due to the pandemic — forced these men and women to carry their children or tow them behind on carts and even luggage cases .
Stories soon began to circulate of children dying due to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asleep on railway tracks and being run over by trains and others dying in road accidents and because of extreme exhaustion .
Cases of police violently trying to enforce curfews and lockdowns on migrants were also reported .
Beyond the financial catastrophe that will impact millions of poor Indians , there is a very real possibility the arrival of Covid-19-positive migrants in rural towns may trigger a health crisis in areas that are ill-prepared to handle the virus .
India now has surpassed Italy and become the fourth country with the most Covid-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climbing up the ladder .
Allowing migrants to return home first before implementing the lockdown could have slowed the spread , according to a joint task force of India ’ s top public health organizations .
The sad truth is that it ’ s only in this time of crisis that India ’ s upper and middle classes have slowly begun to recognize the crucial role migrant workers and daily laborers play in keeping the country ’ s economy running and maintaining their comfortable lifestyle .
They are the invisible class — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maids , factory workers in middle sized and larger companies — that keeps India ’ s economic engine running .
While some of them may come back when the economic conditions improve and the pandemic is under control , many may not want to return .
Why should they when India did not consider their plight in the midst of a lockdown ?
Though the Supreme Court of India has finally stepped in and ordered states to help migrants get home , initially the court dismissed a petition to address the issue .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ conditions in places such as Dharavi , where physical distancing is nonexistent , and to usurious contracts that flout any sense of decent labor regulations also may prevent many migrants from returning .
As lockdown restrictions begin to ease , India now faces the imposing challenge of finding a way to restart its economy .
Stimulus packages can help keep businesses , corporations and those employed in the formal economy afloat , but special consideration must be taken for daily laborers who can not access economic relief provided to the private sector .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ individual states , should consider setting up an emergency task force dedicated to addressing the needs of this half of our population .
In the short term , disbursing 7,500 INR ( approximately $ 100 USD ) for the next six to 12 months has been proposed by economists to help these families survive , as well as providing food grains from the surplus of the government ’ s granaries .
Welcoming NGOs and the U.N. ’ s World Food Program will also go a long way in providing food to those in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , India ’ s archaic labor laws and health care infrastructure need to be reformed so migrant laborers get paid fair wages and have access to health care , which includes proper accommodation .
Even before the Covid-19 pandemic , Prime Minister Narendra Modi had advocated for India to become fully self-reliant in every respect , economically and in its food production .
This vision can only be achieved if we acknowledge the worth and value the laborers in the organized sector bring to our nation .
Note to readers : please click @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Most Rev .
Joseph D ’ Souza is a Christian theologian , author and human and civil rights activist .
He is the founder of Dignity Freedom Network , an organization that advocates for and delivers humanitarian aid to the marginalized and outcastes of South Asia .
He is archbishop of the Anglican Good Shepherd Church of India and serves as the president of the All India Christian Council .

If you have ever walked by Mumbai’s southern seacoast, you may have noticed a strange-looking tower rising above the apartment complexes. Measuring 27-stories high and featuring three helipads, an 80-seat theater and an 168-car garage, among other amenities, the skyrise is the residence of India’s wealthiest man, Mukesh Ambani. It’s estimated to be worth at least $1 billion, making it the most expensive private home in the world.
Go less than eight miles north along the coastline and you will reach Dharavi, one of the largest slums in the world. Measuring .81 sq mi, the slum is home to over 1 million Indians, making it one of the most densely populated areas on Earth. Entire families cram into one-room houses inside Dharavi’s labyrinthine neighborhoods, where diseases run rampant because of the confined and unsanitary conditions people live in.
This is not the first time the opulence of Ambani’s home has been compared to Dharavi, which was famously depicted in the film “Slumdog Millionaire.” Since it was erected in 2010, Ambani’s home has served as the quintessential metaphor that captures the absurd scope of India’s economic inequality, which is among the worst in the world.
But the economic fallout of Covid-19 is exacerbating India’s inequality to a point beyond what metaphors can capture. Economic forecasts estimate that India’s GDP will contract by 4-5% in the coming year, severely impacting major industries and India’s emerging middle class. But it is India’s informal economy, where nearly 81% of Indians work, that will be hit hardest. This bottom half of India, as Nobel laureate Abhijit Banerjee calls it, is not simply facing an economic crisis but an existential one as they struggle to put food on their tables. These are the people who earn daily wages, work on a contract basis and have no safety net or personal insurance of any kind. They may not succumb to Covid-19, but they will succumb to lack of access to food and health care.
The plight of India’s migrant workers offers a glimpse of the grim reality millions will face because of the Covid-19 economic fallout. When India entered a state of lockdown on March 24 — the largest lockdown in the world — more than 100 million men and women who had migrated from their rural towns and villages to look for work in big cities and slums such as Dharavi were suddenly left jobless. The vast majority live hand to mouth, depending on their daily earnings to meet their needs, and many of them don’t own homes but sleep at their place of employment.
In the days following the lockdown, images from across India started to emerge of a mass exodus of people walking 310, 621 or even 932 miles (500, 1,000, 1,500 km, respectively) under the scorching sun to reach their hometowns, most of them in the north. Lack of public transportation — which was either unaffordable for many or closed due to the pandemic — forced these men and women to carry their children or tow them behind on carts and even luggage cases. Stories soon began to circulate of children dying due to exhaustion and starvation, fatigued migrants falling asleep on railway tracks and being run over by trains and others dying in road accidents and because of extreme exhaustion. Cases of police violently trying to enforce curfews and lockdowns on migrants were also reported.
Beyond the financial catastrophe that will impact millions of poor Indians, there is a very real possibility the arrival of Covid-19-positive migrants in rural towns may trigger a health crisis in areas that are ill-prepared to handle the virus. India now has surpassed Italy and become the fourth country with the most Covid-19 cases — and it’s quickly climbing up the ladder. Allowing migrants to return home first before implementing the lockdown could have slowed the spread, according to a joint task force of India’s top public health organizations.
The sad truth is that it’s only in this time of crisis that India’s upper and middle classes have slowly begun to recognize the crucial role migrant workers and daily laborers play in keeping the country’s economy running and maintaining their comfortable lifestyle. They are the invisible class — the construction workers, plumbers, cleaners, maids, factory workers in middle sized and larger companies — that keeps India’s economic engine running.
While some of them may come back when the economic conditions improve and the pandemic is under control, many may not want to return. Why should they when India did not consider their plight in the midst of a lockdown? Though the Supreme Court of India has finally stepped in and ordered states to help migrants get home, initially the court dismissed a petition to address the issue.
The prospect of returning to cramped living conditions in places such as Dharavi, where physical distancing is nonexistent, and to usurious contracts that flout any sense of decent labor regulations also may prevent many migrants from returning.
As lockdown restrictions begin to ease, India now faces the imposing challenge of finding a way to restart its economy. Stimulus packages can help keep businesses, corporations and those employed in the formal economy afloat, but special consideration must be taken for daily laborers who cannot access economic relief provided to the private sector. The central government, as well as individual states, should consider setting up an emergency task force dedicated to addressing the needs of this half of our population.
In the short term, disbursing 7,500 INR (approximately $100 USD) for the next six to 12 months has been proposed by economists to help these families survive, as well as providing food grains from the surplus of the government’s granaries. Welcoming NGOs and the U.N.’s World Food Program will also go a long way in providing food to those in need. But in the long run, India’s archaic labor laws and health care infrastructure need to be reformed so migrant laborers get paid fair wages and have access to health care, which includes proper accommodation.
Even before the Covid-19 pandemic, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had advocated for India to become fully self-reliant in every respect, economically and in its food production. This vision can only be achieved if we acknowledge the worth and value the laborers in the organized sector bring to our nation.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Most Rev. Joseph D’Souza is a Christian theologian, author and human and civil rights activist. He is the founder of Dignity Freedom Network, an organization that advocates for and delivers humanitarian aid to the marginalized and outcastes of South Asia. He is archbishop of the Anglican Good Shepherd Church of India and serves as the president of the All India Christian Council.


asiapacificresearch--2020-06-24--Dishonour on the Bench: Dyson Heydon and the Australian High Court

It is one of the oldest professions , stacked with rules , conventions and protocols .
It is also tribal and hierarchical .
The law , presided over its executors , the judges , do not do transparency well .
It stands to reason : according to Charles Dickens , the business of the law is to make business for itself , creating its own impenetrable labyrinths and traps while insisting on its own policing .
Now , the high priests in Australia are asking searching questions about the case of former High Court justice Dyson Heydon .
On Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Age revealed the existence , and the findings of an independent inquiry , into claims that Heydon had sexually harassed six associates during his time on the High Court bench .
To that number were also a former judge and former head of the ACT Law Society , who allege indecent assault .
The Chief Justice of the Australian High Court , Susan Kiefel , revealed in her statement that the investigation , conducted by Vivienne Thom , had produced findings of “ extreme concern to me , my fellow Justices , our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court .
We ’ re ashamed that this could have happened in the High Court of Australia.
” The six recommendations seem odd , drafted , as it were , by someone who had just woken from an induced coma .
They include the development of “ a supplementary HR policy relevant to the particular employment circumstances of the personal staff of Justices including associates ” : more information in “ induction ” sessions ; and an understanding that associates were under no obligation “ to attend social functions ” .
That this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ceremonial terror such powerful institutions wield : Whatever the judge says , goes .
Ceremonial terror is precisely the sort of thing that Heydon ’ s brother and sister justices could not have been ignorant of .
While parlour gossip can be just that , the tightness of the bench , and members of the legal profession , suggest a desire to look the other way even as an open secret screams before you .
Three of those who received Heydon ’ s unwanted attention are now seeking legal action for compensation against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Such behaviour is also said to have taken place in Britain , where the justice proceeded to teach after mandatory retirement at the age of 70 in 2013 .
His appointment as Visiting Professor to the Law Faculty at the University of Oxford was greeted with some fanfare – at least initially .
Law Faculty Dean Timothy Endicott was ecstatic .
Endicott swooned over Heydon ’ s command of the “ law of trusts ” , and the fact that he was “ a leading figure in the law of evidence ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ between 2014 to 2016 , word got around ; the Australians were talking about the judge ’ s reputation , and it certainly was not about either the law of evidence or trusts .
According to a former student , A postgraduate student also complained to the university after being supposedly harassed in the Bodleian Library .
Dirty Dyson ’ s stint also extended to invitations to awkward lunches .
Heydon , for his part , rejects “ any allegation of predatory behaviour or breaches of the law ” and that any conduct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inadvertent and unintended ” .
His statement conveyed through his lawyers sought to take any legal sting out of the findings of the investigation , “ an internal administrative inquiry ” that “ was conducted by a public servant and not by a lawyer , judge or a tribunal member .
It was conducted without having statutory powers of investigation and of administering affirmations or oaths.
” The Australian Labor Party smell blood , and few could blame them .
Former opposition leader Bill Shorten is demanding the return of the fee he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade unions , and stripping his Order of Australia .
“ This is a time to strip him of all his recognition and get him sorted.
” Memories of being closely examined by Heydon in 2014 , with the justice calling Shorten an evasive witness , remain vivid .
The fact that Heydon also accepted an invitation to deliver the annual Sir Garfield Barwick address at a Liberal Party event even as he performed his duties for the royal commission , did not help .
Exposing the invitation led to Heydon ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he step down from his role led to a less than searching investigation conducted by , of all people , Heydon himself .
In his words , he had “ overlooked the connection between the person and persons organising the address and the Liberal party which had been set out in [ an ] April 2014 email.
” Those in the legal profession have been rushing to the platforms in the wake of the revelations .
As a judge ’ s associate , Brooke Greenwood remembers “ being warned of [ Heydon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for events – warnings passed on by successive cohorts of female associates trying to protect themselves and each other.
” She also “ experienced sexual harassment ” prior to starting at the court .
“ I complained .
It was one of the hardest things I ’ ve ever done .
I was terrified I would lose the job I loved and had always wanted to do.
” In 2018 , the International Bar Association , in a joint-survey conducted with Acritas of 7,000 individuals in legal workplaces spanning 135 countries found endemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ One in three female respondents had been sexually harassed in a workplace context , as had one in 14 male respondents.
” Tentative suggestions are now being made that an equivalent Me Too movement in the legal profession is in the offing .
The lechers of power will be outed ; the molesters will be run out of the profession .
But that would require a massive , top-to-bottom , back and forth reappraisal of a guild much petrified by convention and obsessed with self-policing .
In the meantime , Heydon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
“ By the time this thing has washed through the system , ” concludes Phillip Coorey in the Australian Financial Review , “ there is every potential for more scalps .
Big names too.
” Note to readers : please click the share buttons above or below .
Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College , Cambridge .
He lectures at RMIT University , Melbourne .
He is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Research .
Email : [ email protected ]

It is one of the oldest professions, stacked with rules, conventions and protocols. It is also tribal and hierarchical. The law, presided over its executors, the judges, do not do transparency well. It stands to reason: according to Charles Dickens, the business of the law is to make business for itself, creating its own impenetrable labyrinths and traps while insisting on its own policing. Now, the high priests in Australia are asking searching questions about the case of former High Court justice Dyson Heydon.
On Monday, the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age revealed the existence, and the findings of an independent inquiry, into claims that Heydon had sexually harassed six associates during his time on the High Court bench. To that number were also a former judge and former head of the ACT Law Society, who allege indecent assault.
The Chief Justice of the Australian High Court, Susan Kiefel, revealed in her statement that the investigation, conducted by Vivienne Thom, had produced findings of “extreme concern to me, my fellow Justices, our Chief Executive and the staff of the Court. We’re ashamed that this could have happened in the High Court of Australia.”
The six recommendations seem odd, drafted, as it were, by someone who had just woken from an induced coma. They include the development of “a supplementary HR policy relevant to the particular employment circumstances of the personal staff of Justices including associates”: more information in “induction” sessions; and an understanding that associates were under no obligation “to attend social functions”. That this latter recommendation was even made suggests the ceremonial terror such powerful institutions wield: Whatever the judge says, goes.
Ceremonial terror is precisely the sort of thing that Heydon’s brother and sister justices could not have been ignorant of. While parlour gossip can be just that, the tightness of the bench, and members of the legal profession, suggest a desire to look the other way even as an open secret screams before you.
Three of those who received Heydon’s unwanted attention are now seeking legal action for compensation against both the justice and the Commonwealth.
“They were the best and brightest out of law school,” claimed their legal representative Josh Bornstein. “This was their first job in the legal profession, working for one of the most powerful men. They were in the early 20s, he was in his late 60s. In all three cases, they’ve abandoned the law.”
Such behaviour is also said to have taken place in Britain, where the justice proceeded to teach after mandatory retirement at the age of 70 in 2013. His appointment as Visiting Professor to the Law Faculty at the University of Oxford was greeted with some fanfare – at least initially. Law Faculty Dean Timothy Endicott was ecstatic.
“We would wish to be very careful to keep an appropriately high standard of distinction for Visiting Professors; in our view, Justice Heydon is most clearly a lawyer of the highest academic distinction.”
Endicott swooned over Heydon’s command of the “law of trusts”, and the fact that he was “a leading figure in the law of evidence”.
In undertaking his tasks of delivering lectures between 2014 to 2016, word got around; the Australians were talking about the judge’s reputation, and it certainly was not about either the law of evidence or trusts. According to a former student,
“My first introduction to him was that the Australian law students at Oxford called him ‘Dirty Dyson’, that seemed to be a moniker he had widely.”
A postgraduate student also complained to the university after being supposedly harassed in the Bodleian Library. Dirty Dyson’s stint also extended to invitations to awkward lunches.
Heydon, for his part, rejects “any allegation of predatory behaviour or breaches of the law” and that any conduct that “caused offence” was “inadvertent and unintended”. His statement conveyed through his lawyers sought to take any legal sting out of the findings of the investigation, “an internal administrative inquiry” that “was conducted by a public servant and not by a lawyer, judge or a tribunal member. It was conducted without having statutory powers of investigation and of administering affirmations or oaths.”
The Australian Labor Party smell blood, and few could blame them. Former opposition leader Bill Shorten is demanding the return of the fee he received while chairing the royal commission into trade unions, and stripping his Order of Australia. “This is a time to strip him of all his recognition and get him sorted.” Memories of being closely examined by Heydon in 2014, with the justice calling Shorten an evasive witness, remain vivid.
The fact that Heydon also accepted an invitation to deliver the annual Sir Garfield Barwick address at a Liberal Party event even as he performed his duties for the royal commission, did not help. Exposing the invitation led to Heydon’s withdrawal of acceptance; subsequent calls that he step down from his role led to a less than searching investigation conducted by, of all people, Heydon himself. In his words, he had “overlooked the connection between the person and persons organising the address and the Liberal party which had been set out in [an] April 2014 email.”
Those in the legal profession have been rushing to the platforms in the wake of the revelations. As a judge’s associate, Brooke Greenwood remembers “being warned of [Heydon’s] behaviour when retired justices returned for events – warnings passed on by successive cohorts of female associates trying to protect themselves and each other.” She also “experienced sexual harassment” prior to starting at the court. “I complained. It was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done. I was terrified I would lose the job I loved and had always wanted to do.”
In 2018, the International Bar Association, in a joint-survey conducted with Acritas of 7,000 individuals in legal workplaces spanning 135 countries found endemic instances of bullying and sexual harassment. “One in three female respondents had been sexually harassed in a workplace context, as had one in 14 male respondents.”
Tentative suggestions are now being made that an equivalent Me Too movement in the legal profession is in the offing. The lechers of power will be outed; the molesters will be run out of the profession. But that would require a massive, top-to-bottom, back and forth reappraisal of a guild much petrified by convention and obsessed with self-policing. In the meantime, Heydon’s fall may also take others with him. “By the time this thing has washed through the system,” concludes Phillip Coorey in the Australian Financial Review, “there is every potential for more scalps. Big names too.”
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]


asiapacificresearch--2020-07-01--Defending Australia: The Deputy Sheriff Spending Spree

There are few sadder sights in international relations than a leadership in search of devils and hobgoblins .
But such sights tend to make an appearance when specialists in threat inflation either get elected to office or bumped up the hierarchies of officialdom .
The sagacious pondering types are edged out , leaving way for the drum beaters .
As the Roman general Vegetius suggested with solemn gravity in the 4th century , “ Igitur qui desiderat pacem , praeparet bellum , ” an expression that has come to mean that those desiring peace best ready for war .
Australia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its citizens rather pointedly that “ we have moved into a new and less benign strategic era ” .
It is something that the federal government has never tired of stressing ever since the White Tribe of Asia developed fears of genetic and maternal abandonment , being thousands of miles from Britannia but uncomfortably close to the hordes of Asia .
To the north lay the colours black , brown and yellow , tempered , for a time , by the powers of Europe .
Henry Lawson , who had a fear or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on this sentiment in his patchy Flag of the Southern Cross : “ See how the yellow-men next to her lust for her , Sooner or later to battle we must for her ” .
Such flag-wearing rhetoric can be found in the latest announcement by Prime Minister Scott Morrison to commit $ 270 billion to the defence budget over the next ten years .
In real terms , this amounts to an additional increase of $ 70 billion from initial projections based on the 2016 Defence White Paper .
His speech at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impression that Australia is thinking as an independent , autonomous agent , rather than a deputy sheriff for the Stars and Stripes .
“ The strategic competition between China and the United States means there ’ s a lot of tension in the cord and a lot of risk of miscalculation.
” Instead of committing to an easing of that tension , Morrison is keen to throw Australia into an increasingly crowded theatre of participants in the Indo-Pacific on the mistaken premise that things have dramatically changed .
“ And so we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world in which we live as best as we can , and be prepared to respond and play our role to protect Australia , defend Australia.
” That defence is , invariably , linked to that of the United States , which sees Australia as an essential cog in the containment strategy of the PRC .
The idea that this new round of spending will assist Australia ’ s own independence from this project is misleading in the extreme .
For one , the continuing stress on interoperability between the Australian Defence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feature of spending decisions .
Deputy Sheriffs know where and from whom to take their cues and stock from .
Such weapons as the United States Navy ’ s AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missile ( LRASM ) are on the list of future purchases .
There is also the promise of underwater surveillance systems , and research and development in what promises to be another frontier of an international arms race : hypersonic weapons or , as US President Donald Trump prefers to call them “ super duper missiles ” .
( Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latter . )
The prime minister also revisits a term that is impossible to quantify , largely because of its fictional quality .
Deterrence , ever elastic and rubbery , only has meaning when the hypothetical opponent fears retaliation and loss .
To undertake any attack would , to that end , be dangerous .
For decades , this fictional deterrent was kept up by the vast umbrella of the US imperium .
The sense that this umbrella might be fraying is being used as an excuse to beat the war drum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nolan is one , insisting that “ we must share some of the blame [ for the likelihood of regional conflict ] because we have ignored our century-long history of national unpreparedness , and have relied blindly on an assumed level of US power which , since the end of the Cold War , exists at a much lower and dangerous level , and looks less likely to deter regional conflict.
” Nolan nurses a fantasy that seems to be catching : that Australia aspire to “ self-reliance ” and have “ confidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to defend ourselves and so , with a bit of luck , deter conflict impacting directly on us .
At present , we are severely deficient.
” Morrison similarly opines that , “ The ADF now needs stronger deterrence capabilities .
Capabilities that can hold potential adversaries ’ forces and critical infrastructure at risk from a distance , thereby deterring an attack on Australia and helping to prevent war ” .
To imagine that Australia would be able to deter a power such as China , even with projected purchases , is daftly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come into play .
This incoherence is of little concern to the family of strategists that inhabit the isolated climes of Canberra .
When money and weaponry is promised , champagne corks pop .
Peter Jennings of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute is duly celebrating , given his fixation with that one power “ with both the capacity and the desire to dominate the Indo-Pacific region in a way that works against Australia ’ s interest ” .
He even has a stab at humour : “ We ’ re not talking about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military expenditure are always to be seen with suspicion .
They come with warnings with little substance , and only matter because people of like mind find themselves on opposite sides of the fence warning of the very same thing .
If you do not spend now , you are leaving the country open to attack .
That most important question “ Why would they attack us in the first place ?
” is never asked .
Even at the height of the furious battles of the Second World War , Imperial Japan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continent which would have needlessly consumed resources .
Australia , in short , has never been an inviting target for anyone .
The dangers of adding to the military industrial complex , then , are only too clear .
Countries who prepare for war in the name of armed security can encourage the very thing they are meant to prevent .
Purchased weapons are , after all , there to be used .
The result is the expenditure of billions that would better be spent on health , education and , ever pressingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are then left with the desperate sense of a psychological defect : the need to feel wanted and relevant on the big stage .
This was very much the case when Prime Minister Robert Menzies committed Australian troops in 1965 to stem the Red-Yellow Horde in the steaming jungles of Vietnam .
The language being used then was much as it is now : to deter , to advance national security , to combat an authoritarian menace in a dangerous region .
Little weight was given to the subtleties of a nationalist conflict @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Half-baked and uncooked strategy was served in the messes .
In adding their bloody complement to a local conflict that would eventually see a US defeat , Labor ’ s Arthur Calwell , himself a self-styled white nationalist , made a sober speech in denunciation .
Australia was committing resources to “ the bottomless pit of jungle warfare , in a war in which we have not even defined our purpose honestly , or explained what we would accept as victory ” .
Doing so was “ the very height of folly and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now finds itself committed to a defence strategy against a mirage dressed in enemy ’ s clothes masked in language that resists meaning or quantification .
Note to readers : please click the share buttons above or below .
Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College , Cambridge .
He lectures at RMIT University , Melbourne .
He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research .
Email : @ @ @ @

There are few sadder sights in international relations than a leadership in search of devils and hobgoblins. But such sights tend to make an appearance when specialists in threat inflation either get elected to office or bumped up the hierarchies of officialdom. The sagacious pondering types are edged out, leaving way for the drum beaters. As the Roman general Vegetius suggested with solemn gravity in the 4th century, “Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum,” an expression that has come to mean that those desiring peace best ready for war.
Australia’s drum beating government has told its citizens rather pointedly that “we have moved into a new and less benign strategic era”. It is something that the federal government has never tired of stressing ever since the White Tribe of Asia developed fears of genetic and maternal abandonment, being thousands of miles from Britannia but uncomfortably close to the hordes of Asia. To the north lay the colours black, brown and yellow, tempered, for a time, by the powers of Europe. Henry Lawson, who had a fear or two tucked under his belt, reflected on this sentiment in his patchy Flag of the Southern Cross: “See how the yellow-men next to her lust for her, Sooner or later to battle we must for her”.
Such flag-wearing rhetoric can be found in the latest announcement by Prime Minister Scott Morrison to commit $270 billion to the defence budget over the next ten years. In real terms, this amounts to an additional increase of $70 billion from initial projections based on the 2016 Defence White Paper. His speech at the Australian Defence Force Academy gives the impression that Australia is thinking as an independent, autonomous agent, rather than a deputy sheriff for the Stars and Stripes. “The strategic competition between China and the United States means there’s a lot of tension in the cord and a lot of risk of miscalculation.”
Instead of committing to an easing of that tension, Morrison is keen to throw Australia into an increasingly crowded theatre of participants in the Indo-Pacific on the mistaken premise that things have dramatically changed. “And so we have to be prepared and ready to frame the world in which we live as best as we can, and be prepared to respond and play our role to protect Australia, defend Australia.”
That defence is, invariably, linked to that of the United States, which sees Australia as an essential cog in the containment strategy of the PRC. The idea that this new round of spending will assist Australia’s own independence from this project is misleading in the extreme. For one, the continuing stress on interoperability between the Australian Defence Force and its US counterparts remains a feature of spending decisions. Deputy Sheriffs know where and from whom to take their cues and stock from. Such weapons as the United States Navy’s AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) are on the list of future purchases. There is also the promise of underwater surveillance systems, and research and development in what promises to be another frontier of an international arms race: hypersonic weapons or, as US President Donald Trump prefers to call them “super duper missiles”. (Some $9.3 billion has been allocated for the latter.)
The prime minister also revisits a term that is impossible to quantify, largely because of its fictional quality. Deterrence, ever elastic and rubbery, only has meaning when the hypothetical opponent fears retaliation and loss. To undertake any attack would, to that end, be dangerous. For decades, this fictional deterrent was kept up by the vast umbrella of the US imperium.
The sense that this umbrella might be fraying is being used as an excuse to beat the war drum and stir the blood. Senator Jim Nolan is one, insisting that “we must share some of the blame [for the likelihood of regional conflict] because we have ignored our century-long history of national unpreparedness, and have relied blindly on an assumed level of US power which, since the end of the Cold War, exists at a much lower and dangerous level, and looks less likely to deter regional conflict.” Nolan nurses a fantasy that seems to be catching: that Australia aspire to “self-reliance” and have “confidence that we could adjust in time required to defend ourselves and so, with a bit of luck, deter conflict impacting directly on us. At present, we are severely deficient.”
Morrison similarly opines that, “The ADF now needs stronger deterrence capabilities. Capabilities that can hold potential adversaries’ forces and critical infrastructure at risk from a distance, thereby deterring an attack on Australia and helping to prevent war”. To imagine that Australia would be able to deter a power such as China, even with projected purchases, is daftly entertaining. The term simply does not come into play.
This incoherence is of little concern to the family of strategists that inhabit the isolated climes of Canberra. When money and weaponry is promised, champagne corks pop. Peter Jennings of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute is duly celebrating, given his fixation with that one power “with both the capacity and the desire to dominate the Indo-Pacific region in a way that works against Australia’s interest”. He even has a stab at humour: “We’re not talking about Canada.”
Broad policy commitments to bloated military expenditure are always to be seen with suspicion. They come with warnings with little substance, and only matter because people of like mind find themselves on opposite sides of the fence warning of the very same thing. If you do not spend now, you are leaving the country open to attack. That most important question “Why would they attack us in the first place?” is never asked. Even at the height of the furious battles of the Second World War, Imperial Japan debated the merits of invading an island continent which would have needlessly consumed resources. Australia, in short, has never been an inviting target for anyone.
The dangers of adding to the military industrial complex, then, are only too clear. Countries who prepare for war in the name of armed security can encourage the very thing they are meant to prevent. Purchased weapons are, after all, there to be used. The result is the expenditure of billions that would better be spent on health, education and, ever pressingly, on redressing environmental ruination.
We are then left with the desperate sense of a psychological defect: the need to feel wanted and relevant on the big stage. This was very much the case when Prime Minister Robert Menzies committed Australian troops in 1965 to stem the Red-Yellow Horde in the steaming jungles of Vietnam. The language being used then was much as it is now: to deter, to advance national security, to combat an authoritarian menace in a dangerous region. Little weight was given to the subtleties of a nationalist conflict that was not driven by Beijing. Half-baked and uncooked strategy was served in the messes.
In adding their bloody complement to a local conflict that would eventually see a US defeat, Labor’s Arthur Calwell, himself a self-styled white nationalist, made a sober speech in denunciation. Australia was committing resources to “the bottomless pit of jungle warfare, in a war in which we have not even defined our purpose honestly, or explained what we would accept as victory”. Doing so was “the very height of folly and the very depths of despair.” Australia now finds itself committed to a defence strategy against a mirage dressed in enemy’s clothes masked in language that resists meaning or quantification.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]


asiapacificresearch--2020-07-02--Killing Koalas: The Promise of Extinction Down Under

The British conservationist Gerald Durrell once remarked that the koala was “ the most boring of animals ” .
Its brain size , proportionally the smallest of any mammal , evolved to cope with its slow metabolism .
But the spectacle of these singed , toasted animals was a terrifyingly cruel one to behold .
As good stretches of Australia burned over the last bushfire season , the sheer scale and intensity of this otherwise regular occurrence suggested something beyond remedy .
Fires bring with them bold destruction and vigorous promise .
What is taken can be renewed .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question .
Environmental degradation , anthropogenic meddling and all around beastliness to country , has made Australia a titan of destructiveness .
In terms of mammals , its rate of extinction is grimly impressive , making it the leader in an inglorious pack .
As John Woinarski noted in 2018 , “ Over the last two hundred years at least 34 Australian mammal species and 29 birds have become extinct.
” A New South Wales Parliamentary committee has brought more bad tidings to further blot the copybook .
Published on June 30 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in New South Wales suggests that the animal , in the absence of government intervention , is doomed to extinction by 2050 .
The culprits of depredation have not changed , and the report reads like a doomsday call .
The list of findings would make bruising reading to even the most stone-hearted property developer .
The casualties for this particular marsupial during the course of the recent bushfires is said to be 5,000 .
A warning is issued that the current estimated number of 36,000 koalas in New South Wales following the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
Continuous logging of NSW native forests “ has had cumulative impacts on koalas over many years because it has reduced the maturity , size and availability of preferred feed and roost trees.
” Climate change had also compounded “ the severity and impact of other threats , such as drought and bushfires , on koala populations.
” Firmer interventions by the state government were needed to address population declines .
Existing policies on koala protection were also found to be deficient .
The NSW Koala Strategy fell “ short of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a whole-of-government koala strategy with the objective of stabilising and then increasing koala numbers.
” It did not “ prioritise and resource the urgent need to protect koala habitat across all tenures.
” A question mark remained on the issue of translocation as a viable strategy of coping with species preservation .
The committee makes 42 recommendations , some of them eminently sensible .
But sensibility requires action ; and action demands will .
Such will , it was noted by committee members , does not seem present at the government level .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ member of the Greens , was exasperated in her foreword , claiming frustration at hearing “ from government witnesses that the policies and laws in place to protect koalas and their habitat are adequate.
” Saving such a species can only commence in earnest at the council , local government level .
One recommendation insists on giving the reins to community groups by means of additional funding and support “ so that they can plant trees and regenerate bushland along koala and wildlife corridors and explore mechanisms to protect these corridors in-perpetuity.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to develop conservation programs and “ conducting mapping [ … ] for comprehensive koala plans of management.
” Other recommendations will irk industry , including the recommendation that the NSW government visit the destructive impacts of logging “ in all public native ( non-plantation ) forests in the context of enabling koala habitat to be identified and protected ” .
The logging and deforestation lobbies will be particularly worried about recommendation 41 , which suggests the creation of the Great Koala National Park , an idea first put forth by the National Parks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ association can hardly be accused of lacking money sense : establishing such a park , they suggest , “ could become a globally significant tourist attraction.
” ( This would hardly help in arresting pervasive environmental fragmentation . )
175,000 hectares of public state forests would be added to the existing protected complement , creating a total of 315,000 hectares reserve .
This is of little comfort to such opponents of the scheme as the Australian Workers ’ Union of NSW , an organisation not exactly known for its green tendencies .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s view that the park would result in a “ catastrophic destruction of regional economies and jobs ” .
Assistant Secretary Paul Noack even went so far as to dismiss the effectiveness of such a venture .
Forget parks , he suggested ; focus on creating “ koala protection areas ” .
Noack need not be too bothered .
Inquiries of this sort always risk succumbing to reductive strategies and severe trimming .
Then comes the matter of vacuous symbolism .
The koala draws the attention of the camera and the publicity minded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy discussion .
As the Australia Koala Foundation ’ s chief executive Deborah Tabart has remarked , “ the koala has many powerful enemies ” .
In September 2011 , an Australian Senate inquiry named The Koala – saving our national icon covered similar ground the NSW parliamentary report does .
Good habitat mapping and the identification of “ a standardised set of methodologies in estimating koala populations ” were recommended ; a national koala monitoring and evaluation program was suggested .
But the report lacks bite and desperation .
Committee members , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complexity of this multifaceted issue ” , often political code for inertia .
Koala populations might have been in sharp decline in the Mulga Lands of Queensland , but were healthy on Kangaroo Island in South Australia .
Such tentative observations did little to discourage the devastating land clearing that continues its remorseless march in Queensland and NSW .
Regional forest arrangements made over the last two decades have also been found to be woefully inadequate in NSW , Victoria , Tasmania and Victoria .
Prior to the conflagrations over the course of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Foundation was already spreading the gloomy word that the koala population in Australia stood at 80,000 , making them “ functionally extinct ” .
A species considered as such is gazing over the precipice , essentially irrelevant or ineffectual in their ecosystem , incapable of reproducing or simply inbreeding .
As Christine Hosking remarked in The Conversation in May 2019 , “ It ’ s hard to say exactly how many koalas are still remaining in Queensland , New South Wales , Victoria , South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deforestation , disease and the effects of climate change.
” In November 2019 , Natasha Daly penned a corrective in the National Geographic , amassing a range of qualifying opinions .
There had been “ erroneous declarations that the animals have lost most of their habit and are ‘ functionally extinct ’ making the rounds in headlines and on social media , illustrating just how quickly misinformation can spread in times of crisis.
” Chris Johnson , professor of wildlife conservation at the University of Tasmania , wished to dampen such apocalyptic calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline because of lots of interacting reasons , but we ’ re not at the point where one event can take them out.
” Diana Fisher of the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland suggested that the species was “ threatened in some parts of its range and not in others.
” Such views , in the aftermath of the latest round of lethal bushfires , must come across as a bit hair-splitting .
The vulnerability of the species has reached apocalyptic levels and human complacency , along with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of enforceable protections , might well prove to be the enemy of this animal .
Note to readers : please click the share buttons above or below .
Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College , Cambridge .
He lectures at RMIT University , Melbourne .
He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research .
Email : [ email protected ]

The British conservationist Gerald Durrell once remarked that the koala was “the most boring of animals”. Its brain size, proportionally the smallest of any mammal, evolved to cope with its slow metabolism. But the spectacle of these singed, toasted animals was a terrifyingly cruel one to behold. As good stretches of Australia burned over the last bushfire season, the sheer scale and intensity of this otherwise regular occurrence suggested something beyond remedy. Fires bring with them bold destruction and vigorous promise. What is taken can be renewed.
That matter of renewal has been brought into question. Environmental degradation, anthropogenic meddling and all around beastliness to country, has made Australia a titan of destructiveness. In terms of mammals, its rate of extinction is grimly impressive, making it the leader in an inglorious pack. As John Woinarski noted in 2018, “Over the last two hundred years at least 34 Australian mammal species and 29 birds have become extinct.”
A New South Wales Parliamentary committee has brought more bad tidings to further blot the copybook. Published on June 30, 2020, Koala populations and the habitat in New South Wales suggests that the animal, in the absence of government intervention, is doomed to extinction by 2050. The culprits of depredation have not changed, and the report reads like a doomsday call.
The list of findings would make bruising reading to even the most stone-hearted property developer. The casualties for this particular marsupial during the course of the recent bushfires is said to be 5,000. A warning is issued that the current estimated number of 36,000 koalas in New South Wales following the 2019-2020 bushfires “is outdated and unreliable”. Continuous logging of NSW native forests “has had cumulative impacts on koalas over many years because it has reduced the maturity, size and availability of preferred feed and roost trees.” Climate change had also compounded “the severity and impact of other threats, such as drought and bushfires, on koala populations.” Firmer interventions by the state government were needed to address population declines.
Existing policies on koala protection were also found to be deficient. The NSW Koala Strategy fell “short of the NSW Chief Scientist’s recommendation of a whole-of-government koala strategy with the objective of stabilising and then increasing koala numbers.” It did not “prioritise and resource the urgent need to protect koala habitat across all tenures.” A question mark remained on the issue of translocation as a viable strategy of coping with species preservation.
The committee makes 42 recommendations, some of them eminently sensible. But sensibility requires action; and action demands will. Such will, it was noted by committee members, does not seem present at the government level. Cate Faehrmann, the committee chair and member of the Greens, was exasperated in her foreword, claiming frustration at hearing “from government witnesses that the policies and laws in place to protect koalas and their habitat are adequate.”
Saving such a species can only commence in earnest at the council, local government level. One recommendation insists on giving the reins to community groups by means of additional funding and support “so that they can plant trees and regenerate bushland along koala and wildlife corridors and explore mechanisms to protect these corridors in-perpetuity.” More funding is suggested for local councils to develop conservation programs and “conducting mapping […] for comprehensive koala plans of management.”
Other recommendations will irk industry, including the recommendation that the NSW government visit the destructive impacts of logging “in all public native (non-plantation) forests in the context of enabling koala habitat to be identified and protected”. The logging and deforestation lobbies will be particularly worried about recommendation 41, which suggests the creation of the Great Koala National Park, an idea first put forth by the National Parks Association of NSW in 2015. That association can hardly be accused of lacking money sense: establishing such a park, they suggest, “could become a globally significant tourist attraction.” (This would hardly help in arresting pervasive environmental fragmentation.) 175,000 hectares of public state forests would be added to the existing protected complement, creating a total of 315,000 hectares reserve.
This is of little comfort to such opponents of the scheme as the Australian Workers’ Union of NSW, an organisation not exactly known for its green tendencies. The committee report duly notes the union’s view that the park would result in a “catastrophic destruction of regional economies and jobs”. Assistant Secretary Paul Noack even went so far as to dismiss the effectiveness of such a venture. Forget parks, he suggested; focus on creating “koala protection areas”.
Noack need not be too bothered. Inquiries of this sort always risk succumbing to reductive strategies and severe trimming. Then comes the matter of vacuous symbolism. The koala draws the attention of the camera and the publicity minded bureaucrat, only to vanish from the policy discussion. As the Australia Koala Foundation’s chief executive Deborah Tabart has remarked, “the koala has many powerful enemies”.
In September 2011, an Australian Senate inquiry named The Koala – saving our national icon covered similar ground the NSW parliamentary report does. Good habitat mapping and the identification of “a standardised set of methodologies in estimating koala populations” were recommended; a national koala monitoring and evaluation program was suggested. But the report lacks bite and desperation. Committee members, for instance, remarked on “the complexity of this multifaceted issue”, often political code for inertia. Koala populations might have been in sharp decline in the Mulga Lands of Queensland, but were healthy on Kangaroo Island in South Australia.
Such tentative observations did little to discourage the devastating land clearing that continues its remorseless march in Queensland and NSW. Regional forest arrangements made over the last two decades have also been found to be woefully inadequate in NSW, Victoria, Tasmania and Victoria.
Prior to the conflagrations over the course of 2019 and 2020, the Australian Koala Foundation was already spreading the gloomy word that the koala population in Australia stood at 80,000, making them “functionally extinct”. A species considered as such is gazing over the precipice, essentially irrelevant or ineffectual in their ecosystem, incapable of reproducing or simply inbreeding. As Christine Hosking remarked in The Conversation in May 2019, “It’s hard to say exactly how many koalas are still remaining in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory, but they are highly vulnerable to threats including deforestation, disease and the effects of climate change.”
In November 2019, Natasha Daly penned a corrective in the National Geographic, amassing a range of qualifying opinions. There had been “erroneous declarations that the animals have lost most of their habit and are ‘functionally extinct’ making the rounds in headlines and on social media, illustrating just how quickly misinformation can spread in times of crisis.” Chris Johnson, professor of wildlife conservation at the University of Tasmania, wished to dampen such apocalyptic calls. “Koala populations will continue to decline because of lots of interacting reasons, but we’re not at the point where one event can take them out.” Diana Fisher of the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland suggested that the species was “threatened in some parts of its range and not in others.”
Such views, in the aftermath of the latest round of lethal bushfires, must come across as a bit hair-splitting. The vulnerability of the species has reached apocalyptic levels and human complacency, along with the usual crippling disregard shown through a lack of enforceable protections, might well prove to be the enemy of this animal.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]


asiapacificresearch--2020-07-03--Criminalising Journalism: Australia’s National Security Craze

There has been a lot of noise made in Australia about the need for broader protections when it comes to the fourth estate and the way it covers national security matters .
In a country lacking a backbone in terms of constitutional free speech , journalists are left at the mercy of authorities when it comes to exposing egregious abuses of power .
Consider , for instance , the exposure of war crimes committed by Australian forces via what has come to be known as the Afghan Files .
As Dan Oakes and Sam Clark , the two ABC journalists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote in July 2017 , The material , published in seven parts , should not surprise students of war .
In the brutality of the Afghan conflict , the killing of civilians became a casual , cruel matter .
In September 2013 , a man and his six-year-old child were killed during the raid on a house .
This incident , along with another involving the killing of a detainee who had allegedly attempted to seize the weapon of an Australian soldier whilst in his custody , formed part of an investigation by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Force .
In 2013 , an Afghan man was slain by Australian troops while riding his motorcycle .
The female passenger was injured .
The report in question noted the increasingly parlous state of Afghan-Australian relations in light of such incidents , involving the wanton killing of civilians by special forces .
Much of this stemmed from the sloppiness of Australian military protocol on the battlefield , shown to be hopelessly , and lethally inadequate .
There nomenklatura of the defence establishment spoke to the need of only targeting Afghans “ directly participating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was lazily made if and when it was made at all .
These are but a few highlights that this cache of files revealed .
But at the core of these revelations was a failed pseudo-colonial mission that was ignoble , misguided and , for all the fanfare of salvation , a dismal failure .
It did little in terms of shoring up either Australian security or those of the Afghan population .
It failed in defeating the insurgent Taliban forces .
It had taken place on impulse , to assist a grieving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terror attacks of September 11 , 2001 .
As with other empires , Afghanistan was reaffirmed as a graveyard for failed powers .
The Taliban , far from being defeated , showed their resoluteness and staying power .
The exposure of such defence documents should have sent policy makers and reformers into the corridors of the ADF .
Oakes and Clark deserved , at the very least , a modest acknowledgment of merit .
Instead , they and the ABC attracted the keen eye of the Australian Federal Police .
On June 5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cheerfully raided the offices of the national broadcaster in Sydney .
The home of News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst was also raided for reporting on a separate matter touching on a proposed expansion of surveillance powers held by the Australian Signals Directorate .
Both raids were motivated by alleged breaches of official secrecy under the old version of the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth ) .
These furnished the Australian public a chilling spectacle , and did something nothing else could have done : bring unity to a fractious field .
Journalists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Guardian Australia chorused in concern and consternation .
The Right to Know campaign was born , though remains , to date , an incipient venture .
In the words of the coalition , The reason why the campaign has failed to yield rewards can be gathered by the continued investigation of Oakes and Clark and the mixed results of the campaign in the courts .
The ABC failed to invalidate the warrants executed to search their Sydney offices , with Federal Court Justice Wendy Abraham issuing a pointed reminder in February that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a personal right but one designed to restrict power .
Smethurst and News Corp did modestly better in the High Court on April 15 , but only in terms of result .
In invalidating the search AFP search warrant , the judges found against the police purely on the basis of vague drafting .
The warrant in question failed “ to identify any offence under section 79 ( 3 ) [ of the Crimes Act ] ” and substantially misstated “ the nature of an offence arising under it.
” Had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they would still have stood as valid exercises of state power .
Smethurst and her colleagues probably kept the champagne on ice .
In September 2019 , Attorney-General Christian Porter issued a direction under the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Act requiring the Director of Public Prosecutions to seek the approval of the AG in instances where a journalist is to be prosecuted .
When it was issued , weak pronouncements were made that this was a warning to the AFP not to pursue the scribblers of the fourth estate .
Porter brandished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a free press was significant “ as a principle of democracy ” .
Given Porter ’ s insistence on prosecuting former ASIS officer Witness K and his lawyer , Bernard Collaery , for exposing a blatant wrong against a friendly country , such credentials can be dismissed as surplus baubles .
Little wonder , then , that the AFP has now confirmed submitting a brief of evidence to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions , acting on the July 11 , 2017 referral received from the Chief of the Defence Force and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommended .
Oddly enough , the police have decided to single out Oakes and spare Clark .
Power , in the absence of restraint , is coldly arbitrary .
The final say on whether such charges will be laid resides with Porter , and we have every reason to be troubled by a discretion that is executive , political and non-judicial .
Oakes sees the higher principle at stake .
“ Whether or not we are ever charged or convicted over our stories , the most important thing is that those who broke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflict are held to account.
” Note to readers : please click the share buttons above or below .
Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College , Cambridge .
He lectures at RMIT University , Melbourne .
He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research .
Email : [ email protected ]

There has been a lot of noise made in Australia about the need for broader protections when it comes to the fourth estate and the way it covers national security matters. In a country lacking a backbone in terms of constitutional free speech, journalists are left at the mercy of authorities when it comes to exposing egregious abuses of power. Consider, for instance, the exposure of war crimes committed by Australian forces via what has come to be known as the Afghan Files.
As Dan Oakes and Sam Clark, the two ABC journalists involved in putting together the file material wrote in July 2017,
“Hundreds of pages of secret defence force documents leaked to the ABC give an unprecedented insight into the clandestine operations in Australia’s elite special forces in Afghanistan, including incidents of troops killing unarmed men and children.”
The material, published in seven parts, should not surprise students of war. In the brutality of the Afghan conflict, the killing of civilians became a casual, cruel matter. In September 2013, a man and his six-year-old child were killed during the raid on a house. This incident, along with another involving the killing of a detainee who had allegedly attempted to seize the weapon of an Australian soldier whilst in his custody, formed part of an investigation by the Inspector General of the Australian Defence Force.
In 2013, an Afghan man was slain by Australian troops while riding his motorcycle. The female passenger was injured. The report in question noted the increasingly parlous state of Afghan-Australian relations in light of such incidents, involving the wanton killing of civilians by special forces. Much of this stemmed from the sloppiness of Australian military protocol on the battlefield, shown to be hopelessly, and lethally inadequate. There nomenklatura of the defence establishment spoke to the need of only targeting Afghans “directly participating in hostilities”, a distinction that was lazily made if and when it was made at all.
These are but a few highlights that this cache of files revealed. But at the core of these revelations was a failed pseudo-colonial mission that was ignoble, misguided and, for all the fanfare of salvation, a dismal failure. It did little in terms of shoring up either Australian security or those of the Afghan population. It failed in defeating the insurgent Taliban forces. It had taken place on impulse, to assist a grieving US still licking its wounds after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. As with other empires, Afghanistan was reaffirmed as a graveyard for failed powers. The Taliban, far from being defeated, showed their resoluteness and staying power.
The exposure of such defence documents should have sent policy makers and reformers into the corridors of the ADF. Oakes and Clark deserved, at the very least, a modest acknowledgment of merit. Instead, they and the ABC attracted the keen eye of the Australian Federal Police. On June 5, 2019, AFP officers swanned in and cheerfully raided the offices of the national broadcaster in Sydney. The home of News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst was also raided for reporting on a separate matter touching on a proposed expansion of surveillance powers held by the Australian Signals Directorate. Both raids were motivated by alleged breaches of official secrecy under the old version of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).
These furnished the Australian public a chilling spectacle, and did something nothing else could have done: bring unity to a fractious field. Journalists from Fairfax, News Corp and The Guardian Australia chorused in concern and consternation. The Right to Know campaign was born, though remains, to date, an incipient venture. In the words of the coalition,
“You have a right to know what the government you elect are doing in your name. But in Australia today, the media is prevented from informing you, people who speak out are penalised and journalism that shines a light on matters you deserve to know about is criminalised.”
The reason why the campaign has failed to yield rewards can be gathered by the continued investigation of Oakes and Clark and the mixed results of the campaign in the courts. The ABC failed to invalidate the warrants executed to search their Sydney offices, with Federal Court Justice Wendy Abraham issuing a pointed reminder in February that the implied constitutional right to political subjects is not a personal right but one designed to restrict power.
Smethurst and News Corp did modestly better in the High Court on April 15, but only in terms of result. In invalidating the search AFP search warrant, the judges found against the police purely on the basis of vague drafting. The warrant in question failed “to identify any offence under section 79(3)[of the Crimes Act]” and substantially misstated “the nature of an offence arising under it.” Had the warrant been prescribed with greater clarity, they would still have stood as valid exercises of state power. Smethurst and her colleagues probably kept the champagne on ice.
In September 2019, Attorney-General Christian Porter issued a direction under the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Act requiring the Director of Public Prosecutions to seek the approval of the AG in instances where a journalist is to be prosecuted. When it was issued, weak pronouncements were made that this was a warning to the AFP not to pursue the scribblers of the fourth estate. Porter brandished his credentials as a democrat, arguing that a free press was significant “as a principle of democracy”. Given Porter’s insistence on prosecuting former ASIS officer Witness K and his lawyer, Bernard Collaery, for exposing a blatant wrong against a friendly country, such credentials can be dismissed as surplus baubles.
Little wonder, then, that the AFP has now confirmed submitting a brief of evidence to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, acting on the July 11, 2017 referral received from the Chief of the Defence Force and then acting-secretary of defence. Charges are recommended. Oddly enough, the police have decided to single out Oakes and spare Clark. Power, in the absence of restraint, is coldly arbitrary.
The final say on whether such charges will be laid resides with Porter, and we have every reason to be troubled by a discretion that is executive, political and non-judicial. Oakes sees the higher principle at stake. “Whether or not we are ever charged or convicted over our stories, the most important thing is that those who broke our laws and the laws of armed conflict are held to account.”
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]


asiapacificresearch--2020-07-06--Spiked Concerns: The Melbourne Coronavirus Lockdown

It all looked like it was going so well for Australia and Victoria , in particular .
They could point to the mishandling of the Ruby Princess , a cruise ship that docked in Sydney and whose passengers disembarked chocked with coronavirus , precipitating 700 cases and some 21 deaths across the country .
It had , till now , been the single most contagious incident in the COVID-19 annals of the antipodes .
Victorians could hold their heads hubristically high .
Then , the dreaded spike returned .
Before journalists had time to file , or arm chair warriors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus beast had gotten away from an Australian state that had prided itself in reining in numbers and playing the game of suppression .
Victoria ’ s quarantine regime was seemingly in tatters ; COVID-19 had found its way through the channels of community transmission .
Now , nine public housing towers in Flemington and North Melbourne with some 3,000 residents have gone into “ complete lockdown ” .
Residents are not permitted to leave their abodes for five days .
The police are holding the fort .
The hindsight wizards are all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignoring that old wisdom that pandemic policy is an unruly , fickle thing .
The Andrews government has been accused of incompetence and hubris .
Greg Sheridan of the Murdoch stable of reactionary politics was jubilant at the failings of the premier .
“ Daniel Andrews is now clearly the worst-performing , most unsuccessful premier or territory leader in Australia in managing the COVID-19 outbreak , despite being more authoritarian.
” Why , asked Fairfax press correspondent Peter Hartcher on Sunday , did Andrews not respect the plague lessons of old ?
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the carpet from under the state government .
Central and defective is the issue of the quarantine regime itself , one that seems to have fallen into a state of ruin .
With a rise in COVID-19 infections in late June , Andrews found himself scratching his confused head .
There were claims that the new outbreak might be traced to an errant cigarette lighter used by staff working in hotel quarantine .
They had kept their distance , claimed the premier “ but sharing a lighter between each other ” .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which mean they were in closer contact than we would like.
” A terrible understatement .
It did not take long for the critics to train their interest in the very idea of having security guards supervising the entire program .
Recruits with spotty levels of training , much of it horrendously so , were used to supervise the quarantined guests .
And it showed .
Various transgressions and malpractices took place .
Some security personnel had sexual congress with their guarded quarry , a point that delighted such outlets as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listed on duty at any one time was inflated as part of an effort to charge more for fewer services .
Personal protective equipment was worn for extensive periods of time without change , and loose supervision meant that quarantined families could still visit each under for recreational pursuits .
Such practices were replicated at various hotels , leading to a spurring on of the contagion .
There have also been increasing numbers of returning travellers and residents who have refused to be tested for coronavirus .
In the rage that has followed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of malice have been imputed .
Conspiracy theories were underlined .
As Jane Williams and Bridget Haire suggest in The Conversation , such testing never yields “ neutral ” information .
“ People may refuse medical testing ( if they have symptoms ) or screening ( if no symptoms ) of any type because they want to avoid the consequences of a positive result.
” Casual workers , for instance , face the perils of few if any sick days .
Jobs can be lost during the course of quarantine .
The Andrews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , none of them palatable , few of them desirable .
To send armed police to effectively detain a vulnerable population , many immigrants , many with a less than sympathetic disposition to the boys and girls in blue , may not be the most politic of moves .
In this sense , the premier has his hands tied .
Saddled with the moniker “ Red Dan ” and now having the spectre of the Wuhan experiment of bordering up buildings manifest itself in Melbourne , risk scuppering any credible efforts .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is wedged .
Individuals like Sheridan howl about the “ politburo ” style of the Victorian premier but would equally object to firm measures if they were not taken .
The reaction from residents in the public housing towers is predictably rattled .
Sudanese national Awatif Taha , who has been a resident in the Flemington public housing flats for 18 years with her husband , paints a troubling scene of crowded tenement spaces , insufficient government services and poor channels of information .
Community leaders were not enlisted in the cause .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ what happened on Saturday , with us being told we would not be allowed to leave our units for at least five days ?
I feel really good , but it was a shock .
I don ’ t know why they didn ’ t talk to us before Saturday.
” Sensitivity is being reiterated , but this is becoming a trope on a loop .
Articulating it somehow makes it manifest , but there is no sense yet how each resident in these towers will be given the tender reassurance and compassionate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem .
The premier has announced a scheme of hardship payments and around the clock support ( food , medical and other services ) .
But these are people being held against their will , for their own good , and they are also being tarnished in the endeavour .
They are also being detained in facilities that are themselves conducive to infection .
As acting Australian Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly describes it , such buildings “ are vertical cruise ships , in a way.
” Pandemics , as with other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There is also a fear that such selective approaches are merely delaying the inevitable , by which time the entire state will find itself returning to the severest of restrictions .
The Victorian government has already designated lockdown restrictions for those in “ restricted postcodes ” , but this has merely re-enforced perceptions of the suburban unwashed misbehaving in the margins while teasing out fears of a more punitive approach .
The “ militarisation and policing crackdown , ” warns advocacy coordinator of the Police Accountability Project Daniel Nguyen , “ will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targeted and exacerbate their sense of isolation during this lockdown.
” The prevalent perception is harsh : Stay there , you nasty lot , in the Bantustans of Broadmeadows and Keilor Downs .
The opposition , resoundingly trounced at the last state election , is doing what any aggrieved loser does : find faults in the government with fanatical dedication .
They have had much to play with of late .
But the insistence on using private contractors to deal with public health problems is hardly unique to the current Andrews government .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ premier , the uniformed personnel were not there where they might have mattered most .
Note to readers : please click the share buttons above or below .
Forward this article to your email lists .
Crosspost on your blog site , internet forums .
etc .
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College , Cambridge .
He lectures at RMIT University , Melbourne .
He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research .
Email : [ email protected ]

It all looked like it was going so well for Australia and Victoria, in particular. They could point to the mishandling of the Ruby Princess, a cruise ship that docked in Sydney and whose passengers disembarked chocked with coronavirus, precipitating 700 cases and some 21 deaths across the country. It had, till now, been the single most contagious incident in the COVID-19 annals of the antipodes. Victorians could hold their heads hubristically high.
Then, the dreaded spike returned. Before journalists had time to file, or arm chair warriors time to muster their thoughts, the coronavirus beast had gotten away from an Australian state that had prided itself in reining in numbers and playing the game of suppression. Victoria’s quarantine regime was seemingly in tatters; COVID-19 had found its way through the channels of community transmission.
Now, nine public housing towers in Flemington and North Melbourne with some 3,000 residents have gone into “complete lockdown”. Residents are not permitted to leave their abodes for five days. The police are holding the fort.
The hindsight wizards are all coming out from under the covers, ignoring that old wisdom that pandemic policy is an unruly, fickle thing. The Andrews government has been accused of incompetence and hubris. Greg Sheridan of the Murdoch stable of reactionary politics was jubilant at the failings of the premier. “Daniel Andrews is now clearly the worst-performing, most unsuccessful premier or territory leader in Australia in managing the COVID-19 outbreak, despite being more authoritarian.” Why, asked Fairfax press correspondent Peter Hartcher on Sunday, did Andrews not respect the plague lessons of old?
A host of problems have surfaced to pull the carpet from under the state government. Central and defective is the issue of the quarantine regime itself, one that seems to have fallen into a state of ruin. With a rise in COVID-19 infections in late June, Andrews found himself scratching his confused head. There were claims that the new outbreak might be traced to an errant cigarette lighter used by staff working in hotel quarantine. They had kept their distance, claimed the premier “but sharing a lighter between each other”. There were also “carpooling arrangements between staff, which mean they were in closer contact than we would like.” A terrible understatement.
It did not take long for the critics to train their interest in the very idea of having security guards supervising the entire program. Recruits with spotty levels of training, much of it horrendously so, were used to supervise the quarantined guests. And it showed. Various transgressions and malpractices took place. Some security personnel had sexual congress with their guarded quarry, a point that delighted such outlets as the Herald Sun. The number of guards listed on duty at any one time was inflated as part of an effort to charge more for fewer services. Personal protective equipment was worn for extensive periods of time without change, and loose supervision meant that quarantined families could still visit each under for recreational pursuits. Such practices were replicated at various hotels, leading to a spurring on of the contagion.
There have also been increasing numbers of returning travellers and residents who have refused to be tested for coronavirus. In the rage that has followed, sinister motives and a good deal of malice have been imputed. Conspiracy theories were underlined. As Jane Williams and Bridget Haire suggest in The Conversation, such testing never yields “neutral” information. “People may refuse medical testing (if they have symptoms) or screening (if no symptoms) of any type because they want to avoid the consequences of a positive result.” Casual workers, for instance, face the perils of few if any sick days. Jobs can be lost during the course of quarantine.
The Andrews government now faces the coarsest of options, none of them palatable, few of them desirable. To send armed police to effectively detain a vulnerable population, many immigrants, many with a less than sympathetic disposition to the boys and girls in blue, may not be the most politic of moves. In this sense, the premier has his hands tied. Saddled with the moniker “Red Dan” and now having the spectre of the Wuhan experiment of bordering up buildings manifest itself in Melbourne, risk scuppering any credible efforts. In that most vulgar of terms, Andrews is wedged. Individuals like Sheridan howl about the “politburo” style of the Victorian premier but would equally object to firm measures if they were not taken.
The reaction from residents in the public housing towers is predictably rattled. Sudanese national Awatif Taha, who has been a resident in the Flemington public housing flats for 18 years with her husband, paints a troubling scene of crowded tenement spaces, insufficient government services and poor channels of information. Community leaders were not enlisted in the cause. “So how do I feel about what happened on Saturday, with us being told we would not be allowed to leave our units for at least five days? I feel really good, but it was a shock. I don’t know why they didn’t talk to us before Saturday.”
Sensitivity is being reiterated, but this is becoming a trope on a loop. Articulating it somehow makes it manifest, but there is no sense yet how each resident in these towers will be given the tender reassurance and compassionate hand when they are also being considered the problem. The premier has announced a scheme of hardship payments and around the clock support (food, medical and other services). But these are people being held against their will, for their own good, and they are also being tarnished in the endeavour. They are also being detained in facilities that are themselves conducive to infection. As acting Australian Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly describes it, such buildings “are vertical cruise ships, in a way.” Pandemics, as with other destructive phenomena, fall unevenly upon populations.
There is also a fear that such selective approaches are merely delaying the inevitable, by which time the entire state will find itself returning to the severest of restrictions. The Victorian government has already designated lockdown restrictions for those in “restricted postcodes”, but this has merely re-enforced perceptions of the suburban unwashed misbehaving in the margins while teasing out fears of a more punitive approach. The “militarisation and policing crackdown,” warns advocacy coordinator of the Police Accountability Project Daniel Nguyen, “will disproportionately impact communities already weary of being targeted and exacerbate their sense of isolation during this lockdown.” The prevalent perception is harsh: Stay there, you nasty lot, in the Bantustans of Broadmeadows and Keilor Downs.
The opposition, resoundingly trounced at the last state election, is doing what any aggrieved loser does: find faults in the government with fanatical dedication. They have had much to play with of late. But the insistence on using private contractors to deal with public health problems is hardly unique to the current Andrews government. Unfortunately, and possibly perilously for the premier, the uniformed personnel were not there where they might have mattered most.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]