Mediaboss Marketing

India and the European Union are natural partners in the quest for environmental sustainability, climate change mitigation, and green growth and development, writes Santosh Jha.

Santosh Jha is Ambassador ofIndiato the EU, Belgium, and Luxembourg.

As the world recovers from the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, economic and supply chain restructuring, resilience and diversification are clear priorities. Underlying this is the imperative of green growth. Industrial and technological investments we make must be ecologically sustainable and contribute to the battle against global warming.

In this context, Indias sustained adherence to its COP 21 Paris Climate Agreement commitments offers opportunity. India is the first major country attempting industrialisation and large-scale urbanisation while also reducing intensity of dependence on fossil fuels. In Paris in 2015 it promised to reduce the greenhouse gas emission intensity of its GDP by 33-35% (below 2005 levels) by 2030. It also pledged to create an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to three billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent through added forest and tree cover.

Even before Prime Minister Narendra Modi travelled to Paris, he had raised the bar for Indias climate ambitions. In 2014 India enhanced its renewable energy target to 175 GW by 2022. Actual achievement is likely to be as high as 225 GW. By 2030 India will be generating 450 GW of renewable energy. By that year India is committed to reaching 40% of installed electricity capacity from non-fossil fuel sources. In reality, this will easily cross 50%.

India is in the midst of an afforestation programme of unusual magnitude. As per the India State of the Forest Report: 2019, the area under forest and tree cover went up by over 16,000 square km in the previous five years. To put that figure in context, it is equivalent to more than half the territory of Belgium. Few countries have shown such consistent gains in expanding forest cover. When the ongoing programme is completed, India would have planted 1.25 billion additional trees, especially alongside national highways that are under construction or expansion.

A green, climate-friendly emphasis has been a feature of several of the Modi governments flagship developmental initiatives. These range from Namami Gange, the cleaning and basin-wide rejuvenation of the river Ganga, to the Jal Jeevan Mission, aimed at universalising drinking water access and linking this to the conservation as well as efficient and sustainable use of water sources. By 2021 India would have abolished single-use plastics.

Our country has also undertaken the worlds largest programme of switching to energy-saving LED bulbs. Through a mix of direct interventions and subsidies, the government has replaced close to 370 million conventional bulbs with LED bulbs. This has reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 39 million tonnes a year.

From 1 April 2020, all cars sold in India conform to Bharat Stage VI (the equivalent of Euro VI) fuel standards. Notwithstanding the formidable logistics, India leapfrogged from Euro IV to Euro VI fuel standards in a determined, once-in-a-generation attempt to address automobile pollution. In parallel, electrical vehicle adoption is being incentivised with tax concessions and ramping up charging infrastructure.

India is hoping to become the first big world power where all cars on its roads are electric, as part of its efforts to combat severe atmospheric pollution. 1.8 million deaths are caused by it every year on the subcontinent. EURACTIVs partner Italia Oggi reports.

Indias domestic emphasis has been mirrored by its external efforts. The Modi government is among the strongest international advocates of renewable energy. Co-founded by India and France, the International Solar Alliance held its inaugural conference in New Delhi in 2018. The Alliance has expanded to some 90 countries, including small island nations and those in the Global South that are vulnerable to climate change. It is working to facilitate finance and technology that expands use of affordable solar power. Such an approach flows from a conviction that climate change is a global challenge that calls for global response and collaboration.

Indias delivery on its Paris pledges has been recognised. A September 2019 Climate Change Report released by National Geographic in association with Climate Action Tracker rated the country as Top of the Class and a global leader in renewable energy. The report noted Indias stiff targets for renewables and acknowledged progress has been so rapid India could reach these earlier than previously predicted.

The Germanwatch Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) 2020 report arrived at similar conclusions. It categorised India as one of only two G20 countries with a high performance, and commended it on benchmarks such as tackling greenhouse gas emissions, climate policy, energy use, and renewables. Both reports acknowledged Indias per capita emissions remain much lower than the global average, let alone emissions of developed nations.

India and the European Union are natural partners in the quest for environmental sustainability, climate change mitigation, and green growth and development. Our common hopes and endeavours could define our partnership in the post-coronavirus era.

Continued flexibility in supporting Indias green strategy will help it go even further. This requires a careful mix of targets where feasible (such as for renewable energy) and incentivising sustainable business practices and clean energy preferences. Stronger outcomes in India would benefit from long-term finance and green-sector investments from Europe, as well as liberal technology sharing protocols. Our planet will reap the dividend.

Follow this link:
India and the EU are natural partners for the green economy - EURACTIV

Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama has criticized the European Unions lack of mechanisms and leadership to advance with enlargement in the Balkans. During an economic forum in Germany on Sunday, Rama took the chance to suggest possible ways to reform the decision-making framework, and improve the overall situation within the European Union.

He started by pointing out that powerful European leaders are driven by social media and newspapers in their policies and decisions, which, according to him, are not the source where to find strength to project yourself to the future.

Rama went on to blame smaller nations for vetoing the EU enlargement. Rama metaphorically compared the current situation within the EU with a household where nephews veto grandfathers decisions. Without changes to the decision-making framework before the six Western Balkan countries are admitted, the European Union will continue not to function properly, he assessed.

He urged European leaders to rise to the task, show leadership, sit in talks, get rid of the veto, and find the best way forward. If the big powers in Europe sit down to find ways to adjust the mechanism and its not just the veto but its also about leadership, Rama argued.

His focus then diverted on Europeans alleged prejudice about the so-called Albanian crime, which has often resulted as one of the main reasons for Albanias lack of EU progress in the last six years, since it was granted candidate status in 2014.

Rama recalled the Europeans fears when other Easter European countries became part of the union. Newspapers wrote that murder rates will increase because of Bulgarians, European storks will be eaten by Romanians, etc., he recalled, adding that every country approaching membership will be faced with prejudice.

However, Rama denied the existence of Albanian crime, arguing that organized crime is international in nature. He maintained that Albanian criminals have created their own European Union within the international organized crime. Their European Union that is much more efficient, flexible, with no veto, no annual budget plan, no targets, no negotiations, Rama explained.

Expressing astonishment to the EUs lack of exchange of information between countries, Rama implied that the union has a lot to learn from international organized crime. He said that the EU is unable to exchange intelligence between agencies, and this hampers the fight against terrorism. However, he argued, criminals do not face such a problem in their own union, where information is exchanged rapidly.

The Albanian leader then related the topic to The Netherlands, one of the most vocal countries in pointing at Albanian crime when vetoing Albanias advancement in the EU path.

Albanians in The Netherland have become the worst thing you can think about, Rama said, adding that Its good for politics but its not true.

He criticized the Dutch media for running headlines that single out the Albanian nationality of particular criminals, despite them being arrested in a group of several nationalities. He gave the example of the alleged newspaper headline Another Albanian gang dissolved, explaining that two 65-years-old Albanian men were arrested alongside 7 other Dutch, Belgian, Polish and Moroccan criminals. Yet, the Albanian old men, who were allegedly guarding the building where drugs were being cultivated, were singled out by the newspaper.

Rama didnt spare French President Emmanuel Macron from criticism, blaming his alleged insincere politics toward Albanias EU integration process.

He reiterated how Macron had told him that opening EU talks with Albania would be difficult for the French government due to the rise of the French right, Marie le Pen, European Parliament elections, etc. Rama said he had asked Macron to say this in public, so that Ramas government wouldnt be blamed for failing in its EU policies, but Macron practically refused.

Finally, Rama concluded his speech with another metaphor to illustrate Albanias and his governments situation regarding the start in practice of EU accession talks.

Albanians are blindly in love with Europe a love that they never question, he said. They are promised marriage but are simultaneously kept away. How can we marry if we dont talk? Rama wondered rhetorically.

He explained that Albanias accession to the EU is a different story, but starting accession talks is very important for the country to strengthen its democracy.

The prime minister invited everyone to visit Albania, the safest country in Europe for foreigners.

Fjal kye: Edi Rama, Emmanuel Macron, Germany, opening accession negotiations with Albania

Read more:
Albanian Prime Minister Lectures European Leaders on Reforming, Enlarging the Union - Exit - Explain Albania

BRUSSELS -- The European Union and Britain imposed sanctions Thursday on six Russians, some among the highest-ranked officials in the nation, and a state research institute over the nerve-agent poisoning of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

The move occurred a day after Russia's foreign minister threatened the 27-nation EU with retaliatory action. The sanctions had been agreed on by EU foreign ministers on Monday, without names given.

"Russia is our neighbor and shares this continent with us, but we will not give up our principles and convictions when it comes to chemical weapons," French President Emmanuel Marcon told reporters at a summit of EU leaders in Brussels. He said the bloc must continue "a transparent but demanding dialogue" with Moscow.

Foreign Minister Heiko Maas of Germany, which holds the EU's rotating presidency, said that "only with a clear position and by sticking to principles can we as the European Union make progress with respect to Russia."

[Video not showing up above? Click here to view https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqxDNVbjAzQ%5D

Those hit by the sanctions, which consist of an asset freeze and travel bans in Europe, include Alexander Bortnikov, the chief of Russia's Federal Security Service, the top KGB successor agency that is in charge of domestic security, and Sergei Kiriyenko, President Vladimir Putin's deputy chief of staff.

The State Scientific Research Institute for Organic Chemistry and Technology also was targeted. The EU said that institute, which was responsible for destroying Soviet-era chemical weapon, was years ago involved in the development and production of chemical weapons, including the nerve agent novichok allegedly used to poison Navalny.

The U.K. said it also would apply the EU sanctions and will continue them once it leaves a post-Brexit transition period at the end of the year.

"Any use of chemical weapons by the Russian state violates international law. We are determined to hold those responsible to account," British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said.

Navalny, an anti-corruption investigator who is Putin's most visible political opponent, fell ill on Aug. 20 during a domestic flight in Russia. He was flown to Germany for treatment two days later and is still recovering there.

Last week, tests conducted at labs designated by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons confirmed that Navalny was poisoned by a novichok nerve agent. They confirmed results found earlier in labs in Germany and elsewhere.

Russian officials have repeatedly denied any involvement in the poisoning and Russian doctors who first examined Navalny have said they found no signs of a poisoning.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the move "a deliberate unfriendly step towards Russia" and said that the EU "inflicted damage" on the bloc's relations with Russia.

"Moscow will analyze the situation and will act in accordance with its own interests," Peskov said, adding that "no logic can be seen in such a decision" by the EU.

EU foreign ministers agreed Monday to impose the sanctions to combat the use and spread of chemical weapons, after a push by France and Germany. The legal procedures were completed Thursday.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said the EU had acted "with exceptional speed, in keeping with the seriousness of this act and the methods used."

"This demonstrates a European Union that acts in the face of the new, unacceptable and destabilizing use of a chemical weapon," he said at a meeting in Paris.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has suggested that Moscow might retaliate and even sever ties over the Navalny dispute. "The Germans are not planning to provide any facts, despite all international and legal obligations. We respond in kind. This is diplomatic practice," he said Wednesday.

Information for this article was contributed by Daria Litvinova, Geir Moulson and Jill Lawless of The Associated Press.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, right, speaks with French President Emmanuel Macron arrives for a round table meeting at an EU summit at the European Council building in Brussels, Thursday, Oct. 15, 2020. European Union leaders are meeting in person for a two-day summit amid the worsening coronavirus pandemic to discuss topics ranging from Brexit to climate and relations with Africa. (Yves Herman, Pool via AP)

European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell speaks during a media conference after a meeting of EU foreign ministers at the European Council building in Luxembourg, Monday, Oct. 12, 2020. European Union foreign ministers were weighing Monday whether to impose sanctions on Russian officials and organizations blamed for the poisoning of opposition leader Alexei Navalny with a Soviet-era nerve agent. (Jean-Christophe Verhaegen, Pool via AP)

European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell rings a bell to signal the start of a meeting of European Union foreign ministers at the European Council building in Luxembourg, Monday, Oct. 12, 2020. European Union foreign ministers were weighing Monday whether to impose sanctions on Russian officials and organizations blamed for the poisoning of opposition leader Alexei Navalny with a Soviet-era nerve agent. (Jean-Christophe Verhaegen, Pool via AP)

French President Emmanuel Macron arrives for an EU summit at the European Council building in Brussels, Thursday, Oct. 15, 2020. European Union leaders are meeting in person for a two-day summit amid the worsening coronavirus pandemic to discuss topics ranging from Brexit to climate and relations with Africa. (Olivier Hoslet, Pool via AP)

European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell speaks during a media conference after a meeting of EU foreign ministers at the European Council building in Luxembourg, Monday, Oct. 12, 2020. European Union foreign ministers were weighing Monday whether to impose sanctions on Russian officials and organizations blamed for the poisoning of opposition leader Alexei Navalny with a Soviet-era nerve agent. (Jean-Christophe Verhaegen, Pool via AP)

Go here to see the original:
EU, Britain sanction 6 Russians - Arkansas Online

In a room where, people unanimously maintain a conspiracy of silence, one word of truth sounds like a pistol shot. - Czeslaw Milosz

Whistle Blow Whistleblowing - the term whistleblowing, comprising of the words whistle and blow, historically derives from Anglo-Saxon law and its origins are rooted in referees stopping a game when someone fouls by blowing a whistle or police officers blowing a whistle when someone commits a crime to attract the attention of the public.1 The term itself has evolved over time and has gained the meaning pf disclosing wrongdoing or reporting faulty behaviors. The term whistleblowing does not have an exact translation in the Turkish language; therefore, in many Turkish resources, the term is used as is (whistleblowing). The most accurate use of the term in the Turkish language is bilgi uurma, which refers to transmitting related information.

What is Whistleblowing?

This question does not have an exact answer in Turkish law since, unlike in the European Union (the EU), there is no specific piece of legislation in Turkey that regulates whistleblowing. While the concepts of disclosing wrongdoing, reporting faulty behaviors, and leniency processes, among others, are regulated under various pieces of legislation in Turkey, because the exact term bilgi uurma / whistleblowing is not referred to under any legislation, there is no definition for the term in Turkish law.

As a result, the definitions for the term provided by the international organizations to which Turkey is a member will guide us in determining the meaning of whistleblowing. The International Labour Organization (ILO), to which Turkey became a member in 1932, defines whistleblowing as the reporting by employees or former employees of illegal, irregular, dangerous or unethical practices by employers.2

This definition offered by the ILO only regulates employees or former employees, but is it enough to limit the regulation to only employees or formeremployees and only provide protection to them, or should the term encompass a wider range of people? Considering the recent legislative amendments, especially in the EU, European legislators may have already answered this question.

Whistleblowing in the EU

The EU adopted the Directive on the Protection of Persons Who Report Breaches of Union Law on 7 October 2019 (Directive), which entered into force on 16 December 2019. The Directive provides for the implementation of new comprehensive EU-wide rules on whistleblower protections. One of the most striking elements of the Directive is that it grants protection to a wide range of potential whistleblowers, including job applicants, contractors, volunteers, former workers, and board members, as well as individuals who assist whistleblowers such as colleagues and relatives and even journalists. Through the Directive, this wide range of individuals are protected from employment termination, degradation, transfer or change of workplace, and other discrimination.

Another welcoming feature of the Directive is that its scope has been expanded. Whistleblowers will be able to sound the alarm on a broad range of issues and remain protected from recrimination.3 It now includes protection for reports of wrongdoing related to EU law, such as tax fraud, money laundering, product and road safety, public health, and even hot topics such as environmental protection and data protection. The European Commission is encouraging national legislators to extend this scope even further by stating that Member States are free to extend these rules to other areas.4 This effort from the European Commission is promising as it sets forth certain requirements to be met by member countries while also providing flexibility for member countries to respond to what their society actually needs. As the deadline for member countries to transform theDirective into national law is December 2021, many member countries are already working on legislative amendments. The Directive itself and the amendments being drafted by EU member countries to comply with the Directive may have an impact on Turkey as well, as was the case with the EU data protection related legislation. That said, let`s take a look at where Turkey currently stands in terms of whistleblowing.

Whistleblowing in Turkey

i. The UN Convention

Turkey ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UN Convention) on 9 November 2006. According to Article 90 of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, duly ratified international agreements have the force of law. In this respect, Article 33 of the UN Convention calls for the adoption of national legislation to combat the unjustified treatment of whistleblowers who report to the competent authorities. However, no specific national regulations governing the procedures for whistleblowing have been adopted in Turkey yet. Still, as can be seen below, there are certain pieces of legislation in Turkey that provide protection for whistleblowers.

ii. The ILO Convention

Turkey also ratified the ILOs Termination of the Employment Convention numbered C158 (ILO Convention) on 4 January 1995, and the ILO Convention entered into force twelve months after its ratification was registered as law. Article 5 of the ILO Convention provides that the filing of a complaint or the participation in proceedings against an employer for violation of laws or regulations or recourse to the competent administrative authorities should not constitute valid reasons for termination. A very similar provision is also available in the Turkish Labor Law,5 as explained below.

iii. The Turkish Penal Code

There are certain provisions under the Turkish Penal Code6 in relation to the reporting of crimes. According to the Turkish Penal Code, any person who fails to report an offence that is in progress to the relevant authority shall be sentenced to a penalty of imprisonment for a term of up to one year. Furthermore, any person who fails to notify the relevant authority of any offence that has already been committed but where it is still possible to limit its consequences shall be sentenced according to the provisions of the abovementioned section. One should note that this reporting provision is vaguely drafted and there are a very limited number of precedents, evidencing that it is an ineffective provision.

iv. The Labor Law

The Labor Law provides protection to employees if they file a complaint against their employer to the competent administrative or judicial authorities to follow up his/her rights stemming from legislation or the employees employment contract. If the employer terminates the employment contract because of this complaint, then the termination will not be deemed a valid reason under the Labor Law. However, this protection is only in relation to filing complaints against employers. So, what happens in cases where an employee reports a co-worker? What should the employee do if he/she witnesses wrongdoing at the workplace by another co-worker?

There is neither a specific rule nor any right vested to employees to report such behaviors that would provide them protection, but the Labor Law and the Turkish Code of Obligations7 impose a duty of loyalty on employees. In accordance with the Labor Law, acts such as abuse of the employers trust, theft, or the disclosure of an employers confidential and professional secrets, which are in contravention of the duty of loyalty, aredeemed just grounds for termination of an employment agreement by the employer.

As per Article 396 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, employees are also obliged to do their work diligently and to act loyally by protecting the legitimate interests of the employer. In practice, if an employee witnesses any wrongdoing at the workplace by another co-worker, such employee should report this to his/ her employer in accordance with the duty of loyalty

To Blow the Whistle or Not

If a person asks himself whether or not to blow the whistle, this means that he/ she is afraid of the consequences of whistleblowing as it is said the decision to blow the whistle requires great moral courage.8

There is an inherent duty to blow the whistle if one witnesses actions that may danger the wellbeing and security of society, thievery, fraud, or any situation that may breach ethical rules, morals, laws, regulations and state policies, or discrimination against gender, nation, religion, and race. In summary, all matters that would benefit public welfare should be considered within the scope of whistleblowing.9 But what if the national legislation does not provide sufficient protection to whistleblowers? In such case, it is the duty of companies, organizations, and unions to provide such protection through internal directives and policies because it is society who suffers when people remain silent against wrongdoing. In order to encourage whistleblowing, whistleblowers must be provided sufficient protection and an effective policy for whistleblowing should be adopted.10 More people are using their companies ethics procedures to report misconduct, and more people are filing whistle-blower claims.11

In Turkey, many global entities that deem themselves transparent and accountable are adopting internal rules and procedures for whistleblowing and for eliminating retaliation. With guidance from the Directive and the corporate entities taking the lead in the support for whistleblowing, individuals may be more capable of blowing the whistle even when local legislation has yet to be seen.

Originally posted here:
Whistleblowing in the European Union and Turkey - Lexology

This week, the World Health Organization warned that Europe is facing exponential increases in COVID-19 cases. In just the past ten days, the continent has recorded over one million new cases, bringing the total since the start of the pandemic to over seven million.

As Europe emerges as an epicenter of a global resurgence of COVID-19, the EU is pursuing a policy leading to deaths on an unprecedented scale, far surpassing the 200,000 deaths this spring.

After lockdowns reversed the initial surge of COVID-19 in Europe, governments across the continent boasted that they had controlled the virus. As Europes central banks handed out bailouts of 1.25 trillion for the Eurozone and 645 billion in Britain, and the EU negotiated a 750 billion corporate bailout, they demanded workers return to work and youth to school. The priority, they insisted, was avoiding a new lockdown.

All these arguments stand completely exposed. The number of daily new cases in Europe has surged past 150,000, as the virus explodes out of control. France is declaring over 30,000, Britain nearly 20,000, the Czech Republic nearly 10,000, Italy 9,000, Belgium, Poland and the Netherlands 8,000 and Germany 7,000. Authorities report 13,000 new cases daily in Spain, until recently Europes worst-hit country, but newspapers are reporting that regional governments are cutting thousands of cases out of their totals.

Even if the contagion were to remain at its current levels, at 4.5 million cases per month, it would overwhelm Europes health care system. However, EU governments continue to reject a general shelter-at-home or lockdown orderdemanding instead that non-essential workers go back to work, to produce profits on the massive amounts of financial capital being handed over to major corporations. The EU sacrificed workers health and lives to the profits of the financial aristocracy.

Officials in Spain, Britain and France are announcing late-night curfews or restrictions on mobility in selected cities, in an attempt to reassure an increasingly angry and fearful public. From Madrid to Marseille, Paris and Liverpool, however, these curfews have one thing in common: they force workers and youth to keep going as before to work and school, where the vast majority of infections take place. With this policy, the number of new cases will keep rising exponentially.

As the northern hemisphere heads into winterthe season when people stay inside more in poorly ventilated areas and diseases like COVID-19 spread and kill the most rapidlya disaster is looming in Europe and around the world.

The worst can be averted only via the political mobilization of the European and international working class. Indeed, it was only the independent intervention of the working class that compelled the adoption of lockdown policies this spring in Europe, which epidemiologists estimate saved the lives of millions. Wildcat strikes starting at Fiats Pomigliano auto plant and spreading to steel, engineering and food processing plants in Italy and much of Europe shut down international supply chains and forced EU governments to adopt shelter-at-home orders.

After over 1 million COVID-19 deaths worldwide, including over 230,000 in Europe, explosive social opposition is building. Mass youth protests have erupted against back-to-school policies in Greece and Poland, as well as strikes by nurses in Spain and France demanding more resources and better pay to deal with the pandemic. Health workers and professionals are denouncing the herd immunity policies adopted by governments around the world, which Britains internationally recognized medical journal, theLancet, subjected to devastating and unambiguous criticism.

The Lancet wrote, The arrival of a second wave and the realisation of the challenges ahead has led to renewed interest in a so-called herd immunity approach, which suggests allowing a large uncontrolled outbreak in the low-risk population while protecting the vulnerable. Proponents suggest this would lead to the development of infection-acquired population immunity in the low-risk population, which will eventually protect the vulnerable. This is a dangerous fallacy unsupported by scientific evidence.

Uncontrolled transmission in younger people risks significant morbidity and mortality across the whole population, theLancet warned. It added that this threatens to overwhelm the ability of health care systems to provide acute and routine care, would ensure recurrent epidemics, and risks further exacerbating the socioeconomic inequities ... already laid bare by the pandemic.

The Lancet wrote that the stay-at-home measures carried out earlier in the year were essential to reduce mortality, prevent health-care services from being overwhelmed, and buy time to set up pandemic response systems to suppress transmission following lock-down.

Seven months after lock-downs began across Europe this spring, there is no longer any question that the closure of non-essential businesses, combined with massive investments public health, testing, quarantine and contact tracing are the only scientific policy to combat the virus. What remains to be clarified is the political program on which the growing opposition in the working class can be turned in a conscious struggle to avert a truly horrific loss of life. A scientific policy can only be implemented through the international unification and mobilization of the working class in a struggle for socialism.

Only a massive, revolutionary assault on capitalist property can overcome the entrenched economic interests that have dictated a murderous policy on COVID-19. The inescapable conclusion of theLancets article is that EU governments back-to-work, back-to-school policy was a false, anti-scientific policy, foisted on workers and youth by the financial aristocracy based on lies.

EU officials knew their policies would lead to mass deaths. In March, as strikes forced them to agree to lock-downs, the German Interior Ministry prepared a classified report that over 1 million Germans could die in 2020 of COVID-19 without emergency measures. Officials at a French national security council meeting reportedly heard top-secret warnings of hundreds of thousands of deaths. However, these warnings were hidden from the population and buried by the media, so that EU banks and governments could push workers back to work and restart the flow of profits.

Europes union bureaucracies and allied middle class parties, like Germanys Left Party, Podemos in Spain, or Frances New Anti-capitalist Party, are implicated in this criminal policy. After doing nothing to mobilize workers this spring, they helped implement the back-to-work policy. After the German and French unions signed a statement this summer endorsing EU bailouts, they expect that billions in bailout funds will pass through banks and works councils into their stock portfolios and union coffers, and are leaving thousands or millions of workers to die.

The sections of the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) have called for workers and youth to organize safety committees in workplaces and schools, independently of the unions, to oppose the herd immunity policies of the ruling class. As the virus tears through the population, it is clear that defending health and safety in individual workplaces or schools is impossible without a collective, revolutionary strategy to oppose the financial aristocracys strategy of mass infection and death.

This requires building the ICFI as the revolutionary leadership in the international working class, to lay the political basis for mass, coordinated strike actions, systematic opposition and the taking of power to impound the necessary resources for a scientific and humane fight against COVID-19. This includes a shelter-at-home policy for youth and all non-essential workers, backed by financing for workers and small businesses no longer able to operate. It demands a revolutionary struggle by the working class to bring down the EU and replace it with the United Socialist States of Europe.

See the original post here:
Mobilize the working class against the European Union's herd immunity policies! - WSWS