 Give the people what they want. Give the people what they want. Give the people what they want. Your weekly movement news round up. Show 103. Give the people what they want. Brought to you live. Today it's just Prashant from People's Dispatch, your favorite movement news site, peoplesdispatch.org. I'm Vijay from Globetrotter. Coming to you as we do every week this week without Zoe unfortunately. But we're here, ready to go. Peace talks resumed in Venezuela between the various remnant factions in the Colombian Civil War. Perhaps good things will come out of it. Lots of things to talk about today, but I think we're going to start with Prashant. Prashant, you know, not only was there the ASEAN meeting, not only was there the G20 meeting in Bali, but there was that COP 27 meeting. Seem to have been anticipated there was some drama, strum and drum during the meeting and then boom, silence. What actually happened at the end in COP? Right, Vijay. This is the third week we're talking about COP 27. We talked a lot about COP 26 as well. And, you know, there's an unfortunate tone that often accompanies, I think, all of our coverage on this, which kind of encapsulates the situation. So COP 27 ended over time as usual there was, it was a bit of a mixed outcome on the one hand. The loss and damage fund that we talked about was finally agreed upon in principle, which is really the operative word, operative phrase here. It was agreed upon in principle. And there were a lot of outcomes which people were very disappointed about. We'll come first, of course, to the loss and damage point because that's, as Prashant means, celebrated a lot. So as we know, it's basically to help adaptation. That's help countries which are dealing with clay effects of climate change right now. Like for instance, Pakistan, which is suffering, it suffered billions worth of damage after those disastrous floods and then had to wait for funds. So the idea was that, you know, if a disaster takes place, do you have to wait for months until you can scrounge together some kind of international funding for aid or should there be a dedicated fund for this? Now, common sense would say that yes, there should be a dedicated fund for this because it's due to climate change. But what's been finally decided is that next year there'll be more clarity of this. So the key question is the operative aspects regarding who's going to pay, which is the single biggest question. There's a lot of disagreement on that. The richer countries, especially the Western European countries, what the classified is developing countries also to pay for this loss and damage fund which is causing a lot of controversy. Then of course, the other question is what kind of form will this money come in? Will it come in the form of say, loans will come in the form of insurance schemes, for instance, will come in the form of private financing, all of which brings with it its own set of issues. And if you look at generally the kind of funding that has been taking place for climate change related issues, a lot of it has been in these forms. And activists in countries in the global south have very rightly called it out saying that, you know, this is kind of a cop out in all kinds of ways. In fact, increasing the burden maybe on developing countries. So that's one aspect of the discussions that took place. The other, I mean, the most, maybe one of the most crucial aspects is that the question of reducing global warming to 1.5 degrees below pre-industrial, I mean, about pre-industrial levels looks increasingly difficult because, you know, say the emission of greenhouse gases continues to increase right now. We are not looking at, you know, science says that ideally we should peak by 2025. It doesn't look anywhere close to happening at this point of time. Maybe 2030 is a more realistic estimate maybe even later. So the possibility of that happening looks very, very slim at this point. And this already means that we're going to be seeing way more of an impact than what we're seeing right now in terms of extreme weather events, in terms of destruction of sources of food, in terms of livelihoods, in terms of people having to migrate in huge numbers, in terms of submergence of coastal areas, you know, it's really a recipe for disaster in so many ways. So that too, there's no real, I mean, there's been no real concrete action on a lot of words, a lot of promises, but again, a depressing outcome. And I think another key aspect which we really need to highlight, probably the more one of the important point is something which I think I want to quote the Bolivian official, the Bolivian street negotiator who said that this principle of what is called common but differentiated responsibilities, which has been the bedrock of action on climate change since 1992, since the UN framework was devised as slowly vanishing. So according to him, he said that what seems to be happening is that it's becoming common but shared responsibility, where things are becoming so bad that the rich countries now can say that hey, you know what, it's everyone's problem, let's all pitch it together, ignoring the historic inequality that led to climate change in the first place, ignoring the question that the rich countries have been responsible per capita for a huge amount of the emissions. And so they've taken things to such an extent that now it's easy for them to say, you know, everyone should just stop emitting greenhouse gases and this is an extremely dangerous precedent that we're seeing taking place here. It might get even heightened in the coming years as well. So all in all, not a very positive COP meeting, we know that fossil fuel representatives numbers were at a historic high this year and next year is going to happen in the UAE so you can possibly assume that might be the case there as well. So these are some of the important outcomes I think we need to highlight again the fact that no real answer to the question of debt. How are countries going to deal with climate change when they're so indebted? With the more millions of loans you have to take. So all these are issues which are not really seriously addressed. There's been namesake lip service, but that's about it. Prashant, come on. You know, we already mentioned that the problem of this loss and damage is hardly something novel. You know, and I think it's interesting that the media as it reports the aftermath of COP 27 is suffering from acute amnesia and has forgotten that the loss and damage question was agreed upon at COP 25 in Santiago where there was the Santiago loss and damage agreement which is basically been recycled in COP 27 as a victory. It's extraordinary, isn't it? Absolute case of media amnesia in reporting on this COP and believing in a way the headline that the leaders of COP and Egypt wanted to promote. We had a breakthrough on loss and damage. Excuse me. You had a breakthrough in 2019. You're just repeating the same press release. Anyway, you know, talk about repeating. How many times on this show have we come back to the question of Mali and France over and over again? Very interesting story. November 21st, interim Prime Minister of Mali, Colonel Aboulaye Maiga releases a statement on social media saying, hey listen, French NGOs no longer welcome in Mali. Now, in a sense, Colonel Maiga's statement didn't come from nowhere. He didn't initiate this. From February onwards after the junta led by military section that had taken power in Mali last year in a second coup, really an anti-French coup. From February onwards, the French government said, look, we are no longer going to provide Mali with ODA. That's the overseas development assistance. France was quite categorical. You're out. Why France? Why did you cut ODA in February? Interesting. The French didn't talk about the military coup. They didn't talk about corruption in Mali. The normal things one hears about. France directly said, we're angry because the Malian military is associating with Russia's Wagner group. The principle reason they said was the Wagner group. So Colonel Maiga, when he retaliated as it were on November 21st, said in his social media post, not only, look, no more French NGOs operating in Mali, but he said, we are retaliating because of your absurd allegations. Interesting. There are two narratives at work here. Number one, there is increasing French anti-French sentiment such that in actually 2019, before this, you know, spate of coups in Burkina Faso, Mali and Guinea, before that, the French basically had to come to terms with the fact that no longer could France hold 50% of the reserves of the West African countries, holding them because these countries operate with a currency called the CFA franc, which is actually controlled by monetary unions in West Africa and in the Sahel to be fair to the French. They don't really control it, although about almost half of the personnel in these monetary unions were seconded from the Treasury department in Paris. And as I said, 50% of the assets had to be held in French banks. 2019 France said it will divest from this. Just as a back note, people may have forgotten in 2011, there was Nikolai Sarcozy's war against Muhammad Gaddafi. Gaddafi had been on a tear for at least two or three years arguing for the substitution of the CFA franc by something they wanted to call the Afriq, a new African currency. Didn't happen. Gaddafi was overthrown. That was the end of that. Well, interestingly, one narrative is that there's this anti-French sentiment, very plausible because there's a lot of anger at France from Algeria onwards saying you've been colluding with the Islamists who hold about maybe almost 50% of the landmass in Mali. Mali is a very large country. The second narrative is France's storyline saying that no, no, the real question is that the Mali and military is working with the Wagner group. Now, it's true. The current defense minister in Mali, the chief of the state staff, they were both in Moscow twice last year. They were in Moscow again this year. Indeed, there are Russian mercenaries in Mali, about 800 of them. Very insignificant number in terms of the number of French troops were there in Barkhane, which was in the tens of thousands. But at any rate, there are some Russian troops. The dispute is whether this particular confluence, this particular clash between France and Mali is about Russia's involvement in the Sahel region, or it's really about anti-French sentiment. Smells a lot like part of the anti-French way, but what do I know? You want to hear more about this? Don't read the press either in Paris or in New York. You might have to actually listen to the Malians a little bit. But again, what do we know? I mean, we just run a weekly show where we focus on Mali a lot and try to get you the news about it. A lot of anti-Russian propaganda in Africa. Some of it is sticking, but not all of it. Not all of it. And I think that's the bottom line in this. Speaking about tough stories, Prashant, back to Palestine, back to Palestine, over 50 children killed by the Israelis this year. What's the story with Palestine? Right. We're talking a few days ahead of what is called the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people. There's a 29th of November that's marked every year, of course. And this is the 45th year on which it's supposed to be marked the first such day was marked in 1977, I believe, or that is when the resolution was passed. So this is the 45th anniversary of that. Curious, the time frame is 45 years, 1977 when it was passed. It was 10 years after the 1967 war, which altered the ground reality considerably in Palestine, Israel's occupation rose to new heights in the period following that war. And it's something that was, of course, never reversed. But in the 45 years since looking back in 2022, when you look back, it's horrifying to the extent to which the ground situation has changed if you look at what's been happening. And this year I think exemplifies those trends because on the one hand, like you said, you have the kind of atrocities that are taking place purely in terms of brutal killings. Alone, this year has been the worst year since 2005 in the occupied best bank when the UN started collecting numbers and I believe the total number of 203 people, Palestinians have been killed in all the occupied territories together. And of course, we see other forms of brutality as well just yesterday in the new scheme that 20 year old Ahmad Mansara who is who has been in jail for over 7 years a judge has extended his solitary confinement by another 4 months saying that he is a threat to himself and this is after lawyers have said that his mental health has been significantly deteriorating and Israel's answer is that the Israeli establishment's answer is that, oh that means he's a threat to himself and others. So he should be kept in solitary confinement. It really there's no way there's no way of even comprehending this kind of logic but you know, of course there are killings that are such instances but also this year also marks yet another right word lurch as far as Israel is concerned and there's no greater example of that than the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu and Atmar bin Goyil, his new ally who earlier even Netanyahu was reluctant to ally with it that is our right wing he was but now everything seems possible in Israeli politics. They agree to sort of retroactively legalize the illegal outposts which even Israel used to call illegal until recently so we know that through the system of settlements and outposts they are basically encroached massively on Palestinian land they are basically broken Palestinian land into small bits which makes you know continuous travel impossible there's this whole network of checkpoints of you know the apartheid wall for instance and these settlements and outposts are in many ways they're the tip of the spear whereby they basically destroy the possibility of a Palestinian state and while Israel has legally you know has encouraged both these settlements and outposts in which over 700,000 people live settlers live it it somehow maintained this fiction that while they considered the settlements legal the outposts were not legal according to them and this is what they retroactively decided to legalize as part of this new government formation that is taking place so that itself I think again goes to show that from 1977 when we look back it's kind of when we look back when we look at the situation today it shows how you know immeasurably the situation has changed so you know this is a part of the issue of course the other larger part of the issue the other aspects being you know we talked about Sheikh Jannat in the past we talked about the attacks we talked about the rhetoric so all in all I think a very difficult time for the Palestinians their resistance of course continuing like a resistance continuing very bravely and valiantly but I think it's up for the international community to sort of ask itself this question as they mark this day the UN has an event for instance you might find regular statements from the European Union and others promising to uphold Palestinian sovereignty and rights but I think the real question is something else what has the international community done after making all these claims and making all these commitments in various resolutions Prashant it's a distressing story and has been so for a very long time and it's important that we keep on it you're listening to give the people what they want coming to you from people's dispatch that's Prashant is the editor of people's dispatch along with Zoe we don't have Zoe with us today she'll be back next week I'm Vijay from Globetrotter happy to be with you I'm here sitting in the independent Republic of Dongshankistan with my colleagues and Marco from Dongshank and Manolo keeping me company happy to be with you I want to talk a little bit about that war in Ukraine Prashant which has been going on and on stunning news recently we of course already talked about the fact that there was a missile that came from Ukrainian territory likely shot by the Ukrainians landed in Poland well one would have thought that after the mishap with the associated news where the Associated Press came out and said well it was a Russian missile in fact the Associated Press let go the reporter who wrote that story after all that it looks like increasingly NATO is going to be putting patriot batteries both in Poland and other states that border Ukraine very dangerous in fact the Polish Premier and defence minister said that the patriot batteries coming from Germany are going to be actually flush on the border between Poland and Ukraine which means if there is any error they can now again be the accusation that there was an attack on a NATO country pretty striking and scary stuff over there including of course now we know 400 million more dollars coming from the US in often military, lethal military equipment that amounts to close to 20 billion dollars coming from the United States into Ukraine I mean there is also other things the United Kingdom for the first time is sending seeking helicopters to Ukraine these are manned helicopters, lethal helicopters coming in now nobody is saying that the Russian assault hasn't been quite brutal and hitting areas where civilians are and so on but I must say they're ramping up both of the of these financial support to buy military equipment from the west on the one side and secondly the provision of these patriot batteries into frontline states around Ukraine very chilling and disturbing I think storylines which of course we've been following trying to make sense of I have to say I've reported a number of conflicts wars and so on very difficult to actually get a handle of what's going on people are too quick to rush in and make claims about what happens in battlefields very ugly situation as reporters of course most of us pretty sensitive people we'd like to see some kind of resolution ceasefire taking stock of the damage and so on looks unlikely Prashant not with more money coming in from the United States into Ukraine to in a sense prolong the war looks unlikely from Moscow where this has really become a prestige issue ugly war all wars in a sense ugly this one ugly for being prolonged beyond I think the time that it needed to have gone on for point is made I think on all sides but let's see we'll be watching carefully as we have been watching carefully trying as best as possible to make sense of what's going on well speaking of belligerence war and things like that United States is of course made a habit of coming in poking its stick in the areas around China you had Nancy Pelosi bringing two congressional delegations into Taipei making all kinds of comments about what should Taiwan do and shouldn't do of course the Taiwanese not so much a protagonist in this as US Congress people well now it looks like the United States has sent another honorable guest into the Philippines who's that Prashant right this is of course Vice President Kamala Harris who visited the Philippines and received received too many contrasting welcomes on the one hand of course Ferdinand Bong Bong Markov's government going all out to receive a red carpet welcome and then you had activists in the ground raising a slogan which is interesting among many slogans of course one of which was just said Harris imperialist which I think you know conveyed pretty much what this entire segment is about so like I said civil society organizations not very happy with the visit for multiple reasons and I think there are two aspects to look at here of course on the one hand we do know that the Bong Bong Markov's government has has a very problematic record in various ways you talked about it on this show before inheriting a legacy which is also is not a great legacy let's say both in terms of the previous Rodrigo de Tepte government that it succeeded and the legacy of the older Marcos senior who was a very close ally of the US also one of the most brutal dictators in the region so activists on the one hand were a bit unhappy about that aspect the fact that you know Kamala Harris was coming there in some senses sanctifying that regime so to speak but also the fact that although it will not be that well known the United States also has a you know very say close military alliance or assistance program with the United States with the Philippines for a number of years in fact I think between 2015 and 2022 it received arms equipment in training to the tune of about 1.4 billion and you know that itself kind of shows the you know how much it's investing in the Philippines and why it's doing so it's pretty simple because as far as the United States is concerned causing tension in Southeast Asia in the Asia Pacific region is quite a strategic relevance to the US and that's how this connects to what Nancy Pelosi was doing in Taiwan as well because as part of its encircling China strategy what the US would like to do is to sort of keep those conflicts going on in Southeast Asia in the Asia Pacific region now I think it's you sort of take it for granted that any region countries are going to have differences over borders, over trade, over commerce over a number of issues history there's you know there's no region in the world where everything is hunky-dory so it's undoubtedly there's no doubts about the fact that there will be conflicts and disagreements I think what's significant is that countries despite having them continue to move forward for instance we had a couple of years ago the RCEP deal being signed in that region the biggest trading block in the world and this was signed by countries all of whom have differences and I think that's pretty much how diplomacy works that's how relations between countries work that you have differences but nonetheless you also engage with each other and this is something which the United States really finds is not its own agenda and so it's in this context that you need to see Kamala Harris's visit and also the visit to what is called the Palawan province which is very close to what is known as the Spratly Islands where there is a bit of attention over issues of sovereignty there are multiple claims being made in the region so the fact that she actually chose to be there make statements from there actually made a lot of activists very jittery the fact that why is the United States coming and raising this bokeh once again at a time when already tensions are high in the region because for instance of the issue of Taiwan and intervention over there so all these things considered yet another visit by a US official which is not meant to promote cooperation or promote goodwill but to subtly and not so subtly promote these kind of tensions it often makes you think you only see this happening US officials landing in difficult parts of the world and making those statements reverse never happens just as you only have US warships in the South China Sea or in the Pacific Ocean where there are no business to be so it actually kind of shows the skews in the order which often we don't notice because we take it so much for granted US ships they go all over the world but nobody ever thinks why is it only that US ships are there in places where there are no business to be it's the habits of finger wagging the habits of finger wagging are unique to the United States incredible it's a tough week I lost a very close friend of mine of 30 years to diabetes he's been struggling with the disease for a long time the 14th of November was World Diabetes Day this is the 100th anniversary of the discovery of insulin a key medicine to treat diabetes one of the great untreated ailments in the global South my friend was only 54 years old died of diabetes the reason I'm saying this is I'm entering into telling you about a story to do with measles you see a lot of focus over the last three years around the COVID pandemic there was a lockdown then there were the creation at rapid speed of vaccines vaccination programs and so on during this entire period there was a great neglect of other healthcare challenges including vaccination programs and the delivery of insulin to people in various countries simply had very much lower supplies as a consequence of a great shift to tackling COVID as a primary you know as the primary ailment of our times well the WHO the World Health Organization has been warning over the last few months over the decline in vaccination programs for other things other than COVID now must be said COVID vaccines are still not available in many parts of the world we know that in some countries 70% vaccination won't happen until the year 2100 we already know that I mean it's already scandalous any rate let's come to the pressing issue that the World Health Organization has just reported on and that's measles, measles is a big killer of children I think people don't appreciate the fact that in many parts of the global south ailments like measles and mumps continue to take the lives of young people who are not vaccinated WHO says that something like 90% of children need to get the first dose of a measles vaccine to allow for what is known as herd immunity I know there's a lot of controversy around the eye of herd immunity but nonetheless that's what the WHO says they say the threshold is about 90% the consequence of the lack of vaccinations because of the COVID pandemic in 2021 last year the vaccination rate for the first dose of the measles vaccine was at 81% the second dose was down to 71% now what the WHO worries about is that 40 million children will not have received the vaccine this is the lowest first dose percentage since 2008 this is going to be at least the WHO believes pretty catastrophic lots of countries are going to experience a pretty invisible death rate for children who will die of measles I say invisible because this gets reported very very little I want to urge you to go to the People's Dispatch website and follow the coverage People's Dispatch does through People's Health Dispatch which is produced in collaboration with the People's Health Movement very much like to have you go and look at the People's Health Movement work on some of these issues now Prashant, I don't know if the People's Health Dispatch is going to cover the measles story I hope it does, it's an important story these are the neglected stories about children in the poorest parts of the world and I must say whatever criticisms one has of the United Nations and there are many that one could have whatever criticisms you have about the World Health Organization they simply don't forget to keep telling us that these are real issues that impact poor children in vulnerable parts of our great planet please go and read People's Dispatch stories on many of these issues you've been listening to give the people what they want brought to you People's Dispatch today it was Prashant, Zoe's on leave she'll be back next week I'm Vijay from Globetrotter see you next week it will be show 104 looking forward to your selfies