English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Corbyn And Sanders Most Popular Politicians In Britain And US

Published

on

Bernie Sanders and Jermy Carbyn

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]By: Saeed Naqvi

The recent rise in the electability of Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as Britain’s next Prime Minister, according to the latest opinion polls, has not made headline news. This is not surprising because Establishments everywhere, of which the media is a part, imagine that an idea can be made to vanish by playing it down.

The findings of the poll have been published even in conservative newspapers like The Telegraph in London. This virtually amounts to a taboo being lifted from the idea of Corbyn. Call it acquiescence, if you like.

Senior Labour leaders, indeed authors of New Labour, like Tony Blair and Lord Peter Mandelson must be close to a nervous breakdown. Or, they must be working very hard, as Mandelson has admitted in interviews, to “undermine Corbyn”.

The difficulty with mean-minded cribbing by Mandelson is that it generates sympathy among Corbyn’s growing tribe of supporters. Take this quote from a Labour member: “The idea that Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister implementing policies that actually benefit the people terrifies the Establishment. It is no surprise that Mandelson has found space in his busy schedule for spending time on Oligarch’s Yachts to attempt to undermine Jeremy.”

 This being the tone of the exchange, Corbyn’s path to eventual success will be made ever more difficult by the Establishment of which Mandelson and the Deep State are parts.

There is, however, a tailwind of recent history particular to Britain, which may be helping Corbyn.

 Accelerated globalization after the Soviet collapse, was a shot in the arm for capitalism. This, in its turn, generated arbitrary inequalities which erupted in such movements as “Occupy Wall Street”. The Republican Tea Party was the immediate counter punch.

The popular will adapts to changing climate. Establishments, obstinately resistant to change, begin to strategize: how to channelize or thwart the popular will.

 In almost all western democracies the conflict is on: Establishments vs. the people. A Left wing Syriza brought 43 year old Alexis Tsipras to power as Prime Minister of Greece. Germany and the EU broke the movement’s will. Revert to austerity or we shall not pick up your debts.

In Spain, where the ghost of Franco still hovers over public life, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy of the Right Wing Peoples Party, supervised over such unspeakable corruption (another gift of globalization), that a new communist-inclined party Podemos, under the leadership of 39 year old Pablo Iglesias, burst upon the scene. The resulting stalemate between the Peoples Party, Socialist and Podemos led to a repeat election which yielded more or less the same configuration. The Establishment worked overtime. On the pain of being decimated, Socialists allowed themselves to be persuaded to abstain in a Parliamentary vote. This enabled the corrupt PP hold onto power. The idea is to weaken and eventually erase Podemos by sheer attrition and election fatigue.

In the process of warding off unfriendly political trends, the establishment learnt another lesson. The sprinkling of leaders breaking out of the two party suffocation were all anti austerity, leftists and in their 30s and 40s. Why could not the “right” respond with similar décor and aspirations?

 That exactly is what has been attempted in Spain by launching Ciudadanos, (Citizens) a centrist party with an unusual rise on an anti corruption platform. I met people in Madrid and Barcelona who described the new party as “Podemos of the right”. In terms of youth, Ciudadanos is an improvement. Its leader, Albert Rivera, 35, is four years younger than Pablo Iglesias.

 “They are stealing Podemos’ aesthetics” laments Madrid’s Communist Mayor who hung a giant placard outside her office: “Refugees Welcome”. She tweets “We are not going to criminalize the Muslim community” Carmena said. “The response to terror must be solidarity.” Her punchline was “co existence = safer cities”.

The aesthetics which define young leaders in Greece, Spain, Canada appear to have been grafted on France’s Emmanuel Macron too. He is their age and talks of influencing the EU to reduce the burden of austerity. The scale of his success has encouraged him to be openly ambidextrous.  He has invited Donald Trump to the National Day parade on July 14. This despite Trump having withdrawn from the Paris accord on climate change.

 In brief, different kinds of gyrations define western democracies today. In this over all confused picture another reality remains largely unnoticed.

A Fox News poll published some months ago (mostly ignored) shows that Bernie Sanders has a +28 rating above all US politicians on both ends of the political spectrum.

The Guardian’s Trevor Timm wrote recently: “One would think with numbers like that, Democratic politicians would be falling all over themselves to be associated with Sanders, especially considering the party as a whole is more unpopular than the Republicans and even Donald Trump right now. Yet instead of embracing his message, the Establishment wing of the party continues to resist him at almost every turn, and they seem insistent that they don’t have to change their ways to gain back the support of huge swaths of the country.”

 The moral of the story is this: a rattled Establishment is in many democracies rushing to thwart or redirect the popular will – and with mixed success.

Against this backdrop, there appears on the horizon a certain British exceptionalism. Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Labour leader despite Tony Blair, Mandelson, and the Parliamentary party, results of the Brexit referendum, the manner in which Theresa May was trounced in June 8 elections – all point to the Establishment in Britain unlike elsewhere, clearly contained by the people.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest world news

General Asim Munir reaffirms Pakistan’s hardline stance on Kashmir and Balochistan

In a speech abroad, General Asim Munir reignites Indo-Pak tensions by reiterating Pakistan’s claims on Kashmir and dismissing concerns about terrorism and separatist movements.

Published

on

In a provocative address to overseas Pakistanis, Pakistan Army Chief General Asim Munir has reiterated Islamabad’s uncompromising position on Kashmir, asserting that it remains Pakistan’s “jugular vein” and would never be forgotten. His remarks, delivered while addressing a gathering of Pakistanis abroad, are likely to provoke a strong diplomatic reaction from India.

General Munir described those residing overseas as Pakistan’s “ambassadors” and urged them to uphold what he called a “superior ideology and culture.” He framed his statements within the context of the two-nation theory, which served as the ideological foundation for the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Emphasising civilizational differences, he said, “Our forefathers thought that we are different from the Hindus in every aspect of life… our religions, our customs, traditions, thoughts and ambitions are different.”

The two-nation theory, championed by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, has long been a source of ideological division between India and Pakistan. It directly opposes the vision of a united India based on secular values and shared heritage.

Assertion on Kashmir and national identity

Referring to the ongoing dispute over Kashmir, General Munir said, “It was our jugular vein, it will be our jugular vein, we will not forget it.” He further added, “We will not leave our Kashmiri brothers in their heroic struggle,” framing the Kashmir issue as central to Pakistan’s national narrative and identity.

In a broader nationalist tone, General Munir urged Pakistanis to keep narrating the country’s creation story to future generations to maintain a strong bond with the nation.

Stance on terrorism and Balochistan separatism

Touching upon concerns related to terrorism and investment, the Pakistan Army chief dismissed doubts about the country’s stability, stating, “The 1.3 million-strong Indian Army, with all its wherewithal, if they cannot intimidate us, do you think these terrorists can subdue the armed forces of Pakistan?”

On the issue of Balochistan, where separatist movements have long challenged the central authority, Munir declared the province to be “Pakistan’s pride” and warned against any illusions of secession. “You won’t be able to take it in 10 generations,” he said, pledging that the military will decisively counter separatist groups.

Implications for India-Pakistan relations

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs is yet to issue an official response, but given the sharply worded statements, diplomatic engagement or condemnation is anticipated. General Munir’s comments underscore the enduring friction between the two nations and reinforce the Pakistan Army’s dominant role in shaping Islamabad’s foreign and domestic policies.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

China halts Boeing jet deliveries amid trade war with US

This halt in Boeing deliveries could have significant repercussions for both China’s aviation industry and the American aerospace sector.

Published

on

In a significant escalation of trade tensions between China and the United States, Beijing has directed its airlines to stop receiving aircraft from American aerospace manufacturer Boeing, according to a report released on Tuesday.

Additionally, Chinese authorities have ordered their carriers to cease purchasing aircraft-related equipment and components from U.S. companies.

This development, initially reported by Bloomberg News, comes amid rising tensions in the ongoing trade conflict between Washington and Beijing, which began following the introduction of “reciprocal tariffs” under former President Donald Trump.

Since Trump took office in January, the two largest economies in the world have engaged in a reciprocal trade war, with the U.S. imposing tariffs as high as 145 percent on certain Chinese imports.

In retaliation, Beijing has described Washington’s actions as illegal “bullying” and has implemented counter-tariffs of 125 percent on American goods, claiming that further tax increases would be futile.

The recent Chinese government order to suspend Boeing deliveries, affecting both state-owned and private airlines, is interpreted as part of China’s broader strategy to address the U.S. tariffs.

This halt in Boeing deliveries could have significant repercussions for both China’s aviation industry and the American aerospace sector.

On the same day, China emphasized its commitment to forging stronger trade relationships, with the foreign ministry stating its preference for cooperation over conflict. Lin Jian, a spokesperson for the foreign ministry, remarked during a briefing that China aims to “tear down walls” and foster connections instead of creating barriers.

Meanwhile, the World Trade Organization has cautioned that the intense trade dispute between the two nations could lead to an 80% reduction in goods shipments between them and could severely impact global economic growth.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Barack Obama backs Harvard University after Trump freezes $2.3 billion funding, says attempt to stifle academic freedom

The demands also called for banning face coverings—viewed as targeting pro-Palestinian protesters—and dismantling the university’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, which the government criticized as fostering “simplistic racial stereotypes.”

Published

on

Former United States President Barack Obama on Tuesday lauded Harvard University for resisting the Trump administration’s decision to withhold $2.3 billion in federal funding after the institution rejected a series of White House demands. Calling Harvard’s stance a beacon for other colleges, Obama praised its commitment to academic freedom amid intensifying political pressure.

Harvard President Alan Garber firmly rebuffed the administration’s conditions, which included overhauling admissions to prioritize “merit-based” criteria, curbing student activism, auditing diversity initiatives, and derecognizing certain student groups. The demands also called for banning face coverings—viewed as targeting pro-Palestinian protesters—and dismantling the university’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, which the government criticized as fostering “simplistic racial stereotypes.”

“Harvard’s rejection of this heavy-handed attempt to undermine academic freedom sets a powerful example for higher education,” Obama wrote on X, commending the university for fostering “intellectual rigor, open debate, and mutual respect.”

The clash escalated after the Department of Education’s antisemitism task force accused Harvard of neglecting civil rights laws and fostering an “entitlement mindset” while failing to protect Jewish students amid campus disruptions.

The White House argued that elite universities, flush with federal funds, have tolerated unrest tied to pro-Palestinian protests since Israel’s war in Gaza began, with some demonstrations accused of endorsing Hamas—a group the US labels a terrorist organization following its October 7 attack on Israel.

Garber, in a defiant open letter, declared, “No government, regardless of party, has the right to dictate what private universities teach, who they admit or hire, or what research they pursue.” Hours later, the Trump administration froze $2.3 billion in funding, marking a dramatic escalation in its campaign to reshape higher education.

Harvard’s stand makes it the first major US university to openly challenge such federal directives, which also urged cooperation with immigration authorities and the withdrawal of support for student groups linked to violence or harassment. The university’s endowment, valued at over $50 billion, may cushion the financial blow, but the standoff signals deeper tensions over campus autonomy.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com