December, 19 2017, 07:45am EDT
![Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament](https://assets.rbl.ms/51071496/origin.png)
MoD Can't Pay PS205 billion For Trident? Expect Further Cuts To Schools and Hospitals
Anti-nuclear campaigners have responded to the announcement that Trident could be shifted from the Ministry of Defence budget.
WASHINGTON
Dave Webb, CND Chair, said:
"This is an extraordinary development if the government goes ahead. Where precisely will PS205 billion or more, the full cost of Trident replacement, be found outside of the MoD budget? The government has repeatedly said it hasn't got billions laying about so, for lack of a magic money tree, this can mean only one thing. Further cuts to schools, hospitals or other areas of social spending.
"There are growing numbers of MPs concerned about the impact of Trident spending on conventional weaponry and defence. The leaks on HMS Queen Elizabeth, the new aircraft carrier, could well be an example of the sort of corner cutting the MoD is charged with. But the answer to this is not to shift the responsibility for Trident spending elsewhere. The credible answer is that it's time to face the reality about Trident: it's outdated, expensive, leaves us vulnerable, and doesn't address the major 21st century security threats. It's time to cancel Trident."
CND campaigns non-violently to rid the world of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction and to create genuine security for future generations. CND opposes all nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction: their development, manufacture, testing, deployment and use or threatened use by any country.
LATEST NEWS
UK Ministers at Risk of Liability for Supporting Israeli War Crimes: Legal Expert
"There is a 'real prospect' individuals... may have knowingly facilitated the commission of alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity," a legal analysis found.
Aug 21, 2024
Amid reports that government officials have expressed doubt that the United Kingdom can continue supporting Israel's assault on Gaza without breaking international law, a legal expert commissioned by a rights group warned the Labour Party on Wednesday that government ministers could be liable for possible war crimes committed by the Israel Defense Forces.
Global Justice Now director Nick Dearden wrote to Foreign Secretary David Lammy on Wednesday, advising him that the organization has commissioned a leading lawyer, Sam Fowles of Cornerstone Barristers, to provide a legal analysis of the U.K.'s potential breach of international law via its support for Israel.
Fowles determined that "the U.K. and individuals, including government ministers and senior civil servants, may be liable for crimes committed by the Israeli state or Israeli personnel during the country's ongoing military operation in Gaza and through the country's unlawful occupation of Gaza and the West Bank," wrote Dearden, with the potential liability arising from the U.K.'s continued "aid and assistance provided to Israel."
The legal opinion, said Tim Bierley, campaigner for Global Justice Now, should send "alarm bells... sounding across Whitehall."
"The U.K. government is putting its own ministers and civil servants at risk of prosecution by its continued failure to withhold support for Israel," he said.
In a 28-page report, Fowles pointed to the U.K.'s involvement with Israel since October 2023, when the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) began its bombardment of Gaza in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel.
U.K. surveillance aircraft have reportedly flown more than 200 missions over Gaza to assist Israel since October, and about 100 Royal Marines were sent to the Eastern Mediterranean shortly after the Hamas attack. The U.K. has also sent military aid to Israel and granted at least 42 new weapons licenses since Israel began its operations in Gaza, where Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant ordered the IDF to release "all the restraints" that would protect civilian lives.
Israel's full-scale assault on Gaza has killed more than 40,000 Palestinians, the majority of whom have been women and children, and has included numerous strikes on so-called "humanitarian zones." It has also included Israel's blocking of nearly all humanitarian aid, leading to a mass starvation crisis that United Nations experts last month said qualifies as famine, and the spread of diseases including polio.
According to Fowles' legal analysis, said Dearden, the U.K. government "could be liable for Israel's alleged breaches of international humanitarian law and crimes against humanity during its military operation in Gaza since October 2023."
Fowles also found potential liability for "Israel's breaches of the right to self-determination and the prohibition of obtaining territory by aggression in its illegal and ongoing occupation of the West Bank and Gaza."
The barrister pointed out that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on July 19 that Israel's occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza is unlawful and that it breached international law by obtaining control of the territories by force. The ICJ also ruled in January that it was plausible that Israel has violated Gaza residents' rights under the Genocide Convention since October 2023.
Fowles' finding that the U.K. and its high-level government officials could be liable for war crimes was also bolstered, he said, by a report presented in May by the U.N.'s Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, which found Israel "had committed multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity."
Dearden wrote that Global Justice Now is hopeful that the findings will lead to "the swift and decisive action needed to end U.K. complicity in Israel's war crimes," particularly following the decision of Foreign Office official Mark Smith to resign from the government this week, saying there is "no justification" for continued arms sales to Israel.
The government is reportedly considering an arms embargo on Israel, but Dearden noted that on July 29, officials announced they were "seeking to develop a new trade deal with Israel."
"We seek to highlight the legal advice which states that 'it seems likely that the U.K., through its trade relationship with Israel, has helped facilitate the unlawful occupation,'" wrote Dearden.
Earlier this year, lawyers for the Conservative government that was voted out in July advised officials that Israel, with U.K. support, has breached international humanitarian law.
"What on Earth is [the government] waiting for?" asked Bierley. "It is long overdue for the U.K. to match words with actions by immediately suspending arms sales, trade talks, and other aid and assistance to Israel."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare for All Advocates Welcome Obama DNC Remarks as 'New Opening for Reform'
The former president said Democratic nominee Kamala Harris "knows we can't stop" at the Affordable Care Act.
Aug 21, 2024
A brief aside in former President Barack Obama's 35-minute speech at the Democratic National Convention Tuesday night provided a glimmer of hope that a Kamala Harris victory in November could be a catalyst for transformational change to the United States' disastrous for-profit healthcare system.
Obama—who before becoming president described himself as a "proponent of a single-payer universal healthcare program"—told Democratic delegates, leaders, and activists gathered inside the United Center in Chicago that the party should be "proud of the enormous progress that we've made through the Affordable Care Act," the 2010 law commonly known as Obamacare.
"But," the former president added, "Kamala knows we can't stop there, which is why she'll keep working to limit out-of-pocket costs."
Obama's remarks were far from an explicit endorsement of Medicare for All, a longstanding progressive goal that Harris backed as a senator and continued to support—at least in name—as a 2020 presidential candidate.
But longtime single-payer advocate Michael Lighty told Common Dreams on Wednesday that Obama's acknowledgment that the ACA has not been nearly enough to rein in the nation's out-of-control healthcare costs and crack down on the rampant abuses of the for-profit insurance industry "signals a new opening for reform" if Harris defeats Republican nominee Donald Trump.
"I was struck by the juxtaposition of 'access to affordable coverage,' which is the usual centrist frame for healthcare reform, and this reference to going beyond the ACA," Lighty said in response to Obama's comments. "It recognizes that rising costs overall and out-of-pocket costs especially are unsustainable."
"The cost frame is good for Medicare for All advocates," he added, "if we 'prosecute' the argument for the savings generated by Medicare for All."
Research has repeatedly shown that a Medicare for All system of the kind envisioned by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—the leading single-payer advocates in Congress—would cost less than the status quo while providing everyone in the U.S. with comprehensive insurance coverage for free at the point of service.
Under the nation's current for-profit system—which leaves tens of millions of Americans uninsured or underinsured and struggling to afford their out-of-pocket costs—annual healthcare spending is projected to rise to $7.7 trillion by 2032, according to federal estimates.
"It is clear that the North Star of a Harris-Walz administration is consistent with what Senator Bernie Sanders said from the DNC stage last night: guaranteeing healthcare to every person in this country."
Despite co-sponsoring Sanders' Medicare for All bill in the Senate in 2017 and campaigning on a proposal that donned the "Medicare for All" label during the 2020 Democratic primary, Harris has not made the popular progressive idea part of her 2024 platform.
A Harris campaign official toldPolitico earlier this week that Medicare for All is "no longer part of" the vice president's healthcare policy agenda, which has thus far focused largely on slashing prescription drug costs and relieving the burden of medical debt.
But Medicare for All advocates, who have seen support for the proposal surge at the state and local levels amid federal inaction, are not disheartened by the vice president's decision to sideline single-payer in her 2024 campaign.
Alex Lawson, executive director of Social Security Works, pointed to the newly unveiled Democratic platform's support for expanding Medicare benefits to include dental, vision, and hearing services as part of a viable "path forward."
"It is clear that the North Star of a Harris-Walz administration is consistent with what Senator Bernie Sanders said from the DNC stage last night: guaranteeing healthcare to every person in this country, so if you get sick you get the care you need," Lawson told Common Dreams. (The Democratic platform states that "healthcare should be a right in America, not a privilege"—a line popularized by Sanders.)
"As president," said Lawson, "it is clear that Kamala Harris would use every tool at her disposal to rein in the corporate greed, delays, and denials of the current system and continue building step by step towards a goal of universal guaranteed healthcare."
Rose Roach, national coordinator of the Labor Campaign for Single Payer, offered a similar assessment, telling Common Dreams in an email on Wednesday that while President Joe Biden "was clear that he did not support Medicare for All," he "supported important improvements to traditional Medicare that begins to build the public infrastructure we'll need for Medicare for All when it does pass"—specifically the drug price negotiation program and new constraints on corporate-run Medicare Advantage plans.
"The Labor Campaign for Single Payer believes VP Harris is equally committed to securing and protecting traditional Medicare and will work with the movement to continue the work of stabilizing our public Medicare program," said Roach. "Improving and expanding traditional Medicare, protecting it from the privatizers who are overbilling Medicare while inflicting obstacles for enrollees to access care via onerous prior authorizations and outright claims denials, is job one."
"Doing so not only offers the infrastructure building we need on the pathway to Medicare for All," Roach added, "but it also makes traditional Medicare affordable for enrollees, unions who negotiate retiree health benefits, and even for employers who offer retiree benefits. It's a win-win."
Keep ReadingShow Less
How Crypto Giants Are 'Exploiting' Citizens United to Buy 2024 Elections
A new analysis and call for a constitutional amendment comes as reporting sheds light on Sen. JD Vance's ties to a right-wing group backed by tech and digital currency investors.
Aug 21, 2024
A report out Wednesday takes aim at how giants of the cryptocurrency industry are using the 2010 Citizens United ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which opened the floodgates for dark money in political campaigns, to make a massive deregulatory push ahead of this year's pivotal election.
Based on Public Citizen research director Rick Claypool's analysis of federal election data from OpenSecrets, the consumer advocacy group accused the crypto industry of "exploiting" the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling "to an unprecedented degree, dwarfing direct corporate spending by Big Oil and other corporate sectors in the 2024 elections."
Claypool found that crypto companies have dumped over $119 million into the 2024 federal elections so far, mostly through super political action committees (PACs) focused on elevating candidates that back their industry and opposing any skeptics.
"Nearly half (48%) of all corporate money contributed during this year's elections ($248 million so far) came from crypto backers," the report notes. Koch Industries, the conglomerate of the infamous Koch brothers, "is a distant second place," having put $25 million toward Americans for Prosperity Action and $3.25 million toward electing Republicans to Congress.
"That cryptocurrency companies like Coinbase and Ripple are able to spend over a hundred million dollars to silence crypto's critics and elevate its backers embodies everything that is wrong with the Supreme Court's disastrous Citizens United decision."
Since Citizens United, there has been at least $884 million in known corporate contributions to elections. Already, crypto corporations' spending for the past three cycles amounts to 15% of that total—and 92% has been during this cycle. The industry now only trails fossil fuel companies in election-related spending in the wake of the 2010 ruling.
"That cryptocurrency companies like Coinbase and Ripple are able to spend over a hundred million dollars to silence crypto's critics and elevate its backers embodies everything that is wrong with the Supreme Court's disastrous Citizens United decision," Claypool said in a statement.
Claypool stressed that "corporations can't vote. But the sole reason crypto is a hot-button topic in this election cycle is that crypto businesses are spending eye-popping sums to make themselves impossible to ignore."
"All this spending is a concern not just because the crypto companies may be able to buy deregulation," he warned. "This direct spending by crypto corporations is shattering a long-standing norm—and is likely to set a precedent for vastly more direct spending by corporations in upcoming elections."
Much of the industry's money from this cycle—nearly $114 million—has gone to the sector's Fairshake PAC and its affiliates. The report details how the group intervened in two Democratic primaries:
When Fairshake and its affiliates spend money to influence races, either by attacking crypto skeptics or boosting crypto supporters, the ads don't mention crypto at all. The super PAC spent $10 million on ads against Rep. Katie Porter in California's Senate primary and $2 million against Rep. Jamaal Bowman in a primary contest in New York. Rather than criticizing candidates for not sufficiently supporting crypto, both attack campaigns smeared the candidates' using unflattering claims having nothing to do with crypto policy.
In Bowman's case, he was also targeted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its affiliates for his criticism of U.S. support for Israel's assault of the Gaza Strip. Another target of both pro-Israel and crypto groups was fellow progressive Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), who lost her primary earlier this month.
Industry use of Fairshake is expected to continue through November. The report points out that "the super PAC recently pledged to spend $25 million backing 18 House candidates—nine Democrats and nine Republicans—in the general election."
The report also lays out how both major parties' presidential nominees—former Republican President Donald Trump and Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris—and their allies have been courting the industry this cycle:
- Donald Trump, who previously expressed skepticism toward the sector and whose Securities and Exchange Commission initiated tough enforcement against alleged crypto misconduct, has rebranded himself as the pro-crypto presidential candidate. Speaking at the Bitcoin Conference in July, Trump vowed to make the U.S. the "crypto capital of the planet and the bitcoin superpower of the world" and proposed the federal government hold a "strategic bitcoin reserve."
- Trump's running mate selection of Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), whose background in venture capital and crypto-friendly policies, is seen as another pro-crypto signal.
- Kamala Harris advisers, meanwhile, have reportedly reached out to crypto corporations to "reset."
- Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at a "Crypto4Harris" virtual fundraiser in August, declaring: "Crypto is here to stay no matter what. So Congress must get it right... we all believe in the future of crypto." Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) also participated.
The new Public Citizen report—which concludes with a call for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United—was released a day after Reutersreported that before Vance joined the Republican ticket, "he co-founded a Silicon Valley-backed donor organization to finance right-wing news stories, voter turnout operations, and election polls."
"The existence of Rockbridge and Vance's link to it have been previously reported," the outlet detailed. "But three internal Rockbridge documents reviewed by Reuters and half a dozen sources familiar with the group reveal the scale of its ambitions, its roughly $75 million budget for 2024, and its role in seeking to influence November's presidential election."
"Rockbridge showcases how Trump's selection of Vance as his running mate could empower a new set of Republican businessmen: heavyweight tech investors who favor far-reaching deregulation," Reuters continued. "Many want to weaken the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which regulates Wall Street, and reduce oversight of cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence."
Meanwhile, in remarks cheered by Bush, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) declared at the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night that there is an urgent "need to get big money out of our political process."
"Billionaires in both parties should not be able to buy elections, including primary elections," he said. "For the sake of our democracy, we must overturn the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision and move toward public funding of elections."
OpenSecrets revealed last week that outside spending during the current election cycle has hit a record $1 billion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular