COCOBOD: Ohene Agyekum’s Bank Accounts Defrozen

Daniel Ohene Agyekum

The Economic and Organised Crime Organisation, EOCO has defrozen the bank accounts of Mr Daniel Ohene Agyekum, the immediate past Chairman of the Ghana Cocoa Board (Cocobod).

Sources close to the EOCO say that the decision was communicated to the Banks by a letter dated March 17, 2017.

The indications are that by this decision, EOCO is signalling that Mr Agyekum may not have serious questions to answer.

He was first invited to assist EOCO in its investigations into alleged financial maladministration in Cocobod but was later informed that he would be charged with causing financial loss to the state.

Over the last three months, Mr Agyekum has been questioned on a number of occasions about the release of some money to the National Security Council to fight the smuggling of cocoa and inputs for cocoa farmers.

He was also questioned about the renovation of the residence of the Chief Executive of the Cocobod and the award of contracts for what has come to be known as cocoa roads.

Mr Agyekum has always insisted on his innocence and told investigators that COCOBOD under his leadership was strictly governed by law and internal rules.

Dr Opuni, the Chief Executive of Cocobod is also currently under investigation over procurements.

Reports purported to be coming from EOCO have been widely published by a section of the media alleging impropriety on the part of Dr Opuni.

However these reports have not been confirmed or denied by the EOCO.

It is not known whether Dr Opuni’s accounts have also been defrozen.

Editorial

DONALD TRUMP

It is not clear whether Donald Trump, President of the United States of America can wriggle his way out of the attempt to impeach him for allegedly interfering with investigations of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI).

Mr Trump has so far denied any wrong doing but there are very strong indications that some senior Republicans and Democrats are intent on carrying on the investigations to their logical conclusion.

For all we know, the US establishment is making moves to install Michael Pence as President to enable it push its anti-Iran and anti-Russian agenda.

The establishment may also have an eye on the development of the military-industrial complex.

Whatever the agenda may be, it shouldn’t take too long for it to manifest fully.

Perhaps it is only then that Trump and his supporters will learn the important lessons of history.

Local News:

ALL SET FOR AFRICAN VOICES FOR PALESTINE

Amandzeba Nat Brew

Organisers say that all is set for the musical concert dubbed “African Voices for Palestine”.

The date for the event has now been firmly fixed for July 14, 2017 and the venue will be the national theatre in Accra.

A spokesperson for the organisers told The Insight that Miatta Fahnbulleh, a Liberian superstar has confirmed her participation and contact has been made with the international reggae superstar, Rocky Dawuni over his participation.

The event is at the initiative of the Ghanaian music maestro, Amandzeba and award winning Dr Knii Lante Blackson.

Many Ghanaian superstars have expressed interest in the event and organisers may have to refuse some offers.

The event is designed to draw attention to the plight of the people of Palestine living under Zionist occupation, including detentions without charge or trial, the destruction of agricultural lands and infrastructure, the denial of the right of refugees to return to their homeland and the building of illegal settlements on Palestinian lands.

Miatta Fahnbulleh

Entrance to the event will be absolutely free.

Organisers say that they expect a huge crowd to participate in the concert.

Currently more than one thousand Palestinians prisoners are languishing in Israeli jails and about a third of them have embarked upon a hunger strike to protest their conditions.

The prisoners are led by Marwan Bargouthi, a leader of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).

Even Israeli doctors have refused to force-feed the strikers arguing that it would be a violation of their rights.

In the dying days of racism in Zimbabwe, Robert Nestor Marley had a similar concert in Harare, the Zimbabwean capital.

President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo will be invited to grace the event along with other Ghanaian and African dignitaries.

What Akufo Addo said About the new Chief Justice

H.E President Nana Akuffo Addo

By President Akufo Addo

In three and a half weeks’ time, on 8th June this year to be precise, a remarkable chapter in Ghana’s legal and judicial history will come to a close. On that day, Her Lordship the Chief Justice, Georgina Theodora Wood, will step down from an office into retirement. The twelfth occupant of that office in independent Ghana, she is the first female to head the Judiciary, and its longest-serving leader, who will have been in office for three days short of ten years. Her career has been extraordinary, and I pay warm tribute to her distinguished service to our nation, and wish her a well-earned retirement, even though her public service will not be over as her place on the Council of State awaits her.

In order to ensure a smooth succession to the office and preserve the integrity of the judicial branch of government, I have decided to initiate the constitutional processes for the appointment of her successor, so as to preclude any undue vacuum in the office. I have, thus, today, sought, by letter, consultation with the Council of State, in accordance with Article 144 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic, in order to nominate for the approval of Parliament the appointment of Justice Sophia Akuffo, a Justice of the Supreme Court and a senior member of the Court, as the new Chief Justice of the Republic. If the constitutional processes conclude in a satisfactory manner, and I have every expectation that they will, she will be the thirteenth person to hold that important office of State.

Justice Sophia Akuffo

I have known Justice Sophia Akuffo well, for over 40 years. Indeed, she was my first junior in practice, as barristers call their work. She impressed me considerably with her hard work, her capacity for detailed research, her independence of mind and spirit, her honesty and integrity, her deep-seated respect for the rule of law, and her abiding belief in the sovereignty of Almighty God. I believe these are the qualities which sustained her brilliant career as a lawyer that propelled her to the notice of the 1st President of the 4th Republic, His Excellency Jerry John Rawlings, who appointed her to the Supreme Court on November 30, 1995, some 22 years ago.

She has been one of the leading lights of the Court since her appointment, and her contribution to the Court’s work and the growth of our nation’s jurisprudence has been extensive. She has enriched her judicial experience by serving with credit on continental judicial bodies such as the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, where she ended up as President of the Court.

I have no doubt that Justice Akuffo will be a worthy successor to Chief Justice Wood and uphold jealously the independence of the Judiciary. I expect discipline, fairness, integrity and the continuing modernisation of judicial activities to be the hallmarks of her tenure as Chief Justice if she is so endorsed by the constitutional bodies. It is important for the development of our nation that we have a Judiciary that commands the respect of the nation by the quality of its justice delivery, as well as by the comportment of its judges.

We are all witnesses to the stormy winds that have buffeted the Judiciary in recent years and to the efforts Chief Justice Wood has been making to restore public confidence in the institution. I expect Justice Akuffo to continue and intensify that work.  The Judiciary has the onerous responsibility of being the bulwark of the defence of the liberties and the rights of our people. It can only discharge that responsibility effectively if it has the unalloyed respect of the people.

We are determined to build a new Ghanaian civilisation, where the rule of law is not a slogan, but an operating principle for the development of our State, where the separation of powers is real and meaningful, where the liberties and rights of our people are fully protected, and where law and order provide a firm basis for our social and economic development, so that the dreams of prosperity that animated the great patriots, who are the founders of our nation, can find expression in our generation.

I will be a genuine and trusted partner of the Judiciary so that, together, the Executive and Judiciary can co-operate in a spirit of mutual respect to attain this goal for the benefit and welfare of our people. I am confident that, in Justice Sophia Akuffo, I will find a worthy collaborator in this noble endeavour. I commend her to the constitutional bodies, the Council of State and Parliament, for appointment as Chief Justice of Ghana.

Thank you. May God bless our homeland Ghana and make her great and strong.

Africa:

USA wants to dismember Libya into three states 

Map of Libya showing areas of control by various forces

According to Western media, tensions between conflicting parties in Libya continue growing. Libya may eventually split into several smaller regional states.

The Guardian published a map of Libya when it was divided into three states before 1963. The formations outlined the boundaries of three wilayahs of the Ottoman empires: Tripolitania in the west, Cyrenaica in the east, and Fezzan in the south.

A while back, junior national security adviser to US President, Sebastian Gorka, proposed dividing Libya into three states. Shortly before the inauguration of Donald Trump, Gorka presented a conditional diagram of the project at a meeting with a high-ranking European diplomat. Reportedly, Sebastian Gorka aims to receive the post of president's envoy in Libya.

Libya Sirte post Gaddafi

Sebastian Gorka became a full-fledged American citizen only in 2012 owing to his "friendship" with senior adviser to the US president on political and strategic issues, right-wing extremist Stephen Bannon. Moreover, Gorka is suspected of having links with ultra-right Hungarian party "Order of the Knights", which is accused of anti-Semitism, cooperation with Nazis and involvement in the massacre of Jews in Hungary during World War II. Interestingly, members of such organizations are not entitled to receive US citizenship. However, Sebastian Gorka appeared to be an exception from the rule.

The White House has not provided any comments on the questions about the territorial division of Libya.

The idea to divide Libya into three states is not new. Hillary Clinton, when serving as US Secretary of State, was considering such a scenario too, which can be seen from her correspondence with assistant Jake Sullivan in March 2012.

Some experts believe that Western countries and several Arab states, Egypt in the first place, try to take Libya under control to gain access to its oil reserves.

US Forces in Libya

To displace Colonel Gaddafi and then kill him, the US State Department provided distorted information to the White House. Tripoli's secret audio recordings unveiled that high-ranking Pentagon officials and Democratic congressmen were vehemently opposed to Hillary Clinton's decision to continue hostilities in Libya in March 2011. To stop the escalation of the conflict, they contacted members of Gaddafi's team via diplomatic channels.

The records of the talks between US officials and the son of Muammar Gaddafi, one of the Libyan leaders, were exposed by The Washington Times. The parties to the talks harshly criticized Mrs. Clinton's policy, noting that her tunnel thinking had led to an absolutely unnecessary war, for which even US special services saw no reasons.

Pravda.Ru

Britain:

Today’s Labour voters ‘prefer Corbyn to Blair’ as socialist tightens grip on party 

Jeremy Corbyn with Tony Blair standing behind him

The Labour Party is now polling better under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership than it would have done under Tony Blair, a new survey has revealed.

According to pollsters GfK, 31 percent of the British electorate will be supporting Corbyn in the June 8 general elections, compared to only 23 percent that would rather have Blair back at the helm.

Other figures inside the party fared no better, with only 25 percent of those quizzed considering London Mayor Sadiq Khan to be a better alternative to Corbyn. A mere 24 percent would prefer to see former leader Ed Miliband or ex-Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper in charge.

It was even worse for Blair among non-Labour voters, with 61 percent recoiling at the thought of voting for the party if he were still leader. Corbyn’s number among the same sample was 53 percent.

Net satisfaction too was better under Corbyn than most other options. GfK’s survey found that while Cooper was the least controversial candidate with -21, Corbyn drew a -22 rating when matched with Blair’s disastrous -38 rate.

"These results cast doubt on how successful any political comeback by Tony Blair would be,” GfK research director Keiran Pedley said.

“Much has been written on Corbyn’s unpopularity but these results suggest that Tony Blair is even more unpopular with the public. His biggest problem in terms of political credibility is that he no longer has an obvious constituency in British politics. He is even divisive among Labour voters.”

The poll’s overall results also bode well for Corbyn’s position in his party, as his leadership could now grant Labour a better election result than those achieved by Gordon Brown and Miliband in 2010 and 2015 respectively. After Labour’s 13 years in government, Brown lost to the Conservatives in 2010 with a vote of 29 percent. In the following election, Miliband lost to David Cameron, collecting just over 30 percent of the vote.

If Corbyn secures the projected 31 percent of the vote – an estimated 171 seats in Parliament – he would have a stronger case for remaining leader of the Labour Party after June 8.

On Tuesday evening, former Labour frontbencher and Corbyn ally Clive Lewis once again insisted that the socialist should stay on at the top “whatever happens” in the general election.

 “One of the things we've learnt after Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown is that when leaders of the party leave immediately, after it can be quite destabilizing,” the one-time shadow business secretary said.

“So I think there's an argument that whatever happens, Jeremy Corbyn stays on and makes sure that he hands the Labour Party on in good order.”

Last week, the Telegraph published a piece suggesting that 100 “moderate MPs” were preparing to leave the party if Corbyn refused to step down after a Tory landslide. Party officials rejected the claim, but rumors that Labour centrists are hoping to build a new, “progressive” party continue to circle Westminster.

Canada:

Canadian labour union support Palestinian independence

Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) Support Palestinian Prisoners

The Canadian Labour Congress, the national labor federation representing 3 million workers across Canada passed an Emergency Resolution at its 2017 convention in Toronto on 10 May in support of Palestinian prisoners’ #DignityStrike. The text of the resolution follows:

Emergency Resolution

CLC Supports Palestinian Prisoners’ Dignity Strike

The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) will:

a) Call on the Canadian Government to pressure Israel to stop violating international law by illegally detaining Palestinians and depriving them of their basic human, civil and political rights;

and

b) Work with global union federations, affiliates and civil society organizations in Canada on campaigns in support of Palestinian prisoners.

BECAUSE More than 1600 Palestinian prisoners have been on a hunger strike since April 17, 2017; and

BECAUSE Key demands of the hunger strike include: end to the denial of family visits, the right to appropriate health care, the right to education in prison and an end to solitary confinement and “administrative detention”; and

BECAUSE The CLC supports the right of the Palestinian people to national self-determination and an end to the illegal Israeli occupation as the basis for a just peace in the region.

This important resolution follows on strong, growing international labor movement and trade union support for Palestinian prisoners and the Palestinian struggle for justice, self-determination and liberation.

On 12 May, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO), which represents nearly one million workers in Norway, endorsed a full international economic, cultural and academic boycott of Israel as a necessary means to support fundamental Palestinian rights.

The Congress of LO unanimously supported some form of boycott of Israel, as 193 delegates voted for a full boycott and 117 voted for a limited boycott of Israeli settlements. The strong majority of the LO congress embraced a full boycott of Israel, emphasizing the importance of meaningful international action in the face of impunity and apartheid.  The LO vote escalated the existing position of the labor confederation in support of the boycott of settlement products.

This important action came as 1500 Palestinian prisoners have been engaged in a hunger strike since 17 April for their basic human rights, including an end to the denial of family visits, proper medical treatment and health care, the right to pursue distance higher education, and an end to solitary confinement and administrative detention, imprisonment without charge or trial.

A number of trade unions and workers’ organizations have been vocal in their support for the Palestinian prisoners. 26 European trade unions and labor organizations endorsed a collective statement in support of the hunger strike:

Palestinan Parliamentarian and Prisoner Marwan Baghouti

“We believe that as trade unionists and conscious citizens of this world, we have duty and power to take a stand. We stand in solidarity with Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike in their demand for fair treatment and justice. We commit to working within our respective unions not to renew contracts with corporations like HP and G4S profiting from the imprisonment of Palestinians. In addition we call on the EU and European member states to end their complicity and hold Israel accountable for its gross violations of human rights,”emphasized the unions, including labor organizations in Belgium, France, Ireland, Norway, the UK, Galicia, Basque Country, Valencia, Scotland, Ireland, Poland, the Netherlands, Catalonia, and Luxembourg.

Meanwhile, the National Union of Teachers in the UK has joined several other international labor unions in being an HP-free zone.  Kevin Courtney, general secretary with the National Union of Teachers, said in the Electronic Intifada that “the NUT does not buy or use HP products or services as a gesture of solidarity with the Palestinian people.”

HP provides services and technologies to the Israeli military as well as the Israel Prison Service, and the boycott of HP is a priority for BDS campaigns in support of Palestinian prisoners.

These statements followed declarations by the World Federation of Trade Unions, representing 92 million workers in 162 countries, and the International Trade Union Confederation, representing 181 million workers in 163 countries, in support of the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike.

The WFTU statement “expresses its firm internationalist solidarity with the more than 6700 Palestinians, including 389 children and 56 women, currently imprisoned by the Israeli occupation forces.

We strongly denounce the imprisonment of the Palestinian people by Israel, the inhumane detention conditions and the acts of abuse like the violent beatings against our Palestinian brothers and sisters and we demand the immediate release of all Palestinian prisoners and the end of Israel’s arrest campaigns, aggressiveness and occupation of the Palestinian territories.”

The WFTU also issued a statement condemning the Pizza Hut Israeli advertisement – later pulled – mocking Palestinian hunger strikers, emphasizing again that

“The World Federation of Trade Unions and the international class oriented trade union movement stand on the side of the heroic Palestinian people and prisoners, express their solidarity and support to their fair struggle.”

ITUC also expressed its solidarity with “Palestinian prisoners who have declared an indefinite hunger strike to protest against violations of human rights inside Israeli Prisons. We also support the ‘general strike for freedom and dignity’ held in solidarity with hunger striking prisoners and call for wider international solidarity…

We add our voice to the demands of the hunger striking Palestinian detainees calling for the lifting of restrictions on family visits, improved overall detention conditions and access to medical care, including easing restrictions on access to education materials and food, as well as the installation of telephones to communicate with their relatives. We also recall that under international humanitarian law, detainees from occupied territories must be detained in the occupied territory, not in the territory of the occupying power, as enshrined in the Fourth Geneva Convention.”

In South Africa, among the endorsers of the South African Campaign for Palestinian Political Prisoners is the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) as well as the South African Municipal Workers Union.  Sidubo Dlamini, the President of COSATU, is joining in the broad one-day hunger strike in South Africa in support of Palestinian prisoners, alongside government officials, anti-apartheid struggle veterans and former political prisoners.

This support comes amid a growing campaign in the international labor movement in support of Palestinian rights, including an end to occupation and apartheid, full equality for all and Palestinian refugees’ right to return to the homes and lands from which they were expelled. Unions endorsing BDS include COSATU, CUT in Brazil, CSN in Quebec, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, the Irish Confederation of Trade Unions and the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers (UE) in the United States. Unions in Scotland, Canada, the UK, Sweden, Belgium, the Basque Country, Uruguay and many other countries have also taken a stand in support of Palestinian rights and the campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions. Workers’ struggles and popular movements like the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) in Brazil have been strong supporters of the Palestinian struggle – including that of the Palestinian prisoners – for many years.

Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network salutes all of the labor unions taking a stand with the Palestinian people and the Palestinian prisoners. We echo the call of Palestinian trade unions:

“We also take this opportunity to call on trade unions yet to join the BDS movement to: implement boycotts of Israeli and international companies that are complicit with violations of Palestinian rights, divest trade union funds from companies and institutions complicit in Israel’s occupation, settler colonialism and apartheid, and apply pressure on governments to cut military and trade relations with Israel. We reiterate our call for a boycott of Histadrut, Israel’s general trade union, for its complicity with Israel’s violations of international law and its refusal to take a clear stand in support of comprehensive human rights for Palestinians.”

We urge all labor organizations and workers’ movements to express their solidarity and support for the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike, for the Palestinian people’s struggle for liberation and for the campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel. The majority of Palestinian prisoners are Palestinians of the popular classes: workers, from the villages, the refugee camps and the cities. The international workers’ movement is engaged in a battle confronting capitalist exploitation, oppression and austerity around the world. The Palestinian prisoners in their battle for dignity and freedom are on the front lines not only of the struggle for Palestinian freedom, but for social justice and human liberation in the world today.

UK:

Jeremy Corbyn: A Labour Government will Oppose Lawlessness and Unilateralism 

Jeremy Corbyn campaigns

By Jeremy Corbyn

Chatham House has been at the forefront of thinking on Britain’s role in the world. So with the General Election less than a month away, it’s a great place to set out my approach: on how a Labour Government I lead will keep Britain safe, reshape relationships with partners around the world, work to strengthen the United Nations and respond to the global challenges we face in the 21st century.

And I should say a warm welcome to the UN Special Representative in Somalia,  Michael Keating, who is here today. On Monday, we commemorated VE Day, the anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany in Europe.

VE Day marked the defeat of fascism and the beginning of the end of a global war that claimed seventy million lives. General Eisenhower, supreme commander of the Allied forces in 1944, went on to become Republican President of the United States during some of the most dangerous years of the Cold War in the 1950s.

In his final televised address to the American people as President, Eisenhower gave a stark warning of what he described as “the acquisition of unwarranted influence by the military-industrial complex.” 

“Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry”, he said, “can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defence with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”

Sadly, in the more than half a century since that speech, I think it’s clear that Eisenhower’s warning has not been heeded. Too much of our debate about defence and security is one dimensional. You are either for or against what is presented as “strong defence”, regardless of the actual record of what that has meant in practice.

Alert citizens or political leaders who advocate other routes to security are dismissed or treated as unreliable. My own political views were shaped by the horrors of war and the threat of a nuclear holocaust. My parents met while organising solidarity with the elected government of Spain against Franco’s fascists during the Spanish civil war.

My generation grew up under the shadow of the cold war. On television, through the 1960s and into the seventies, the news was dominated by Vietnam. I was haunted by images of civilians fleeing chemical weapons used by the United States.

I didn’t imagine then that nearly fifty years later we would see chemical weapons still being used against innocent civilians. What an abject failure. How is it that history keeps repeating itself? At the end of the cold war, when the Berlin Wall came down we were told it was the end of history. Global leaders promised a more peaceful, stable world. It didn’t work out like that.

Today the world is more unstable than even at the height of the cold war. The approach to international security we have been using since the 1990s has simply not worked. Regime change wars in Afghanistan Iraq, Libya, and Syria – and Western interventions in Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen – have failed in their own terms, and made the world a more dangerous place.

This is the fourth General Election in a row to be held while Britain is at war and our armed forces are in action in the Middle East and beyond. The fact is that the ‘war on terror’ which has driven these interventions has failed.

They have not increased our security at home – just the opposite. And they have caused destabilisation and devastation abroad.

Last September, the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee published a report on David Cameron’s Libyan war. They concluded the intervention led to political and economic collapse, humanitarian and migrant crises and fuelled the rise of Isis in Africa and across the Middle East. Is that really the way to deliver security to the British people? Who seriously believes that’s what real strength looks like?

We need to step back and have some fresh thinking. The world faces huge problems. As well as the legacy of regime change wars, there is a dangerous cocktail of ethnic conflicts, of food insecurity, water scarcity, the emerging effects of climate change. Add to that mix a grotesque and growing level of inequality in which just eight billionaires own the same wealth as the 3.6 billion poorest people.

And you end up with a refugee crisis of epic proportions affecting every continent in the world. With more displaced people in the world than since the Second World War. These problems are getting worse and fuelling threats and instability. The global situation is becoming more dangerous.

And the new US President seems determined to add to the dangers by recklessly escalating the confrontation with North Korea, unilaterally launching missile strikes on Syria, opposing President Obama’s nuclear arms deal with Iran and backing a new nuclear arms race.

A Labour Government will want a strong and friendly relationship with the United States. But we will not be afraid to speak our mind. The US is the strongest military power on the planet by a very long way. It has a special responsibility to use its power with care and to support international efforts to resolve conflicts collectively and peacefully.

Waiting to see which way the wind blows in Washington isn’t strong leadership. And pandering to an erratic Trump administration will not deliver stability. When Theresa May addressed a Republican Party conference in Philadelphia in January she spoke in alarmist terms about the rise of China and India and of the danger of the West being eclipsed.

She said America and Britain had to ‘stand strong’ together and use their military might to protect their interests. This is the sort of language that led to calamity in Iraq and Libya and all the other disastrous wars that stole the post-Cold War promise of a new world order.

I do not see India and China in those terms. Nor do I think the vast majority of Americans or British people want the boots of their young men and women on the ground in Syria fighting a war that would escalate the suffering and slaughter even further. Britain deserves better than simply outsourcing our country’s security and prosperity to the whims of the Trump White House. So no more hand holding with Donald Trump.

A Labour Government will conduct a robust and independent foreign policy – made in Britain. A Labour Government would seek to work for peace and security with all the other permanent members of the United Nations security council – the US, China, Russia and France. And with other countries with a major role to play such as India, South Africa, Brazil and Germany. The ‘bomb first, talk later’ approach to security has failed. To persist with it, as the Conservative Government has made clear it is determined to do, is a recipe for increasing, not reducing, threats and insecurity.

I am often asked if as prime minister I would order the use of nuclear weapons. It’s an extraordinary question when you think about it – would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? Would you risk such extensive contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world? If circumstances arose where that was a real option, it would represent complete and cataclysmic failure. It would mean world leaders had already triggered a spiral of catastrophe for humankind.

Labour is committed actively to pursue disarmament under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and we are committed to no first use of nuclear weapons. But let me make this absolutely clear. If elected prime minister, I will do everything necessary to protect the safety and security of our people and our country. That would be my first duty.

And to achieve it, I know I will have to work with other countries to solve problems, defuse tensions and build collective security. The best defence for Britain is a government actively engaged in seeking peaceful solutions to the world’s problems. But I am not a pacifist.

I accept that military action, under international law and as a genuine last resort, is in some circumstances necessary. But that is very far from the kind of unilateral wars and interventions that have almost become routine in recent times. I will not take lectures on security or humanitarian action from a Conservative Party that stood by in the 1980s – refusing even to impose sanctions – while children on the streets of Soweto were being shot dead in the streets, or which has backed every move to put our armed forces in harm’s way regardless of the impact on our people’s security.

Once again, in this election, it’s become clear that a vote for Theresa May could be a vote to escalate the war in Syria, risking military confrontation with Russia, adding to the suffering of the Syrian people and increasing global insecurity. When you see children suffering in war, it is only natural to want to do something. But the last thing we need is more of the same failed recipe that has served us so badly and the people of the region so calamitously.

Labour will stand up for the people of Syria. We will press for war crimes to be properly investigated. And we will work tirelessly to make the Geneva talks work. Every action that is taken over Syria must be judged by whether it helps to bring an end to the tragedy of the Syrian war or does the opposite.

Even if ISIS is defeated militarily, the conflict will not end until there is a negotiated settlement involving all the main parties, including the regional and international powers and an inclusive government in Iraq. All wars and conflicts eventually are brought to an end by political means.

So Labour would adopt a new approach. We will not step back from our responsibilities. But our focus will be on strengthening international co-operation and supporting the efforts of the United Nations to resolve conflicts.

A Labour Government will respect international law and oppose lawlessness and unilateralism in international relations. We believe human rights and social justice should drive our foreign policy. In 1968, Harold Wilson’s Labour Government signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

As prime minister, I hope to build on that achievement. Labour’s support for the renewal of the Trident submarine system does not preclude working for meaningful, multilateral steps to achieve reductions in nuclear arsenals.  A Labour Government will pursue a triple commitment to the interlocking foreign policy instruments of: defence, development and diplomacy. For all their bluster, the Tory record on defence and security has been one of incompetence and failure.

They have balanced the books on the backs of servicemen and women. Deep cuts have seen the Army reduced to its smallest size since the Napoleonic wars. From stagnant pay and worsening conditions, to poor housing. The morale of our service personnel and veterans is at rock bottom.

And as the security threats and challenges we face are not bound by geographic borders it is vital that as Britain leaves the EU, we maintain a close relationship with our European partners alongside our commitment to NATO and spending at least 2 per cent on defence.

That means working with our allies to ensure peace and security in Europe. We will work to halt the drift to confrontation with Russia and the escalation of military deployments across the continent.

There is no need whatever to weaken our opposition to Russia’s human rights abuses at home or abroad to understand the necessity of winding down tensions on the Russia-Nato border and supporting dialogue to reduce the risk of international conflict. We will back a new conference on security and cooperation in Europe and seek to defuse the crisis in Ukraine through implementation of the Minsk agreements.

We will continue to work with the EU on operational missions to promote and support global and regional security. This means our Armed Forces will have the necessary capabilities to fulfil the full range of obligations ensuring they are versatile and able to participate in rapid stabilisation, disaster relief, UN peacekeeping and conflict resolution activities. Because security is not only about direct military defence, it’s about conflict resolution and prevention, underpinned by strong diplomacy.

So the next Labour Government will invest in the UK’s diplomatic networks and consular services. We will seek to rebuild some of the key capabilities and services that have been lost as a result of Conservative cuts in recent years.

Finally, while Theresa May seeks to build a coalition of risk and insecurity with Donald Trump, a Labour Government will refocus Britain’s influence towards cooperation, peaceful settlements and social justice.  The life chances, security and prosperity of our citizens are dependent on a stable international environment. We will strengthen our commitment to the UN. But we are well aware of its shortcomings, particularly in the light of repeated abuses of the veto power in the UN Security Council.

So we will work with allies and partners from around the world to build support for UN reform in order to make its institutions more effective and responsive. And as a permanent member of the Security Council we will provide a lead by respecting the authority of International Law.

To lead this work, Labour has created a Minister for Peace who will work across the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. We will reclaim Britain’s leading role in tackling climate change, working hard to preserve the Paris Agreement and deliver on international commitments to reduce carbon emissions.

Labour will re-examine the arms export licensing regulations to ensure that all British arms exports are consistent with our legal and moral obligations. This means refusing to grant export licences for arms when there is a clear risk that they will be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law. Weapons supplied to Saudi Arabia, when the evidence of grave breaches of humanitarian law in Yemen is overwhelming, must be halted immediately.

I see it as the next Labour’s Government task, as my task, to make the case for Britain to advance a security and foreign policy with integrity and human rights at its core. So there is a clear choice at this election.

Between continuing with the failed policy of continual and devastating military interventions, that have intensified conflicts and increased the terrorist threat. Or being willing to step back, learn the lessons of the past and find new ways to solve and prevent conflicts. As Dwight Eisenhower said on another occasion: If people “can develop weapons that are so terrifying as to make the thought of global war almost a sentence for suicide, you would think that man’s intelligence would include also his ability to find a peaceful solution.”

And in the words of Martin Luther King

“The chain reaction of evil – hate – begetting hate, wars producing more wars – must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark days of annihilation”.

 I believe we can find those solutions. We can walk the hard yards to a better way to live together on this planet.

A Labour Government will give leadership in a new and constructive way and that is the leadership we are ready to provide both at home and abroad. Thank you.

North Korea:

What N Korea's Massive Artillery Drills Really Say about 

Pyongyang's Intentions

© REUTERS/ KCN 

North Korea has carried out massive artillery drills, possibly the largest in the country's history, to mark the 85th anniversary of the founding of the country's Army. Speaking to Sputnik, Chinese and Russian experts explained why the exercises may actually be a sign that Pyongyang is seeking some kind of compromise with the US and its allies.

The North Korean military staged massive long-range artillery drills in the country's east near the city of Wonsan on Tuesday, marking the 85th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People's Army. 

South Korean officials told the Yonghap News Agency that the live-fire drills were closely monitored by the South Korean military. One report said that between 300-400 artillery pieces were used in the exercises. Sources also indicated there was a strong likelihood that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un attended the drills.

The exercises coincided with the military exercises being held by the US and South Korea off the western coast of the Korean Peninsula. Against the background of a tense security situation, the US has sent the USS Carl Vinson supercarrier to the region, with a nuclear-powered submarinealso set to join the carrier group off the waters of the peninsula in the coming days.

About 28,000 US troops are permanently stationed in South Korea, and Washington has repeatedly rejected signing a formal peace treaty with Pyongyang. Legally, the US and North Korea are still at war, with hostilities held at bay by an armistice signed in 1953, the year the Korean War officially came to an end.

On Tuesday, officials from South Korea, Japan and the United States agreed to increase pressure on Pyongyang over its ongoing nuclear and missile testing, South Korea's Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs Kim Hong-kyun said. For his part, US Special Representative for North Korea Policy Joseph Yun said that it was clear to Washington that North Korea was not yet ready for dialogue.

North Korea was widely expected to mark Tuesday's anniversary of the founding of the Korean People's Army with some grand demonstration of force, with experts fearing that new missile or nuclear testing was likely.

Zhan Debin, the head of the Center for the Study of the Korean Peninsula at the Shanghai University of International Business and Economics, told Sputnik that the fact that North Korea staged artillery drills instead may be an indication that they are willing to compromise.

"The fact that North Korea did not conduct nuclear testing, or undertake some other 'more serious actions' can be regarded as an attempt at some kind of compromise in the face of pressure from the outside world," the expert explained. After all, "if the DPRK had conducted nuclear testing, or launched a ballistic missile, it would have met with a tough response from China and the United States," he added.

Pyongyang, Zhan noted, seems to have gained a pretty clear understanding that further nuclear testing in the present circumstances would be harmful to its own interests. 

For example, "nuclear testing could affect the situation surrounding the early presidential elections in South Korea; this is something North Korea is also aware of. If North Korea conducts further testing, this will complicate the formation of North Korea policy for Moon Jae-in, the South Korean presidential frontrunner. He will be forced to react more harshly, which in turn could weaken his former approach and change the tone of dialogue with Pyongyang. Therefore, if North Korea had gone ahead with its nuclear tests, it would have lost more than it gained."

For her part, Irina Lantsova, Asia and US expert and lecturer at St. Petersburg State University, also indicated that the fact that North Korea conducted conventional artillery drills instead of nuclear of missile testing was a good sign.

"It must be admitted that the current situation has been sorting itself out in a rather graceful manner," the expert said, speaking to Radio Sputnik.

"On April 15 (the 105th anniversary of the birth of North Korean founder Kim Il Sung), Pyongyang marked the occasion with a parade. Its planned missile test did not get off the ground. Then, on April 25, when everyone expected either a launch or an explosion, they did something they have every right to do in the current circumstances," (staging the artillery drills instead).

This, according to Lantsova, demonstrates a sense of caution from Pyongyang. "In the end, everyone engaged in some saber-rattling, but the situation on the Korean peninsula is likely to gradually return to normal." 

In these circumstances, the academic suggested that further pressure from the US, Japan and South Korea will only serve to aggravate the situation. Instead, the sides must somehow agree to sit down at the negotiating table.;

"More pressure will only convince the North Korean leadership that they need to continue to develop their nuclear program. In the current circumstances, it's worth recalling the experience of the six-party talks held in the early 2000s, which served as a platform for interaction with the North Korean leadership." Today, these have been forgotten, according to Lantsova. But perhaps remembering this experience might be a good idea."

For his part, Zhan Debin emphasized that achieving a breakthrough in its nuclear testing will continue to remain a key strategic goal for Pyongyang, notwithstanding any pressure North Korea may face from the international community.

"Essentially, if North Korea succeeds with a breakthrough in nuclear testing, this would be of great importance for the North Korean army, its unity and morale. After the army gets stronger, the North Korean regime will also become more stable and surefooted," the expert concluded.