Latest news with #GordonCampbell
Scoop
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
On National's Bid To Steal Future Elections
Article – Gordon Campbell Other countries are expanding the ability of their citizens to vote. In Britain (from which New Zealand has long taken its constitutional cues) the franchise is being extended to 16-year-olds. In this country, were headed in the opposite direction. Other countries are expanding the ability of their citizens to vote. In Britain (from which New Zealand has long taken its constitutional cues) the franchise is being extended to 16-year-olds. In this country, we're headed in the opposite direction. The Luxon government is taking steps to make it significantly more difficult for people to cast a vote, and prisoners will lose their right to vote altogether. No valid reasons are being given for these changes. Formerly, we were world leaders in the ease of voting. People could register and vote on Election Day. But once the new legislation is passed, voters will need to have enrolled some 13 days prior to Election Day. At the 2023 election, 110,000 people registered and voted on Election Day. This was a 46% increase of same-day turnout at the prior election. During the two weeks before election day, 454,000 people registered to vote. Given those numbers, the changes being made by the coalition government will inevitably have a significant impact on the election result. No doubt, same day registration has put added pressure on the Electoral Commission to process the votes accurately, and on time. Any human error is one too many. Yet as the Auditor General's report on the 2023 election noted, 'The relatively small number of errors did not affect the overall outcome.' In the one electorate where a journalist had queried the calculations, the Auditor-General further noted, the subsequent Electoral Commission revision 'did not change the candidate or party vote outcomes.' So, at the last election, despite the sharply increased influx of votes close to election day, only minor errors occurred and these had no impact on any of the results. Yet rather than fund the Commission to be better able to process this welcome late rush of ballots, the Luxon government is choosing instead to stop latecomers from being able to vote at all. It is hard to see this as anything other than a bid by the coalition parties to skew the 2026 election results to their own benefit. When more hurdles are put in front of voters, the young and Māori stand to be disproportionately affected. No doubt it is a sheer co-incidence that those groups are statistically more likely to vote for the centre-left and/or for Te Pāti Māori. Voting in prison In addition, a National-led government will once again deny all prisoners the right to vote. Under successive Labour governments, prisoners could vote if they were serving sentences of less than three years. In 2010, the Key government abolished that right, after ignoring a critical report by the-then Attorney General Chris Finlayson on the steps being proposed. Finlayson indicated that a blanket ban on prisoner voting would be inconsistent with section 12 of our Bill of Rights legislation. In fact, [Finlayson] argued, the supposed objective of the Bill – to deter serious offending – was 'not rationally linked' to the Bill's own provisions to impose a blanket ban on prisoner voting. Reason being, serious offenders are already banned from voting by the existing law. As for everyone else : ' It is questionable that every person sentenced to any period of punishment is a serious offender. People who are not serious offenders will be disenfranchised…' The blanket ban, Finlayson concluded, cannot be justified. Having pointed out the irrationality of denying all prisoners the vote, Finlayson then went further, to show how unjust even the existing provisions could play out in practice: The avowed purpose of the Bill is to deter serious offending. Yet as Finlayson pointed out, under its provisions someone sentenced to home detention would still be able to vote, but someone sentenced to jail for the very same offence would be disenfranchised. Moreover, a serious violent offender sentenced to two and half years in jail would not lose their right to vote if their sentence fell – purely by chance – into the period between elections. Yet by the same token, someone sentenced to a week in jail for not paying their parking fines would lose their right to vote, if they were unlucky enough to be sentenced at the wrong point in the electoral cycle. 'Justice, to state the obvious, should not be reduced to such games of chance.' This shabby episode is about to be played out again. This time around, a critical report by the current Attorney-General, Judith Collins is also being ignored. Similar violations of human rights will recur. To be clear: for people in jail, the sentence they are serving is the punishment for their offence. Tacking on punitive extras like losing their right to vote is petty and vengeful, and will do nothing to aid the re-integration of prisoners back into society on their release. In other respects, the Bill being proposed by Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith repeats some of the same anomalies identified 15 years ago by Chris Finlayson. People on home detention will still be able to vote but those in jail will not, even if they have committed the same offence. Thankfully, those on remand will still be allowed to vote. Not many people in prison do vote. Only 84 prisoners nationwide voted in the 2023 general election, out of circa 5,000 who were eligible to vote, and 41% of those voters identified as Maori. (Part of the overall low turnout can be attributed to the cumbersome process of enrolling and casting a special vote.) Although it is a very small cohort, the high proportion of Māori among the bloc of imprisoned voters merits further research into the rehabilitative role – for some offenders at least – of cultural identity and voter participation. To repeat: the changes being proposed look highly dubious. Instead of expanding the franchise and encouraging more people to vote, steps are being taken to limit participation, and by measures likely to penalise the current government's political opponents. Footnote One: Should 16-year-olds get the vote? Of course. They will inherit the effects of government actions and inactions, especially on climate change. There is a myth about young people not being interested in politics. In reality, the deeper problem is that politicians routinely fail to engage with the problems – climate change, high rents, too few jobs etc – that matter to them. As a percentage of those aged 18-24 eligible to vote, just over two thirds do so. Yet that participation rate has been improving, arguably as a result of last minute, Election Day registration. That conclusion is backed up by this chart – which shows that 74% of enrolled 18 to 24-year-olds voted in 2023. That turnout was higher than for every age band of enrolled voters between 30 and 45. Meaning : young people turned up on polling day, enrolled, and voted right then and there. National now wants to stop them from being able to do so. Surely, we should be trying to make it easier for the young to get enrolled, and vote. Instead, those in power are doing the reverse. As for the obvious fairness issues involved in allowing 16-year-olds to vote…No doubt, having civics lessons while 16 to 18-year-olds are still in school could be a significant help in fostering the habit of voting. Yet on those statistics cited above, the problem of non-voting by enrolled voters only really begins to kick in between 25-29, and gets worse thereafter until advanced middle age. This suggests that 20-somethings learn pretty quickly that their voices are being habitually ignored by those in power, so why bother keeping up the charade? Now.. and thanks entirely to this government, any initially disinterested/disillusioned voters who have second thoughts and engage with party politics only at the very last minute will no longer be able to enrol on Election Day. Smoking is a habit The tax break for Big Tobacco (now being extended from one to three years by New Zealand First Minister Casey Costello) is being estimated to cost about $300 million. Initially, NZF had promised that this tax break would be for only a one year trial, and be subject to research as to whether more people were actually switching from harmful nicotine to the monopoly line of heated tobacco products being sold by Philip Morris. This ' trial' and related tax giveaway has now been extended until 2027 at least. Meanwhile, as Labour's Ayesha Verrall has pointed out, the public health system – which could have made far better use of that $300 million giveaway– staggers on while under-funded, under-staffed, and under-paid. When it suits, changes get fast tracked. Not this time. For Big Tobacco, exceptions and foot dragging are the rule. Rastafarians at least, are upfront about the addictive nature of their herb of choice. Here's King Still, deejaying on top of a rhythm laid down by Clancy Eccles and the Dynamites:
Scoop
17-07-2025
- Business
- Scoop
On The Costs Of Regulating Cost, And Burkina Faso As A Role Model
Article – Gordon Campbell Funny how blow-out gets so readily applied to cost escalation in the provision of public services (hospital rebuilds, the Cook Strait ferries) but when politicians get the figures wrong for their pet projects, its just a matter of opinion. Funny how 'blow-out' gets so readily applied to cost escalation in the provision of public services (hospital rebuilds, the Cook Strait ferries) but when politicians get the figures wrong for their pet projects, its just a matter of opinion. Case in point : the original cost estimates for the Regulatory Standards Bill came to $18 million a year – but this week, MBIE calculations released under the Official Information Act indicate that the annual cost could be $50-60 million, or roughly three times the original figure. Sounds like a cost blow-out to me. The sort of incompetence the Bill was created to prevent. MBIE has also calculated that between 95 and 285 full time equivalent staff would be needed to carry out the legislative vetting work envisaged. And already we know that staff at Seymour's Regulations Ministry get paid considerably more than other public servants, on average. In response, Seymour has queried the figures, and suggested that AI would help to reduce those costs. (Hmm. What could possibly go wrong if we asked Chat GTP to rewrite the Resource Management Act in the style of Ayn Rand?) At best, AI might conceivably cut the time spent on several basic administrative tasks, but that would hardly bridge the gap between $18 million and $50-60 million. As the Greens regulation spokesperson Francisco Hernandez told RNZ, one UK study showed that AI would reduce public service labour costs by only about 5%. With the Bill, Hernandez says, money is being diverted from frontline public services into'one person's ideological vanity project': 'But the level of nuanced work of interpreting secondary legislation and how it applies to a principles framework…its not the sort of thing that could easily be automated.' Nor will the Regulatory Standards Bill do much to restore business confidence, which MBIE expects will be negatively affected by the introduction of an extensive vetting process and related compliance worries that are unlikely to survive a change of government. Offal in, offal out This week, the news has been almost as bad about another ACT Party fiasco – the school lunches programme. In recent weeks, a venerable political gambit has been used to repair the programme as a success. First, government enacts a terrible idea, and lots of people complain. No matter how many of them complain – or how loudly – the government totallky ignores them and, over time, people just give up. The government then declares the decline in the number of complaints to be a sign of success! That's exactly what has happened with school lunches. People have been forced to accept a shoddier product as the new norm. This week though, Business Desk revealed just how shoddy that product has become. Reportedly, an offal mince blend is now being used in school lunches instead of pure beef mince, in order to cut costs. The School Lunch Collective has started using a cheaper offal mince blend, a move that has raised compliance questions. The supplier, headed by the Compass Group, quietly updated its website to disclose the use of 'beef trim/heart' only after BusinessDesk and regulators made inquiries late last week. Business Desk understands the value blend, which is 50% beef trim and 50% beef heart, is about 25% cheaper than pure beef mince. Feeding offal to children to make a buck….Truly, anyone who voted for the ACT Party at the last election should now be hanging their head in shame. Out of Africa Unless a natural disaster, coup or rugby team is involved, Africa rarely makes it onto our news bulletins. Even back when it was called Upper Volta, Burkina Faso barely rated a mention. Yet weirdly, Burkina Faso's young leader Ibrahim Traore recently became a point of contention between the leaders of two of our major political parties. Traore was praised by Te Pāti Māori leader Rawiri Waititi, and damned by ACT Party leader David Seymour with equal fervour. As is usually the case with any country not in the Anglophile sphere of interest, local media coverage didn't go much beyond the initial 'he said/he said' exchange. That's a pity, given that in the non-Anglo media, Traore is arguably the most popular political figure on the African continent right now. To Waititi, Traore is a 'hero' – the view that Seymour has described as 'insane.' Insane? This seemed rich coming from someone who – as recently as 2023 – was still expressing his admiration for Margaret Thatcher. Why does Waititi rate Traore so highly? After seizing power in a coup in 2022, Traore's regime cut ties with France, its former colonial ruler, and set up a state-owned mining company. He also required foreign mining firms to (a) give the citizens of Burkina Faso a 15% stake in their local operations and (b) transfer skills to the local people. To further ensure that Burkina Faso receives a fairer share of the benefits from its mineral wealth, Traore is also said to be building a gold refinery and establishing national gold reserves for the first time in the nation's history. The leaders of Mali and Niger are doing much the same. As the UK Financial Times has reported: Their more interventionist stance….stems from a desire to assert national sovereignty after decades under the thumb of western miners and subject to contracts the new rulers view as tilted in favour of the companies. They have been rewriting mining laws, demanding higher tax payments and larger ownership stakes in the industry, but have also resorted to restricting operations, issuing arrest warrants and detaining employees. The effects of France's grim colonial record of exploitation and oppression are still evident. Just before Traore's coup, the literacy rate for those aged 15+ was below 35%, which is almost half the average level of literacy found across the Sahel, the region located between the Sahara desert and the savannahs of Central Africa. Burkina Faso and two other Sahel countries (Mali, Niger) have cut ties with Western colonial powers and forged defence links with Russia, and its Wagner Group of mercenaries. Unfortunately though…right across the Sahel region, the banking system remains in France's colonial grip. How come this is still possible? As the US Foreign Policy magazine recently conceded in an article otherwise hostile to Traore: …[There] is a growing frustration with France's continued economic role in Africa, a result of the enduring Central and West African franc currency systems that continue to exist in twelve former French colonies in the region. This currency regime, which during de-colonization aimed to provide a smooth landing for African economies by pegging their currencies to the stability of the French franc, has endured through the transition to the euro until today. Yet, perhaps the most humiliating aspect of this system is that 50 percent of each member state's foreign assets are held in Paris, plus an additional 20 percent for 'sight liabilities.' All up, one can readily see why Traore's fightback against Western economic dominance and minerals extraction has struck a sympathetic chord with Waititi. Despite the authoritarian nature of the Burkina Faso regime, some of its brutal suppression of dissent has been a survival tactic in the face of the advances by jihadi military forces. For that reason alone, Traore's survival is in the West's self-interest. The jihadis appear to be winning, across much of the Sahel region. To combat them, the Sahel governments that have kicked out France and the United States have not only turned to the Wagner Group for military assistance, but have offered mining rights to Moscow in compensation. Russian assistance has also boosted Traore's sophisticated social media presence. As a result, deepfake AI videos of Beyonce, Justin Bieber and R Kelly have appeared online in which they appear to wish God's blessing on Ibrahim Traore for a long life, and for many more years of enlightened rule. In reality, Traore's rule barely extends beyond the country's two main cities, with jihadi militia controlling much of the countryside. Elections have to be deferred, Traore claims, until these Salafi fundamentalist forces are defeated – otherwise, people would be killed by the rebels for daring to cast a ballot. Given the extent of the jihadi threat, Burkina Faso is now rated by some as being the world's number one centre of Salafi terrorism. Footnote: Unfortunately, politics readily lends itself to this lionising vs demonising process, focussed on individual heroes and villains. The Congolese politician Laurent Kabila once called this process 'dancing in the glory of the monster.' Meaning : it's not about the man, it should be about the system. We need to better understand why the political system rewards the sort of leaders we get. Anthem for a nation The Ivory Coast has always had a strong influence on the music of Burkina Faso. Born in Ivory Coast, the artist now known as Floby has been a fixture on the Burkinabe music scene for over 15 years. From last year, here's a single in which he celebrates his country, and its people:
Vancouver Sun
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Vancouver Sun
Casino, soccer stadium or green space? The battle for Hastings Park is back on
In 2001, it looked like the Pacific National Exhibition would move to Surrey, and Hastings Park would be transformed into green space. Proponents called it 'a Stanley Park for east Vancouver.' But Gordon Campbell's Liberals won the provincial election and killed the proposed Surrey PNE. In 2004, the province handed control over Hastings Park to the city of Vancouver, which kept the status quo — a mix of green space, the PNE fairgrounds and buildings, and Hastings Park racecourse. Fast forward to today. The lease for Hastings Park racecourse is up in May 2026, and 133 years of horse racing at the site may come to a close. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. In April, the Vancouver Whitecaps announced it had approached Vancouver with a proposal to build a new soccer stadium at Hastings Park. In early June, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation revealed an alternative plan, to buy the casino currently operating at the track. Vancouver Coun. Mike Klassen told Postmedia's Dan Fumano news of the pending deal with the Tsleil-Waututh speaks to the strong interest in 'the future of Hastings Park as a destination for entertainment.' Some community members are wondering why there's been no mention of converting any of the space taken up by the track — which is equivalent to about 20 city blocks — into parkland. Linda Shuto was part of the citizens group that worked to turn Hastings Park back into green space in the 1990s. 'The people on the east side of Vancouver have been fighting for a park for probably 40 years,' she said. 'When there was the promise that the PNE was going to move to Surrey, everybody in this community got incredibly excited, and there was a lot of discussion. There were roundtables, there were meetings. 'That's when the sanctuary (pond and nature zone) was built. That was conceived by community organizations and consultations with the province.' When Campbell nixed the PNE move to Surrey, Shuto said she thought, ''Well, that's it. We've lost.' But I never thought about the track (closing).' If the track does leave, she thinks it would be natural to turn the space into parkland. 'Here's another opportunity to make this a park, to make it be a truly green space,' she said. 'Back in the day, there were camping grounds on Hastings Park, there were Douglas firs, there was a golf course. It was an amazing place.' Vancouver park board commissioner Brennan Bastyovanszky agrees. 'It's a protected, designated park, so by every stretch of the imagination, they shouldn't be selling it, they shouldn't be developing it,' said Bastyovanszky. 'And the park board should be the administrator of that, and it should be turned into green space.' The park board has drawn the wrath of Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim, who wants to eliminate it. But Bastyovanszky said issues like this shows the need for a separate, elected park board. 'It's an example of why the park board exists, to prevent the city from making development decisions without having any sort of representation of the potential for the development of green space, or protecting the environment,' he said. Klassen said decisions on the future of the site are complicated, because the entire Hastings Park site, covering the equivalent of 65 city blocks, is in a trust dating to 1889. The track started operating at Hastings Park in 1892, the PNE in 1910. 'It is the City of Vancouver's land, but we're in partnership with the province of B.C.,' he said. 'So any actual decisions pertaining to the future of that acreage would be subject to an agreement with the province as well. There is no formal application or plan in place at this time.' Mark Vulliamy has been through the Hastings Park debate before, as a former park board manager and Hastings Sunrise resident. He said the idea of greening the park started about 1990, when a local resident, Guy Faint, found a clause in the original 1889 lease that stated the land had to be 'for the use, recreation and enjoyment of the public.' This set off a debate on the future of the site, which was partially greened by tearing down some PNE buildings for park features, such as the Italian garden off Renfrew Street and the sanctuary nature area off Hastings Street. But the push for more park space ended when Gregor Robertson's Vision party came into power. 'Interestingly enough, when Vision came in, their interest was saving the CUPE jobs on site,' said Vulliamy. 'They weren't interested in the park.' The idea of converting the racetrack to green space wasn't part of the original park board master plan because, two decades back, it seemed financially stable. But Vulliamy said if the track does move, the site would make a fine park. It has a magnificent view of the North Shore mountains, and is largely open space already, with few buildings to demolish. Asked if it's the last chance to build a large park in east Vancouver, he said, 'Yes, I would agree with that.' Then he upped the ante: It might be the last chance for a big park in the City of Vancouver, period. 'There are no undiscovered Stanley Parks or big areas of land that could be converted to park use,' said Vulliamy. 'I think it could be a park. Whether there's the political will and the public muscle or interest to redevelop it as park, I don't know.' It's an evolving issue. The main proponent of the Tsleil-Waututh casino proposal, Jen Thomas, was defeated in a recent election for chief of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation by Justin George. Chuck Keeling of racetrack operator Great Canadian Entertainment said, it is 'business as usual in the interim for us and our team at Hastings, and there is much work to do before any definitive agreement may be reached. 'We are looking forward to working with the Tsleil-Waututh Nation on next steps, with the goal of completing a definitive agreement with them.' jmackie@
CBC
26-06-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Rustad wonders if he should have made 'blackmail' claim after Opposition caucus meets
Social Sharing British Columbia Opposition Leader John Rustad said he wonders whether he should have used the word "blackmail" to describe the alleged behaviour of former B.C. Conservatives he's accused of trying to take over the party. But he said he didn't exaggerate the claims and doesn't regret writing a letter to his caucus that contained the allegations that are now being examined by police. Rustad was speaking Wednesday after a Conservative caucus meeting in Surrey, B.C., where most of his party's legislators stood behind him as he addressed reporters. "I do think about whether I should have used the word 'blackmail.' That was how staff described it to me," Rustad said, adding it was "unfortunate" the situation had become "very politicized." "I don't want to say a whole lot more because I'm trying to protect our staff." Former Liberal premier Gordon Campbell also attended the caucus meeting. Rustad said Campbell was brought in to talk to legislators about how he handled differences in his own caucus, and how the party's situation differs today. "There's nothing like drawing on some experience," Rustad said. Rustad has faced questions over his handling of allegations that three former Conservative members of the legislative assembly tried to blackmail legislators and staff. He said this week that a person who relayed the claims to him did not want to provide a statement in a police investigation. WATCH | John Rustad alleges blackmail: B.C. Conservative leader's letter alleges blackmail by ex-members 9 days ago Duration 10:04 In a letter leaked to media on Monday, B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad alleges that a group of legislators who left his party are threatening to release texts and messages to intimidate members of his caucus. It comes after two Conservative defectors formed the OneBC party. Tim Thielmann, the chief of staff for the OneBC leader, called the allegations a desperate attempt by Rustad to cling to power. The three former Conservative MLAs, Dallas Brodie, Tara Armstrong and Jordan Kealy, have all denied the accusations. They said the allegations were intended to distract from questions about Rustad's leadership. Rustad's leadership is currently under a review that is expected to last until December, with individual riding associations voting on whether he should stay on. The constitution approved at the party's most recent annual general meeting in Nanaimo says a leader can only be removed from office after voluntary resignation, death, incapacity or in a leadership review by the membership. Rustad said Wednesday that the review was not a unique situation, and while he would "love to have 100 per cent" support, he does not have a particular number in mind beyond the 50 per cent plus one benchmark set out in the party's constitution. WATCH | Rustad under leadership review: B.C. Conservative leader to face scheduled leadership review amid infighting 2 days ago Duration 3:05 The B.C. Conservative party has launched a leadership review into John Rustad. It comes as Rustad struggles to control infighting within the conservative movement. Our Katie DeRosa has been looking into this. University of British Columbia political science lecturer Stewart Prest said he expects MLAs to let that process play out for now. But Prest said the riding-by-riding vote also created the "possibility of an additional drip, drip effect" where Rustad had to continually defend his record. "There's not one particular way this rule may play out, but I would think, if I were Mr. Rustad, I would not be looking forward to the summer," Prest said. He added it is not clear whether any future leadership challenger to Rustad would come from the "populist" or moderate wings of the party. "We are already hearing rumblings of challenges from both camps, so I don't know if it is an either-or situation," Prest said. He said that the recent emergence of the One B.C. party, launched by Brodie and Armstrong, speaks to a growing unwillingness among populists to compromise. "So I think that is likely to continue," Prest said. As for the moderate camp, its members would focus on the question of whether Rustad can win government, Prest said. "If there isn't a sense that Mr. Rustad can pull everyone together, they too will join the calls for him to step aside and let someone else try," Prest said. Premier David Eby said during his weekly news conference that the Opposition faces "significant challenges" regardless of who leads them, saying it has "far-right politics" that are extreme.
Scoop
16-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
On The West's War Against Iran
Article – Gordon Campbell The world needs to stop talking about Israels right to defend itself, & start talking about the worlds need to defend itself against Israel. Gaza, Lebanon, Iran….these have become the stepping stones in Israels plan to expand its rule, Clearly, the world needs to stop talking about Israel's right to defend itself, and start talking about the world's need to defend itself against Israel. Gaza, Lebanon, Iran….these have become the stepping stones in Israel's plan to expand its rule, unrivalled, over all the land between the river and the sea. Iran was on the cusp of making a nuclear weapon? Even the crackpot American Congresswoman politician Marjorie Taylor Greene has been un-impressed by that excuse, noting that Israel 'has been saying the same thing for the past 20 years'. Donald Trump's intelligence boss Tulsi Gabbard recently testified under oath to a Congressional hearing that Iran was not engaged in building a nuclear weapon: Trump's intelligence czar Tulsi Gabbard, another anti-war figure, testified in March that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.'The IC [Intelligence Community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003,' Gabbard said, while noting, however, that Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels, unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons. Iran is surrounded by enemies. Like North Korea, it may well regard having a nuclear weapon capability as its best self-defence against invasion. Yet even if one treated the nuclear enrichment- to-nuclear bomb progression as inevitable – which it wasn't – can Israel actually succeed in destroying Iran's well-protected nuclear facilities? Probably not. Not unless there is regime change in Teheran, which has long been the end purpose of Israel's aggression. Israel is unlikely to succeed in this aim, either. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has in recent days, called once again on the 'proud people of Iran' to stand up for their 'freedom from an evil and repressive regime.' As this Al Jazeera columnist has pointed out: The assumption that Iranians would simply do Israel's bidding as it bombs them relentlessly and unilaterally, seems akin to the notion that if Israel starves and exterminates the Palestinians in Gaza to the required extent, they would rise against Hamas and remove it from power. Even if one bought the notion that all the Iranian people have been waiting for is an Israeli strike to move against the regime, Al Jazeera says, such beliefs demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of the wider historical forces that shape Iranian politics: While many Iranians undoubtedly oppose the Islamic Republic, Iranians of all political persuasions are consistently 'patriotic', committed to supporting Iranian sovereignty and independence from any attempts by external elements to impose their agendas on their country. For that reason, any invading force should be careful about what would come in the wake of their initial 'victory.' Israel, the US and any puppets they install in power would face being mired for a generation in a war of resistance that would dwarf what happened in Iraq after the US invasion in 2003. Shades of 2003 Talking of 2003…Israel's decision to attack Iran (even while talks between the US and Iran on limiting Iran's nuclear ambitions were still happening in Oman) shares that equally cynical historical precedent. Back in March 2003, the US had used the 'weapons of mass destruction' excuse to justify its invasion of Iraq, an attack it launched even while the UN arms inspectors were still at work inside Iraq, looking for those mythical WMDs. Then as now, we are not talking about a pre-emptive war against an external existential threat. This is a war of aggression against a sovereign nation, and it is being waged by an expansionist Israel, with US approval and support. Israel would not have proceeded without getting a green light from the US, which began issuing travel advisories and moving its diplomats out of the region in the week before the attacks began. Beyond the US, Israel can always count on other Western nations to do next to nothing to halt its aggression, or to punish it in any significant way. All year, the West has been bending over backwards to avoid looking as though it is criticising Israel for its genocidal use of starvation as a weapon of war against the two million Palestinian civilian inhabitants of Gaza. For example: when the leaders of Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand announced sanctions against two extremist members of the Israeli Cabinet, the co-signing leaders made a truly pathetic distinction: These measures are directed at individuals who directly contribute to extremist settler violence,' said Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand. 'The measures are not directed against the state of Israel itself.' Right. So, what on earth would Israel have to do – and what would a collectively responsible Israeli Cabinet have to sign off on – before New Zealand could gather up the courage to impose sanctions on the state of Israel? To state the obvious…long ago, Israel went well past the point of proportionate retaliation for the Hamas terrorist actions of October 7,2023. Israel's subsequent actions in Gaza continue to be unfathomably cruel and evil. What mother or father, watching their sons and daughters being systematically starved to death before their eyes, would not risk crowding and jostling for the inadequate amounts of dried food (much of it useless without fuel or water) that is being dribbled out through a handful of privately-run US aid centres – and not through the far more extensive and competent UN aid facilities? Desperate Palestinians are being drawn by the hunger of their families into congregating outside these sham US aid centres, where scores of them are then being shot down by Israeli troops on a daily basis. Food is being used as a lethal magnet to facilitate further mass killings, while New Zealand – and the rest of the Western world- continue to urge both sides to show restraint. Ludicrously, we continue to call on Israel to abide by the norms of international law that the IDF has consistently flouted in Gaza for the past 18 months. Nearly 20,000 dead Palestinian children later, and with the surviving children being slowly and deliberately deprived of food and water, we are still imploring Israel to show restraint. Iran's bomb Reportedly, Israel's latest attacks targeted and killed Ali Shamkani, Iran's chief negotiator in the US-led nuclear containment talks in Oman. Israel has also killed at least six of Iran's leading nuclear scientists, including Fereidoun Abbas, the former head of Iran's Atomic Energy Association. (Back in 2010, Abbas had been seriously wounded when a motorcyclist detonated a magnetic bomb under his car.) Since 2010, Israel has been steadily murdering a succession of Iran nuclear scientists, who had been working on the country's development of nuclear energy in order to meet the country's long-term and entirely legitimate energy needs. Because of the potential that further nuclear enrichment might someday result in the development of a bomb, the Obama administration struck a deal in 2015 with the then-relatively liberal administration of Hassan Rouhani in Teheran. Under the terms of that 2015 deal, Iran agreed to desist from added enrichment, in return for economic sanctions being lifted, and for Iran being enabled to trade with the West. In the wake of this opening, a more democratic society might have been able to emerge in Iran. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors at the time, Iran lived up to its side of the bargain. America, however, did not. Once elected in 2016, Donald Trump immediately scrapped this deal, and imposed even heavier trade sanctions. By doing so, Trump fatally undermined Iran's political liberals, and confirmed the predictions made by the regime's hard-liners that the US could never be trusted. By scrapping the 2015 deal, Trump also forced Iran into an enduring dependence on China as the only major market for its oil. This entirely avoidable outcome gave China a reliable proxy state in the Middle East, and a platform for influence that it had never had before. Fast forward to this year. Nearly 10 years after Iran had restricted its nuclear ambitions in return for trade advantages that it never received, Trump was back again at the bargaining table in Oman – offering Iran what one critic called 'a dime-store version' of the same deal that Trump had torn up in 2016. Regardless, Iran continued to talk, while preparing for the Israeli attack that everyone knew was coming, whatever concessions Iran offered. Few will shed tears over the likely fall of the stupidly brutal and corrupt regime in Teheran, which lost its revolutionary lustre decades ago. For example: even on the cusp of the Israeli attack, the religious authorities in Teheran were engaged in a crackdown on ordinary citizens walking dogs in public, or riding with them in cars. Allegedly, a prayer said when one has a dog hair on one's clothing will not be effective. ( I'd love to know how this was tested.) To repeat: Iran will not be an easy conquest. The country has had long experience of being subjected to external aggression and to the rule of foreign-backed puppets. For example, a US/UK funded coup in 1953 toppled the democratically elected Mossadegh government, and brought the Shah to power. As mentioned above, if Iran's current government is overthrown by external forces it will be extremely difficult to govern, given the underground resistance that will surely flourish in the wake of any foreign-led regime change. Ironically…who might the US and Israel like to install as the ruler of a newly 'democratic' Iran? That amenable puppet could well be the 65 year old Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the Shah deposed in 1979. The more things are changed in Iran, the more they are likely to stay the same. Footnote: Meanwhile, back in Gaza: to discredit and divide support for Hamas, the Israelis have reportedly armed and assisted a criminal Palestinian militia led by a Rafah resident called Yasser Abu Shabab. Reportedly, this gangster chief and his roughly 100 armed followers have – apparently with Israel's blessing – been looting aid convoys. and re-selling the food at a profit. Footnote Two: The media coverage of the Iran/Israel conflict to date has, as usual, been heavily weighted in favour of reportage from the Israeli side of the conflict. Extensive sympathetic coverage is being extended to Israeli citizens – and to embedded Western media – sheltering under Israel's extensive Iron Dome missile defence system. As well, Israelis are reportedly getting phone warnings of incoming Iranian missiles in time to move into bomb shelters that are – also, reportedly- well stocked with food and water. The citizens of Iran have no such luck – which may explain why their death toll is currently running at nearly 20 times higher – and they are certainly not getting such sympathetic treatment from our media. Al Jazeera, again: The Iranian Health Ministry said early Monday that at least 224 people have been killed, 90 percent of them civilians, and 1,481 wounded since Israel attacked Iran. Dozens of women and children were among the dead. So it goes. In the Middle East, they seem to be chronically unwilling/unable to give more than fleeting air time at best, to non-Israeli/US voices. Even the liberal voices on Israel's Ha'aretz news service are rarely called upon. True, foreign media have been barred by the IDF from entering Gaza. Yet, as this columnist in the Independent newspaper recently pointed out, it probably wouldn't have made much difference to the coverage, anyway: The truth is the coverage would have looked much as it has done for more than a year and a half, with Israel dictating the story lines, with Israel's denials foregrounded, with Israel's claims of Hamas 'terrorists' in every hospital, school, bakery, university, and refugee camp used to justify the destruction and slaughter. British doctors volunteering in Gaza who have told us there were no Hamas fighters in the hospitals they worked in, or anyone armed apart from the Israeli soldiers that shot up their medical facilities, would not be more believed because Jeremy Bowen interviewed them in Khan Younis rather than Richard Madeley in a London studio.
