There were 800 Brazilian indigenous people murdered during the presidency of right-winger Jair Bolsonaro, a new report revealed today.
​
The report Violence against Indigenous Peoples in Brazil, published by the Indigenous Missionary Council (CIMI) said that during Mr. Bolsonaro’s time in office, there were 795 cases of homicides against indigenous people throughout the country.

The launch of the report at the National Conference of Bishops of Brazil (CNBB) was attended by indigenous leaders and representatives of the CNBB and Cimi, such as Ricardo Hoepers, general secretary of the CNBB, and the president of CIMI, Roque Paloschi.

The states hardest hit by the killings were Roraima and Amazonas, home to the Yanomami community, where 208 and 168 people were murdered respectively.

In Mato Grosso do Sul 146 killings were reported.

The report also says that the highest rates of suicide were also to be found in these three states between 2019 and 2022.

Nearly three-quarters of the total of the 535 indigenous people who took their own lives were from Roraima, Amazonas, and Mato Grosso do Sul.

An increase in conflicts over territorial rights was also reported, especially in 2022, when 158 violent acts were reported, together with 309 cases of illegal exploitation of natural resources, invasions, and damage to indigenous property in 218 indigenous territories of 25 states of Brazil.

The report of the tragic situation facing indigenous communities in Brazil during four years of Mr. Bolsonaro’s rule showed the loss of demarcations of indigenous lands, an increase in conflicts, and the dismantling of policies aimed at safeguarding indigenous peoples and their territories.

Roberto Antonio Liebgott, one of the authors of the report, said: “This report, unlike the others, closes a cycle of perversity, of four years of brutality. That is why we took the trouble to bring the data collected from the last four years.”

​Morning Star

The coup in Niger follows coups in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Guinea. Each of these was led by military officers angered by the presence of French and US troops and by economic crises inflicted on their countries

At 3 am on July 26, 2023, the presidential guard detained President Mohamed Bazoum in Niamey, the capital of Niger. Troops, led by Brigadier General Abdourahmane Tchiani closed the country’s borders and declared a curfew. The coup d’état was immediately condemned by the Economic Community of West African States, by the African Union, and by the European Union. Both France and the United States—which have military bases in Niger—said that they were watching the situation closely. A tussle between the Army—which claimed to be pro-Bazoum—and the presidential guard threatened the capital, but it soon fizzled out. On July 27, General Abdou Sidikou Issa of the army released a statement saying that he would accept the situation to “avoid a deadly confrontation between the different forces which… could cause a bloodbath.” Brigadier General Tchiani went on television on July 28 to announce that he was the new president of the National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland (Conseil National pour la Sauvegarde de la Patrie or CNSP).

The coup in Niger follows similar coups in Mali (August 2020 and May 2021) and Burkina Faso (January 2022 and September 2022), and Guinea (September 2021). Each of these coups was led by military officers angered by the presence of French and US troops and by the permanent economic crises inflicted on their countries. This region of Africa—the Sahel—has faced a cascade of crises: the desiccation of the land due to the climate catastrophe, the rise of Islamic militancy due to the 2011 NATO war in Libya, the increase in smuggling networks to traffic weapons, humans, and drugs across the desert, the appropriation of natural resources—including uranium and gold—by Western companies that have simply not paid adequately for these riches, and the entrenchment of Western military forces through the construction of bases and the operation of these armies with impunity.

Two days after the coup, the CNSP announced the names of the 10 officers who lead the CNSP. They come from the entire range of the armed forces, from the army (General Mohamed Toumba) to the Air Force (Colonel Major Amadou Abouramane) to the national police (Deputy General Manager Assahaba Ebankawel). It is by now clear that one of the most influential members of the CNSP is General Salifou Mody, former chief of staff of the military and leader in the Supreme Council for the Restoration of Democracy, which led the February 2010 coup against President Mamadou Tandja and which governed Niger until Bazoum’s predecessor Mahamadou Issoufou won the 2011 presidential election. It was during Issoufou’s time in office that the United States government built the world’s largest drone base in Agadez and that the French special forces garrisoned the city of Irlit on behalf of the uranium mining company Orano (formerly a part of Areva).
​
It is important to note that General Salifou Mody is perceived as an influential member of CNSP given his influence in the army and his international contacts. On February 28, 2023, Mody met with the United States Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley during the African Chiefs of Defense Conference in Rome to discuss “regional stability, including counterterrorism cooperation and the continued fight against violent extremism in the region.” On March 9, Mody visited Mali to meet with Colonel Assimi Goïta and the Chief of Staff of the Malian army General Oumar Diarra to strengthen military cooperation between Niger and Mali. A few days later on March 16, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Niger to meet with Bazoum. In what many in Niger perceived as a sidelining of Mody, he was appointed on June 1 as the Nigerien ambassador to the United Arab Emirates. Mody, it is said in Niamey, is the voice in the ear of Brigadier General Tchiani, the titular head of state.

A highly informed source in Niger tells us that the reason why the military moved against Bazoum is that “he’s corrupt, a pawn of France. Nigerians were fed up with him and his gang. They are in the process of arresting the members of the deposed system, who embezzled public funds, many of whom have taken refuge in foreign embassies.” The issue of corruption hangs over Niger, a country with one of the world’s most lucrative uranium deposits. The “corruption” that is talked about in Niger is not about petty bribes by government officials, but about an entire structure—developed during French colonial rule—that prevents Niger from establishing sovereignty over its raw materials and over its development.

At the heart of the “corruption” is the so-called “joint venture” between Niger and France called Société des mines de l’Aïr (Somaïr), which owns and operates the uranium industry in the country. Strikingly, 85 percent of Somaïr is owned by France’s Atomic Energy Commission and two French companies, while only 15 percent is owned by Niger’s government. Niger produces over 5 percent of the world’s uranium, but its uranium is of a very high quality. Half of Niger’s export receipts are from sales of uranium, oil, and gold. One in three lightbulbs in France are powered by uranium from Niger, at the same time as 42 percent of the African country’s population lived below the poverty line. The people of Niger have watched their wealth slip through their fingers for decades. As a mark of the government’s weakness, over the course of the past decade, Niger has lost over $906 million in only 10 arbitration cases brought by multinational corporations before the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the International Chamber of Commerce.
​
France stopped using the franc in 2002 when it switched to the Euro system. But, fourteen former French colonies continued to use the Communauté Financiére Africaine (CFA), which gives immense advantages to France (50 percent of the reserves of these countries have to be held in the French Treasury and France’s devaluations of the CFA--as in 1994—have catastrophic effects on the country’s that use it). In 2015, Chad’s president Idriss Déby Itno said that the CFA “pulls African economies down” and that the “time had come to cut the cord that prevents Africa from developing.” Talk now across the Sahel is for not only the removal of French troops—as has taken place in Burkina Faso and in Mali—but of a break with the French economic hold on the region.

At the 2023 Russia-Africa Summit in July, Burkina Faso’s leader, President Ibrahim Traoré wore a red beret that echoed the uniform of the assassinated socialist leader of his country, Thomas Sankara. Traoré reacted strongly to the condemnation of the military coups in the Sahel, including to a recent visit to his country by an African Union delegation. “A slave that does not rebel does not deserve pity,” he said. “The African Union must stop condemning Africans who decide to fight against their own puppet regimes of the West.”

In February, Burkina Faso had hosted a meeting that included the governments of Mali and Guinea. On the agenda is the creation of a new federation of these states. It is likely that Niger will be invited into these conversations.

The Global Majority is free to choose two different paths to counteract the rabid, cognitive dissonant Straussian neocon psychos in charge of imperial foreign policy; to relentlessly ridicule them, or to work hard on the long and winding road leading to a new multipolar reality.

Reality struck deep at the Russia-Africa summit in St. Petersburg, with its astonishing breadth and scope, reflected in the official declaration and key facts such as Russia writing off no less than $23 billion in African debt, and President Putin calling for Africa to enter the G20 and the UNSC (“It’s time to correct this historical injustice.”)

Three interventions in St. Petersburg summarize the pan-African drive to finally get rid of exploitative neocolonialism.

President of Eritrea Isaias Afwerki:
“They are printing money. They are not manufacturing anything at all, it’s printing money. This has been one of their weapons globally – the monetary system… sanctions here, sanctions there… We need a new financial architecture globally.”

President of Burkina Faso, Ibrahim Traoré, the face of a resurgent Global South and the world’s youngest leader:
“A slave that does not rebel does not deserve pity. The African Union (AU) must stop condemning Africans who decide to fight against their own puppet regimes of the West.”

President of Uganda Yoweri Museveni:
“One facet of neo-colonialism and colonialism was Africa being confined to producing only raw materials, crops, like coffee, and minerals (…) This issue is the biggest factor why the African economies are stunted; they do not grow, because all the value is taken by other people (…) So, what I want to propose to Russia and China is to discourage as a policy the importing of raw materials from Africa, to instead work with the Africans to add value at source.”

In a nutshell: pan-Africa should go all-out creating their own brands and value-added products, without waiting for “approval” from the West.

The South African dramaSouth Africa is an immensely complex case. Under extreme pressure from the usual suspects, Pretoria had already succumbed to the collective West hysteria related to Putin’s attendance of the upcoming BRICS summit, settling for the physical presence of Foreign Minister Lavrov and Putin via videoconference.

Then, during a personal meeting with Putin in St. Petersburg, President Cyril Ramaphosa decided to speak in the name of all African leaders, thanking Russia for the offer of free grain, but stressing they had not come to “receive gifts; Africa proposes the return of the grain deal.”

Translation: this is not about free grain offered for several African nations; this is about Pretoria wanting to cash in on the deal, which privileges globalist oligarchs and their Kiev vassal.

Now compare it with the Russian position. Putin once again made it very clear: fulfill our demands and we return to the grain deal. Meanwhile, Russia remains a leader in wheat production – as it was before; and while prices keep rising on global markets, Moscow will share the income with the poorest African nations.

Tensions inside BRICS, as illustrated in this case, are painfully real, and come from the weakest nodes. For all the devious rhetoric, the fact is India and Brazil prefer BRICS+ to proceed slowly, as sherpas confirm off the record.

Among the over 40 nations – and counting – which are dying to become part of the club, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia are very well positioned to be accepted in the first tier of BRICS+ members, unlike Argentina (which basically paid an IMF loan so it can continue to be paying IMF loans).

Reality is dictating the slow approach. Brasilia – under extreme pressure from the “Biden combo” – has a minimalistic margin of maneuver. And New Delhi is proposing first an “observer” status for prospective members, before full admission. Very much like in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), whose recent summit was decided by New Delhi to be held online. For a very simple reason: India did not want to sit on the same table with China.

What’s worrying is that the practical, gargantuan work schedule for both BRICS and the SCO is being slowed down by a toxic mix of internal squabbles and foreign interference. Yet the Russia-China strategic partnership must have anticipated it – and there are contingencies in place.
​
Essentially, broader discussions are accelerated while minor partners get their act together (or not…) What’s clear is that, for instance, Indonesia, Iran and Saudi Arabia possibly being admitted to BRICS+ will immediately change the internal balance of power, and the weak links will necessarily have to catch up.

St. Petersburg also demonstrated something crucial in the evolving multilateral organization front: the renewed importance of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU). The EAEU is fast expanding beyond Central Asia towards Southeast Asia (a free trade agreement with Indonesia is imminent), Africa and crucially, the DPRK: that was discussed in detail during Defense Minister Shoigu’s rock star welcome in Pyongyang.

All that spells out a road map like this: the EAEU in the vanguard, in parallel to China’s BRI (crucial forum coming up in Beijing in October) until BRICS+ and SCO gridlock is solved.

Only one BRICS member without which is impossible to build Eurasia integration has serious problems with China: India (and that includes rivalry for influence in Africa, West Asia and Central Asia).

Simultaneously, there’s only one BRICS member capable of influencing India: Russia.

Now that’s a challenge for the ages. Yet Moscow does have the potential – and the competence – for regulating the whole new, emerging system of international relations. The timing for implementing what will be in fact a new world system is now, and immediately ahead: from 2025 to 2030.

So Russia-India relations will arguably become the key to fully unlock BRICS+. Issues will include an iron-clad Russian oil road to India via Rosneft; solving the Afghanistan riddle (with Moscow keeping Beijing and New Delhi in sync); a more muscular presence within the SCO; closer security deliberations among the three Ministries of Defense; including Chinese and Indian observers in the Russia-Africa process; and all of the above micro-managed by Putin himself.
​
If China-India competition is already a big deal, we should expect it to become even more complex after 2030. So here’s Russia facing yet another primordial historical/cultural mission. This goes way beyond the Himalayas. It spans the full arc of China-India competition.

It’s always immensely enlightening to follow BRICS-related analyses by Sergey Glazyev, the Minister of Integration and Macroeconomics at the EAEU’s Economic Commission.

Glazyev, in two major interviews, has confirmed that a “sanction-proof” BRICS digital unit of account is under discussion, based not only on BRICS national currencies but also a basket of commodities.

He also confirmed that “we” are working to establish an internal BRICS group to design and establish the new system (by the way, these discussions within the EAEU are way more advanced).

According to Glazyev, a payments system outside of SWIFT can be set up through a network of state-run digital currencies – not to be confused with cryptocurrencies backed only by private speculators.

Glazyev also forcefully defends the adoption of the digital ruble. He argues that’s the way to track blockchain transactions and prevent non-intended use of funds – as in diversion into speculative markets.

Apart from all the huge challenges, the optimal path ahead spells out EAEU and BRICS+ observing international law and slowly but surely building the payments system capable of circumventing massive imperial choke points. A new BRICS currency can wait. What matters is the evolution of so many interconnections as the new system’s infrastructure is being built.

And that brings us once again to North Korea.

The Shoigu visit de facto cleared the path for the DPRK to totally align with the Russia-China strategic partnership in the massive Eurasian integration/development/mutual security process.

Oh, the ironies of “post-everything” History. The Hegemon may have actually been trapped into destroying NATO as a credible military force just as Russia-China reinvigorated a major ally in Northeast Asia and the Far East – complete with nuclear power, ballistic missiles, and a hyper-productive industrial military complex.

So the Straussian neocon psychos want to expand their unwinnable Forever War to rabid hyena Poland and the Baltic chihuahuas? As in first we go to Moscow, then we take Beijing? Be our guest. But first be sure to place a call to Global South powerhouse DPRK. Steel Kitten Kim Yo-jong, Kim Jong Un’s younger sister, will be delighted.

Santiago de Cuba

At 5:12 a.m., July 26, 1953, 100 men and two women under the leadership of Fidel Castro attacked with arms the Moncada military barracks in Santiago de Cuba. The purpose? To initiate the revolutionary battle against dictator Fulgencio Batista, attain weapons from the defeated soldiers and go into the mountains to continue the struggle until victory. The plan was the same at the Carlos Manuel de Céspedes barracks at Bayamo, 80 miles away.

But the Moncada assault failed. Within hours a bloody massacre by Batista’s army ensued. Only six rebels died in combat; 55 men were captured, tortured and slaughtered.

Yet, the Moncada assault became the clarion call to the Cuban people as they learned of the bold and courageous challenge to Batista. Five years and five months later, Fidel’s July 26th Movement succeeded in overthrowing U.S. puppet Batista. Thus began the struggle for national liberation and Cuba’s socialist construction. Today, July 26th is a major holiday in Cuba.

At pre-dawn on July 26, 10,000 Cubans entered the hallowed grounds of the Moncada — now a school — to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Moncada assault. Accompanying them were some 269 visitors of international brigades from 26 states, the U.S., Puerto Rico, Venezuela, Germany, Belgium, Chile, Canada and other Caribbean nations. From the United States, were the IFCO/Pastors for Peace caravanistas and a leadership group of the Venceremos Brigade. Activists of the Cuba and Venezuela Solidarity Committee also participated. At the solidarity march of the international activists the day before, Puerto Rico led as the principal delegation, marking 125 years of U.S. colonialism and the struggle for independence.

Receiving a standing ovation at the historic commemoration were President Miguel Díaz-Canel, two leading combatants of the Moncada assault, historic leader of the Revolution and General of the Army Raúl Castro and Ramiro Valdez Menéndez, who became a commander of the guerrilla war.

A stunning cultural/political performance and reenactment of July 26, 1953, preceded the president’s talk, featuring a dramatic projection onto the walls of the Moncada façade. It began with performers dancing to represent Carnaval celebrations in Santiago that fateful night. Fidel Castro picked the traditional festival to begin the armed action. He figured that the soldiers would be distracted or sleeping. 
​
Depicting key events of the Moncada assault and subsequent events, dramatic high-tech digital scenes were projected on the Moncada façade. The image and name of each martyr was projected, accompanied by stirring music of two women singers.

​To address the multitude, President Díaz-Canel rose to the stage to a standing ovation. He spoke of the selfless sacrifice of the combatants and the heroes who survived to continue the struggle. 

Bringing that historic date to the present, Díaz-Canel said, “But since 1959 we are much more than a few dozen brave young people against Batista’s tyranny. Since 1959 we are a people that defends the revolution and socialism as the most just road to achieve the most just society for all.

“Cuba has had to face the imperial ambitions of its powerful neighbor for more than 200 years, with various forms and methods by seduction or with aggression by the carrot or the stick.

“Its obsession with possessing us has not ceased. It is a conduct dictated by the very nature of imperialism, the natural enemy of the peoples’ right to self-determination and of any government that proposes to truly develop a program of social justice. …

“They have shown themselves to be more aggressive and more intolerant when realizing that there is no force in the world capable of making us renounce those Marxist ideals, but also the ideals of Martí and Fidel, that inspire the tireless struggle for the greatest possible social justice.

“This explains the severity of the economic blockade and the current reinforcement measures established by the Donald Trump government and maintained by the Biden government, whose effect has increased the policy of economic coercion that has escalated the blockade to a qualitatively more aggressive and harmful dimension.”

Díaz-Canel listed five main components of the U.S. economic war:

1. The spurious list of states that the U.S. unilaterally has declared as state sponsors of terrorism. This decree has severely restricted Cuba’s ability to use international banks for commerce, trade and imports.
2. Title 3 of the Helms-Burton Law, which allows U.S. entities to sue any international business in the world that invests in Cuba. This has severely hampered investments.
3. Blocking the import of petroleum that is needed for the country’s energy needs.
4. Demonization and persecution of Cuba’s internationalist medical missions, forcing countries to expel Cuban doctors who provide essential care to hundreds of thousands in the world for free, and in countries with higher economic development, the Cuban professional services provide important income for Cuba’s internal health system.
5. The existence of a U.S. list that greatly restricts the U.S. people’s right to travel to Cuba, by banning patronage in almost all hotels on the island, even to the ridiculous extent of prohibiting U.S. people from the beaches. 

The international visitors issued resolutions of commitment to intensify the fight against the U.S. blockade and the false SSOT designation.

Díaz-Canel recognized the great difficulties that the whole Cuban people are facing with the economic war that the U.S. imposes. But he also honored the continued heroism of Cubans who are determined to defend their Revolution:

“Good Cubans, patriots, compatriots, men and women from Santiago:

“Let us ratify here, before those assailants of the Moncada garrison 70 years ago who accompany us still, and on the land that holds the blood or ashes of those who are no longer here, to preserve and protect the memory of those who gave their lives so that we would finally be free, in that selfless act that still moves us.

“Since July 26, 1953, the best of each generation has faced the challenges and difficulties that the times impose on us, with the spirit that was revealed in Moncada, Fidel’s idea that will never leave us:

The setback can be turned into victory! …

​“Thank you Santiago!

“Long live the Cuban Revolution!
​
“Homeland or Death, We Will Win!”

According to a new survey conducted by the Institute of Peruvian Studies (IEP), the disapproval rating of de-facto president Dina Boluarte has risen from 71% in January to 81.6% in July, while that of the right-wing dominated Congress has increased from 89% to 90.4%

Thousands of Peruvians hit the streets of Lima to demand the resignation of de-facto president Dina Boluarte and the closure of right-wing dominated Congress on July 22. (Photo: Juan Zapata/Wayka)

On Saturday, July 22, thousands of Peruvians once again hit the streets of the capital Lima to demand the resignation of de-facto president Dina Boluarte, the closure of right-wing dominated Congress, new general elections, a constituent assembly to write a new constitution, justice for the victims of state repression during the protests between December 2022 and February 2023.

Saturday’s protest is part of renewed national efforts to intensify the struggle against the Boluarte government which began on July 19 with the “third takeover of Lima” mobilization. Dozens of delegations of Indigenous peoples, peasant communities, social organizations and trade unions have traveled to Peru’s capital, Lima, to participate in the protests which will continue across the country until July 28, Peruvian Independence Day.

On Saturday, protesters marched peacefully from Dos de Mayo square to San Martín square. When they reached the San Martín square, agents of the Peruvian National Police (PNP) began to repress them. The Police used an indiscriminate amount of tear gas to disperse the crowd. The officers forcibly removed people from the plaza, aggressively pushing both men and women of all ages. They even tried to pull young protesters’ gas masks and safety glasses, and prevented the press from recording what was happening.

“The police have attacked us…But they won’t stop us. Only the people can put an end to this dictatorship,” said the woman from the Aymara Indigenous community who was pushed from some steps by police officers at the San Martín square.

Through social media networks, human rights organizations reported that during the repression, a member of the health brigades, groups clearly identified with a red cross that attend to injured protesters, was injured. The organizations also reported that three protesters were arrested after minor scuffles with police.

The National Human Rights Coordinator of Peru (CNDDHH), whose members observe social protests and document human rights violations, publicly condemned that undercover police officers were detected participating in arrests. The organization reminded that “according to the IACHR and the UN, all police officers must be identified during protests,” stressing that “anonymity favors abuse and impunity.”
​
The CNDDHH also denounced that in recent protests, three of its observers had suffered attacks by members of the PNP and had been defamed as “terrorists,” while carrying out their work of accompanying, registering and denouncing violations of human rights. The organization rejected all acts of repression and hate speech.

According to reports from local media and human rights organizations, an estimated 70 people were killed in violent repression by state security forces in the first three months of the anti-coup protests. The IACHR, in its report released in May, slammed the Peruvian authorities for responding to the demonstrators with “disproportionate, indiscriminate and lethal use of force,” classifying the actions by state forces as “extrajudicial executions” and “massacres.”

During the recent protests, the demonstrators have been chanted the popular chants such as “Dina asesina, el pueblo te repudia [Dina murderer, the people repudiate you],” or “Dina y el Congreso, la misma porquería [Dina and the Congress, the same crap],” fiercely expressing their discontent with her regime and the conservative-majority parliament.

The call for the march was given by the National Unitary Coordinator of Struggle, a platform that brings together various social organizations from across the national territory, a day after the massive Third Takeover of Lima march. According to the platform, peaceful marches will continue in Lima and other parts of the country until July 28, the Peruvian Independence Day.

Boluarte, who took office after democratically elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo was removed in a legislative coup and subsequently arrested in December 2022, has been highly unpopular since the day she assumed power. She has been criticized by the people for joining a political alliance with the country’s right-wing forces to govern.

According to a new survey conducted by the Institute of Peruvian Studies (IEP), the disapproval rating of Boluarte has risen from 71% in January to 81.6% in July, while that of the Congress has increased from 89% to 90.4%. With respect to the demands raised at protests, the poll showed that 75% of those consulted were in favor of Boluarte’s resignation, 74% were in favor of the closure of the current Congress, and 69% in favor of creating a constituent assembly to change the current Constitution, which was written and imposed in 1993 under the far-right dictatorship of Alberto Fujimori (July 1990–November 2000). The poll also showed that 58% of the people identify themselves with the ongoing protests. The study also showed that 49% of the people believed that Peru is not a democracy, and that 80% were in favor of holding elections before 2026.
​
Enver León, secretary general of the left political party Nuevo Peru, commented on the polls findings and said, “The resignation of DinaAsesina (Dina killer) and the closing of the corrupt congress is a growing national cry, the expression of 19J (July 19) wherein Lima joined [the mobilizations] with force scares the ruling class and their henchmen of the media. But important to point out, the Constituent Assembly continues to be a way out of the crisis.”

This article was produced by Peoples Dispatch.