Turning a blind eye

The secret life of the UK's biggest companies listed on the London Stock Exchange has been uncovered today revealing that 98 out of 100 are using tax havens. ActionAid's research show for the first time just how deeply embedded this practice is for nearly all of Britain's top multinationals.

 Corporate tax avoidance, which is one of the main reasons companies use tax havens, is having a massive impact on rich and poor countries alike. Developing countries currently lose three times more to tax havens than they receive in aid each year.

ActionAid's report Addicted to tax havens shows banks are doing a brisk business via tax havens, despite the ongoing repercussions of a global financial crisis they helped to create. The banking and financial sector are by far the heaviest users with the ‘big four' High Street names HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds Group and RBS notching up 1,649 tax haven companies.

Chris Jordan, ActionAid's tax justice expert said: "ActionAid's research showing the use of tax havens by Britain's biggest companies raises serious questions they need to answer.

"Tax havens have a damaging impact on the UK exchequer, the stability of the international financial system, and vitally on the ability of developing countries to raise tax revenues which would lift them out of poverty and make them less dependent on aid."

ActionAid's key findings:

•98 multinationals declared tax haven companies. The banking sector makes heaviest use of tax havens, with a total of 1,649 tax haven companies between the ‘big four' banks. They are by far the biggest users of the Cayman Islands, where Barclays alone has 174 companies.

•The biggest tax haven user overall is the advertising company WPP, which has 611 tax haven companies.

•A quarter of the 34,216 companies set up by FTSE 100 multinationals are located in tax havens.There are over 600 FTSE 100 companies in Jersey (more than in the whole of China), 400 in the Cayman Islands and 300 in Luxembourg - all tiny tax havens.

•Only two little-known companies Fresnillo and Hargreaves Landsdown, don't use tax havens

 The use of tax havens facilitates tax avoidance and evasion, which undermines the revenue bases of both developing and developed countries. Additional revenues are urgently needed both to invest in the fight against poverty and to tackle the deficits incurred during the financial crisis in rich countries.

 Chris Jordan continued: "When multinationals use tax havens to avoid paying their fair share, ordinary people in both poor and rich countries are left to pick up the bill. Spending on doctors, nurses and other essential services gets cut for those who need it most.

 "Tax havens might provide the lure of financial secrecy and low tax rates for big companies, but at a time when all countries are desperate for revenues, the UK government can't afford to turn a blind eye."

 

ActionAid is calling on the government to urgently rethink its current proposals to relax UK anti tax haven rules. The Treasury itself estimates these changes will result in an £840 million tax break for multinational companies that use tax havens.

 With both developing and developed countries bearing the brunt of debilitating losses, ActionAid says the UK must ensure that G20 takes the decisive action it promised on tax havens at the London summit in 2009.

The World vs Wall Street‏

Thousands of Americans have non-violently occupied Wall St -- an epicentre of global financial power and corruption. They are the latest ray of light in a new movement for social justice that is spreading like wildfire from Madrid to Jerusalem to 146 other cities and counting, but they need our help to succeed.

As working families pay the bill for a financial crisis caused by corrupt elites, the protesters are calling for real democracy, social justice and anti-corruption. But they are under severe pressure from authorities, and some media are dismissing them as fringe groups. If millions of us from across the world stand with them, we'll boost their resolve and show the media and leaders that the protests are part of a massive mainstream movement for change.

This year could be our century's 1968, but to succeed it must be a movement of all citizens, from every walk of life. Click to join the call for real democracy -- a giant live counter of every one of us who signs the petition will be erected in the centre of the occupation in New York, and live webcasted on the petition page:

The worldwide wave of protest is the latest chapter in this year's story of global people power. In Egypt, people took over Tahrir Square and toppled their dictator. In India, one man's fast brought millions onto the streets and the government to its knees -- winning real action to end corruption. For months, Greek citizens relentlessly protested unfair cuts to public spending. In Spain, thousands of "indignados" defied a ban on pre-election demonstrations and mounted a protest camp in Sol square to speak out against political corruption and the government's handling of the economic crisis. And this summer across Israel, people have built "tent cities" to protest against the rising costs of housing and for social justice.

These national threads are connected by a global narrative of determination to end the collusion of corrupt elites and politicians -- who have in many countries helped cause a damaging financial crisis and now want working families to pay the bill. The mass movement that is responding can not only ensure that the burden of recession doesn't fall on the most vulnerable, it can also help right the balance of power between democracy and corruption. Click to stand with the movement:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/the_world_vs_wall_st/?vl

In every uprising, from Cairo to New York, the call for an accountable government that serves the people is clear, and our global community has backed that people power across the world wherever it has broken out. The time of politicians in the pocket of the corrupt few is ending, and in its place we are building real democracies, of, by, and for people.

Poor students are still being left out

A new government report shows that nearly one in four universities failed to meet their own targets to recruit more poor students last year. In total, 44 institutions, including 23 universities, five of which are elite universities, did not meet their own goals in 2009/10. The figures are included in the Office for Fair Access’s (OFFA) fourth monitoring report, which looks at how much money universities and colleges are spending, and how well they are doing at attracting and supporting candidates from poorer backgrounds. It shows that overall, English universities and colleges received £1.57 billion in additional fee income in 2009/10. This is additional fee income gained from tuition fees charged above the basic rate of £1,285. The maximum fee in 2009/10 was £3,225.

OFFA’s report shows that a quarter of this extra income (25.1%) – £394.7 million – was spent on recruiting and supporting poorer candidates, with £355.7 million going on bursaries and scholarships. In return for charging above the basic fee rate, institutions must submit access agreements to OFFA setting out how they plan to help poorer students. This includes setting their own targets on increasing the numbers of applicants or entrants from poor or under-represented groups. The report raises concerns that while 77% of institutions have either met or exceeded all or most of their targets, 23% (44 in total) are falling short.

OFFA director of fair access Sir Martin Harris said: “The large majority of universities and colleges are also meeting their statistical targets. Where they are not doing so, I am concerned to understand the reasons why. “Over the coming months, we will therefore be discussing performance with a range of institutions, including those that have reported the least progress.”

The report shows that more students are receiving financial support, but the average bursary awarded is smaller. Three-quarters (75%) of money spent on bursaries and scholarships in 2009/10 went to students from the poorest backgrounds, helping more than 271,000 youngsters on full state support. On average, these students receive a bursary of £935 a year, down from £942 in 2008/09 and £1,019 in 2007/08.

Sir Martin said institutions can decide to give funding to “more or less everybody” or decide it is only for students on the very lowest incomes. “What we’ve tried to do is encourage universities to focus money more on students that are genuinely disadvantaged,” he said. Smaller average bursaries are “going in the wrong direction”, Sir Martin suggested. “It is better to focus more on students whose income level is particularly low.” He added that the latest report is for 2009/10 and universities are likely to be encouraged to focus on giving large sums to smaller numbers of very disadvantaged students in the future.

Induction for Overseas Doctors

News that the General Medical Council (GMC) is planning an induction programme for doctors who are new to the UK has been welcomed by healthcare employers.

In its first "State of medical education and practice" report, the GMC reveals that approximately 12,000 doctors from around the world start work in the UK for the first time every year. Of the 239,270 doctors that were on the medical register last year, just over 150,000 qualified in the UK. A further 23,000 trained initially in the European Economic Area (EEA) and 66,000 completed their medical undergraduate education overseas.

But, while overseas doctors have helped employers to address skills shortages, there have been some examples of language difficulties, and differences in expectations of UK medical ethics and culture compared with overseas. Language was one of the difficulties cited in the case of Dr Daniel Ubani, an out-of-hours doctor from Germany, who was found guilty of gross negligence and manslaughter after the death of a patient he injected with 10 times the recommended maximum dose of diamorphine in 2008

Hands off Our Pension

The country's three largest trade unions — Unite, Unison, and the GMB — joined the Fire Brigades Union in announcing they will ballot their members over a coordinated programme of industrial action in protest at proposed changes to pensions.

It could see hundreds of thousands of Scottish workers, and millions across the UK, downing tools in November.

The mass walkout has been pencilled in for November on the date Chancellor George Osborne is expected to give his pre-Budget report.

Mike Arnott, secretary of the Dundee Trade Union Congress, said there is widespread anger over plans to increase workers' pension contributions.

"If this is well coordinated then it will have a massive impact," he said. "There will be more people coming out than in the General Strike 85 years ago. There is a huge amount of anger."

Mr Arnott, a member of the GMB, added: "We are not one of the most radical unions so when they get annoyed it indicates there will be a massive response."

He added that he disagreed with Labour leader Ed Miliband, who said the unions should not threaten industrial action while negotiations over the proposed changes to pensions are continuing.

"We have to kick the negotiations on by taking some action. People are talking about paying another 3.2% into our pensions but it's not going into the pot — the money will go to the government and we'll get less in our pension. It is quite horrendous."

Riots and condemnation without context

very eloquently written by John Wight

Just as the explosion of social unrest that has engulfed working class communities all over London are a predictable outcome to the enormous economic and social pressure said communities have been under as the Tory-led coalition government doles out its punishment to the poor and the working class in response to an economic recession not of their making, and with the tension that has long existed between the alienated youth of our inner cities and the police, so has been the response by the political class and mainstream commentators.

Condemnation without context has been the stock in trade of those sitting at the apex of society, as they seek to explain away the unrest as nothing more than “wanton acts of criminality” or the actions of “mindless thugs”.

While this may be the accepted truth according to the norms of polite society, it fails utterly to get at the root causes. But no one should be under any illusion that this failure is the product of ignorance. On the contrary it is exactly as intended. Assorted right wing commentators and politicians clearly have a vested interest in refusing to admit their own culpability in shaping a society more unequal than at any time since Charles Dickens was in his pomp as a searing critic of Victorian barbarism in the treatment of the nation’s poor and working class over a century past.

In the name of NHS Reforms

The Government is planning huge changes in the NHS.  In the past few weeks it’s had to amend some of its proposals, because of opposition from NHS workers, the trade unions, the Labour Party, and the general public. But most of what the Government wanted to do, it’s still doing. The NHS is in grave danger.

STRATEGIC HEALTH AUTHORITIES AND PRIMARY CARE TRUSTS TO BE REPLACED BY GP GROUPS

The Government wants to scrap SHAs and PCTs by April 2013. In fact SHAs and PCTs have already started restructuring, downsizing, and making staff redundant.

Instead of having SHAs and PCTs to coordinate local NHS services, the Government wants to hand over the health budget to groups of GPs. These groups were originally going to be called “GP consortia”. Now the name has changed to “clinical commissioning groups”. The groups will have to have a token doctor and nurse on their board, but they’ll still be GP-run. Other parts of the NHS workforce are unlikely to get a look in.

These GP groups would have to buy the services they want direct from providers, which is a bad idea. GPs would be put in an awkward position, because they’d control the purse-strings. GPs would have more opportunities to make money off the NHS. They may even be allowed to charge patients for services currently provided free on the NHS.

NHS TRUSTS TO BECOME FOUNDATION TRUSTS

The Government says it “strongly expects that the majority of remaining NHS trusts will be authorised as Foundation Trusts by April 2014″. Foundation Trusts are semi-independent organisations. They have more ability to change staff terms and conditions. More Foundation Trusts means a worse deal for patients. The Government wants to allow Foundation Trusts to take in as many fee-paying patients as they like. NHS patients would be pushed to the back of the queue.

MORE PRIVATE COMPETITION

The Government originally said it wanted the healthcare regulator to “promote competition” in the NHS. Because of the public outcry, the Government changed its wording slightly. It now says it wants to “prevent anti-competitive behaviour”. That’s not a big difference! Hospitals would be fined for any collaboration which the regulator thinks is “anti-competitive”. The idea is to make it easier for the private sector to muscle in on NHS contracts.

The Government doesn’t want the NHS to be the “preferred provider” of healthcare any more. Instead, “any qualified provider” will be free to operate under the NHS brand. The Government is planning to push the “any qualified provider” initiative from April 2012. It’s essentially another way of opening up the NHS to more private competition. In case the competition gets too fierce, the Government is having to put in place measures to deal with hospitals that become insolvent.

The Tories and Lib Dems are running down the health service. The NHS faces a four-year budget freeze and £20bn of “efficiency savings”. This is despite the Government having pledged to increase NHS spending in real terms every year. Yet Tory Health Minister Andrew Lansley is willing to waste upwards of £3bn on implementing his “reforms”.


NHS staff are bearing the brunt. Pay for many NHS workers has been frozen. There is growing job insecurity as well as downward pressure on terms and conditions. Downbanding is a big problem. Because of the cuts and reorganisations, the ability of staff to deliver patient care is deteriorating. More treatments are being rationed and waiting times are up. And if the Government’s plans for the NHS go through, there will be plenty more trouble ahead.

Public sector workers strike

When hundreds of thousands of public sector workers go on strike, the government should take note. These are not the ‘militants’, the ‘extremists’ or the ‘bully boys’ that feature in the fantasies of the Tory media.

These are hard-working, mostly low paid, men and women who keep our vital public services going despite inadequate resources and ever worsening conditions. When these people, who are at the heart of our communities, feel they have no other choice but to walk out, we should all realise that there is a serious grievance that must be addressed.

What on earth does Labour leader Ed Miliband mean when he opposes the strikes by saying, “we are on the side of parents and children"? As if the hundreds of thousands of strikers are not themselves parents or users of the very same services that they work so hard to provide!

Public sector pensions are under attack from a government that values the work of the millionaire banker more than they value the work of a classroom teacher. Home care workers who do the most difficult jobs looking after vulnerable elderly and disabled people face massive cuts in their wages, and changes to their working conditions, that would make it impossible for many of them to survive.

First and foremost, this is an issue of justice. Low-paid public sector workers are not responsible for the economic crisis we are in. Yet they are the ones who will struggle to pay their mortgage, and put food on the table, while Tory bankers only struggle to think how to spend their obscene bonuses.

Yes, people will be inconvenienced by strikes. That is because the services these workers provide are so important to our society. But on this issue we really should be “all in it together”. Those men and women who take strike action this week are fighting for us all

Arrest of leading Palestinian activist

Protests have been called across the country in response to the arrest of leading Palestinian activist Sheik Raed Salah in London. He had been due to speak at a meeting in the House of Common this evening organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign attended by Labour MP's including, Jeremy Corbyn and Birmingham's Richard Burden.

A vigil is being held at 6.30pm today outside Waterstones in the city centre. Please email the Home Secretary and request a reconsideration of the deportation order to allow a court appeal. Call the Rt Hon Theresa May on 02072195206 or email at: mayt@parliament.uk

Brian Haw Rest In Peace

Some sad news. After a long illness the peace campaigner Brian Haw has died. Brian was the instigator on June 2 2001 of the peace camp opposite parliament. He maintained the camp for 10 years, literally around the clock, in opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Explaining his motivation, Brian said, 'the children of Iraq and other countries were every bit as valuable and worthy of love as my precious wife and children. I want to go back to my own kids and look them in the face again, knowing that I've done all I can to try and save the children of Iraq and other countries who are dying because of my government's unjust, amoral, fear - and money-driven policies'.

For his conscience and dedication, we are all in his debt. May he rest in peace.

Solidarity with Saudi women car drivers

The struggle for women's rights in Saudi Arabia put down an important marker on Friday when at least 29 women defied the country's de facto ban on driving.

The campaign has been inspired by Manal al-Sharif, a young mum and computer expert who has received international attention, and a week in jail, for posting a film of herself driving on YouTube.

Although women are not formally banned from driving, to all intensive purposes they are. Women who drive get harassed and arrested by the authorities. In 1990 50 Saudi women were sacked from their jobs and banned from foreign travel for organising a similar protest.

Saudi Arabia is a deeply reactionary country. Women are banned from voting and must get 'written permission from a male relative – even an underage son – to work, travel, seek treatment or study'.

Protests are banned and there is great fear about expressing even the most elementary of rights, especially if you are a women.

And yet... these handful of women are scaring the daylights of Saudi authorities fearful that any campaign for more equality could inspire calls for more widespread democratic reform.

They are right to be scared. As the Arab Spring highlights, once people who have been oppressed get a taste of freedom, who knows where things will end up…

Dutch Muslims and Jews unite to oppose ban on religious slaughter

In a sign of growing religious intolerance in Holland, the Dutch parliament is set to introduce a law which will essentially ban kosher and halal slaughter. The proposals has united a coalition of animal rights and anti-Muslim groups.

The measure is being viewed as part and parcel of a European wide attack on multiculturalism: ‘Many Jews and Muslims see the ban as part of a growing European hostility to immigration and diversity. Geert Wilders the far-right Dutch politician, has called for the Netherlands to ban the burka after France curbed the public wearing of the Islamic face veil; politicians including Germany’s Angela Merkel and Britain’s David Cameron have proclaimed the failure of multiculturalism; and anti-immigration parties such as Finland’s True Finns have been increasingly successful at the polls’.

The Amsterdam Jewish-Moroccan Council has organised protests against the law with imams and rabbis marching together in opposition to it.

CRISIS AT SOUTHERN CROSS

Jamie Buchan Chief Executive of Southern Cross recently told national media that "if the company does not reach agreement with its landlords and lenders the group is unlikely to be able to continue to trade."

So Southern Cross could go under at anytime since the rents it pays on the homes is £100m too high. If they do, the world of the 31,000 residents in their care will be turned upside down. To say nothing of worlds of the 44,000 staff and the residents' families.

The residents, their families and the staff in the 736 care homes all over UK are living in a state of massive uncertainty. No one should suffer this kind of worry, least of all the elderly and the vulnerable: those least able to defend and protect themselves.

Only the government and politicians have the power now to end this uncertainty. Only the politicians can answer the question who will look after the 31,000 elderly and vulnerable if Southern Cross goes under.

These care homes, run by Southern Cross, are not factories that are failing from lack of demand but are an essential part of every community which now face ruin due to the combination of privatisation and private equity. Everyone knows, moving the elderly and vulnerable is the worst thing that can happen to them and can lead to premature death.

Support the Connexions service

More than a million young people are unemployed. Yet the government is taking an axe to Connexions, a vital service that helps young people find work, education and training.

An early day motion has been tabled in parliament that calls on the government to “reverse its policy and instead to provide sufficient funding to the Careers and Connexions Service to help our young people plan and organise their futures”.

The Early Day Motion, and the names of the MP’s who have signed it, can be viewed here.

If your MP hasn’t signed it yet, please contact them and ask for their support. You can contact your MP directly, using this website: www.writetothem.com

University campuses are not 'hotbeds of radicalisation'

With the government set to release a revamped version of their counter radicalisation strategy, Prevent, I am expecting there to be new clamp downs on freedom of speech.

The 'mood music' for this has been created by right-wing think-tanks and commentators who have been creating the impression that our universities are virtual breeding grounds for violent extremism among Muslim students.

Well, not according to chief executive of Universities UK, Nicola Dandridge.

In an interview in the Daily Telegraph she upholds freedom of speech, dismisses claims that 'that because wild things are said at university that automatically equates to radicalisation”, and cites advice from the security forces that “that there is not necessarily a link that they can prove between open debate in universities and violent extremism subsequently.”

More here.

Announcement of new Gaza aid flotilla marks anniversary of Mavi Marmara attack

Yesterday was the first anniversary of the Israeli massacre of nine Palestinian solidarity activists aboard the Mavi Marmara.

The Turkish ship was bringing humanitarian aid to the besieged population of Gaza.

Among those present were two friends of mine, Kevin Ovenden and Sarah Colborn.

The murders were a shocking blow to the international Palestinian solidarity movement, but it has since emerged unbowed and undeterred.

Turkish NGO's have announced plans for a new flotilla, comprising 15 ships and intending to bring 1500 human rights activists, politicians, artists, and journalists to Gaza this June.

There could be no better tribute to martyred Palestinian activists than to see the international solidarity movement they made the ultimate sacrifice for reemerging strengthened and unbowed.

Germany to go nuclear free

The German government has announced it intends to shut all its nuclear plants by 2022.

It intends to become a 'trail blazer' for renewable sources of energy.

At present nuclear energy provides 23% of Germany's total energy needs.

The change in policy comes against a background of Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster and pressure created by a powerful anti-nuclear movement in Germany.

The move has been widely welcomed, though not by everyone.

The utility companies are threatening legal action and have warned the phasing out of Germany's reliance on nuclear power will lead to winter black-outs.

This has been dismissed by the German government, who are planning their own green new deal, with massive investment in more solar, wind and hydroelectric power.

At present Germany employs around 370,000 in the renewable energy sector. This is expected to increase significantly. As Chancellor Angela Merkal said:

"We believe that we can show those countries who decide to abandon nuclear power - or not to start using it - how it is possible to achieve growth, creating jobs and economic prosperity while shifting the energy supply toward renewable energies."

The counter argument is that whatever its dangers, the benefits of nuclear power outweighs them and help reduces the greenhouse gas emissions that are warming the warming the planet, causing floods, droughts and rising sea levels.

With more nuclear power plants planned in this country, we are led to believe that there is simply no alternative. There is a political consensus that nuclear power is intrinsic to meeting Britain's energy needs.

The issue has even divided stalwarts of the environmental movement, like George Monbiot and Caroline Lucas.

However, if an environmentally conscious country like Germany can decide to end its nuclear porgramme, and in a way that will create jobs and economic growth, isn't it time for policy makers here to start having a serious debate about our reliance on nuclear power, instead of just dismissing it?

Rafah crossing reopens today

One of the most dramatic consequences of the overthrow of the Mubarak regime has been the decision of the Egyptian government to reopen the Rafah crossing. This is an important step in the lifting of the siege of Gaza which has been in place since June 2007. You can read Israeli and British coverage here and here. The video is from the Iranian news channel, Press TV.

Libyan war costs £38 million per week

The cost of the war in Libya is over £38 million a week, has already has topped £100 million after just two months, and is set to hit £1 billion by September. More here.

Justice for Stephen Lawrence

After 18 long years, the family and friends of Stephen Lawrence can now hope that a new trial will uncover who was responsible for his murder.

In the face of a terrible personal tragedy, his family fought for justice. Their campaign exposed a disastrous police investigation, and revealed just how much racism had infected the criminal justice system. But, as Sabby Dhalu from One Society Many Cultures explains, real reform is still needed to root out racism:

“Today’s decision would not have been possible, if not for the commitment of the family of Stephen Lawrence, who have had to overcome tragedy, heartbreak and institutional racism, and who are still pursuing justice which should be a basic human right

“The Lawrence family have had to contend with the racism both from Stephen’s murderers and from a police and criminal justice system that failed to appropriately investigate Stephen’s murder and pursue his killers.

“11 years ago the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry was a watershed moment for the anti-racist movement in Britain. It highlighted the depth of institutional racism in Britain’s criminal justice system, including the way the racial murder of a Black person was not treated with the same seriousness as other murders.

“However 11 years on, many of the recommendations in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry report have not been implemented. The proposals were deemed necessary to reduce the inequalities of the criminal justice system, so should all be implemented.

“One Society Many Cultures calls on the government to take action to ensure the Stephen Lawrence report recommendations are carried out in full. We hope that today’s announcement of a new trial will lead to justice. Our thoughts are with the family of Stephen Lawrence. “

Osama bin Laden mission agreed in secret 10 years ago by US and Pakistan

The deal was struck between Pervez Musharraf and George Bush in 2001 and renewed during the 'transition to democracy' – a six-month period from February 2008 when Musharraf was still president but a civilian government had been elected.

The US and Pakistan struck a secret deal almost a decade ago permitting a US operation against Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil similar to last week's raid that killed the al-Qaida leader, the Guardian has learned.

George on bin Laden's death

"I despise Osama Bin Laden, the mediaeval obscurantist savage. The difference is I have always despised him, even when Britain and America were giving him weapons money diplomatic and political support."

 That speech which won me the parliamentary debater of the year award was given on the recall of the commons after 9/11. Younger readers may be unaware that the Osama Bin Laden killed yesterday was once a key member of the western coalition fighting the Russians in Afghanistan. In fact one of the Rambo movies carried a dedication at it’s end saluting the “freedom fighters” he recruited and led.

It turns out that he was living a surprisingly comfortable life in a million dollar home near Islamabad where yesterday he met his end. As he had lived, by the sword, so he perished and could have had no complaints at being gunned down by Americans having inspired the slaughter of so many of them.

But though rejoicing is inevitable as always we must be careful what we wish.

If as is reported Bin Laden hadn’t even a phone line or Internet connection in his palace it’s clear that he long ago ceased to have hands on control of the network which virally proliferated around the world in his name. That this fanatic movement will continue, perhaps revitalised by his killing, is surely obvious.

And of course the swamp of bitterness and hatred out of which he and his followers mutated and climbed becomes ever deeper and more bloody. A swamp sewn by the same western powers with whom he was once in league. A swamp watered by double standards and injustice. By blanket support for the crimes committed against the Palestinian people for over sixty years. By endless occupation and bombardment of Muslim countries by western forces. And by the propping up by us of virtually every dictator who rules in the Muslim world from one end to the other.

“If our problems could only be solved by zapping this bearded turbaned Mephistopholese we would be lucky indeed,” I told my parliamentary audience a decade ago.

Zapped he now is in an operation, as reported, of which Rambo would have been proud.

But when we leave the cinematic glow of the killing of public enemy number one we will find I suspect that many more are emerging from the swamp.

George Galloway condemns NATO's murder of innocent children in Libya

George Galloway this morning expressed his outrage at the NATO air attack which killed Gaddafi's youngest son, Saif Al Arab, and three of Gaddafi's grandchildren in a Tripoli suburb.

"This was a cold-blooded targeted attack on a residential house in the suburbs of Tripoli," said George Galloway who is campaigning in Glasgow for election to the Scottish Parliament. "It beggars belief that this was not a deliberate attempt to assassinate Gaddafi, in the full knowledge that innocent children would be killed in the process. This is a total breach of UN resolution 1973 which authorised action to protect civilians - not kill them.

"NATO sorties are now being used to commit war crimes. Both nationally and internationally the cry must go up for NATO's military actions to be halted immediately and a ceasefire declared. And David Cameron must answer straight, not fudge as he has been doing all day, whether attacking so-called command and control facilities allows the deliberate targeting of Gadaffi and his family, with no regard whatever to the innocent men, women and children who are incinerated as a consequence."

The attacks on multiculturalism are linked to the economic crisis

Earlier last week the Institute of Race Relations (IRR) published Understanding the European-wide assault on multiculturalism - a detailed analysis by Executive Director, Liz Fekete, of key speeches made over the past six months by leading centre-right politicians from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom.

These speeches attack multiculturalism and immigration and link them to the economic crisis. The IRR finds that:

* In singling out multiculturalism as a threat to national identity, the leaders of Europe's centre-right parties are using the same kind of rhetoric and specious arguments as Enoch Powell did forty years ago. Only this time, it is not one rogue European politician carrying the flag, but the leaders of centre-right parties now replacing race and immigration with culture and religion as the watch words.

* As multiculturalism becomes code for discussing the 'Muslim problem', the language, terms and metaphors used by centre-right politicians subtly (and in some cases crudely) convey a sense of national victimhood, of a majority culture under threat from Muslim minorities and new migrants who demand special privileges and group rights and refuse to learn the language.

In Understanding the European-wide assault on multiculturalism the IRR warns that:

* The attacks on multiculturalism are taking place at a time of economic crisis and swingeing cuts, when politicians are desperate to deflect public anger and explain societal break down. The centre Right is establishing a narrative, with some centre-left parties following suit, to justify the biggest round of spending cuts since the 1920s, blaming the current economic crisis not on the bankers and global financial crisis, but on immigration, and on Muslims.

* As the extreme Right increasingly enters national parliaments, sometimes holding the balance of power, there are dangerous signs that the centre Right is preparing for future power-sharing with the extreme Right, as well as nativist anti-immigration parties. The fact that mainstream politicians are now speaking to the fear and hatred promoted by the extremists' anti-multicultural platform, is giving legitimacy to conspiracy theories about Muslims and to anti-Muslim hatred.

Read the IRR's research Understanding the European-wide assault on multiculturalism here.

Liz Fekete, author of the IRR's research commented:

* 'Multiculturalism is being used as the whipping boy, to explain away the impact of the economic and social crisis.'

* 'A recurring theme in the debates about multiculturalism and national identity and immigrants and Muslims causing the economic crisis, is the issue of language or, more accurately 'language deficit'. Government hypocrisy is at its most blatant when immigrants are blamed for not learning the language when the same government slashes funding for language provision.'

Parliament should be recalled as Libya threatens to become the new Iraq

In 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq began, Tony Blair insisted that oil had nothing to do with it:

"...the oil conspiracy theory is honestly one of the most absurd when you analyse it...It's not the oil that is the issue, it is the weapons..."

Of course there were no weapons, just a great deal of oil.

Government papers now reveal just how much the oil industry was licking its lips at the prospects in Iraq. The Independent reports:

“The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities in Iraq "post regime change". Its minutes state: "Iraq is the big oil prospect. BP is desperate to get in there and anxious that political deals should not deny them the opportunity.... Whereas BP was insisting in public that it had "no strategic interest" in Iraq, in private it told the Foreign Office that Iraq was "more important than anything we've seen for a long time".”

Yet all the time we were told this was really a humanitarian venture, motivated by the deepest of concerns about the victims of an evil dictator.

Fast forward to 2011, and the United Nations has passed another resolution authorising military action to ‘protect civilians’. Once again, this country is rich in oil and gas.

And once again, the mission that was supposed to be humanitarian becomes an attempt by former colonial powers to overthrow one government and impose another one.

As Simon Jenkins put it in The Guardian:

“Throughout the west there is a desire to relieve people in distress, but when humanitarians arrive with screaming missiles and a clear political agenda, those being attacked are understandably suspicious of motive... The first humanitarian duty to those who are suffering should be to relieve that suffering, not to fight their civil wars, suppress their dictators, partition their countries and destroy their infrastructure. Something has polluted foreign policy.”

It is quite clear that the original decision to establish a ‘no fly zone’ in Libya has become something else entirely. British ‘advisers’ are now on the ground. Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama are calling for ‘regime change’. This is not what the United Nations, nor our own parliament, decided.

Parliament should be recalled and the government held to account.

Why there should be a left challenge in the GLA elections

The Respect party announced that they will be standing for the London Assembly and approaching others to form an anti-cuts slate for the May 2012 election.

Party Leader Salma Yaqoob said:

"There is a democratic deficit in London. There is a large constituency who want to see Ken beat Boris but are deeply uncomfortable with the Labour party choices for the assembly, marked as they are by a tepid opposition to the spending cuts, support for a decade long war in Afghanistan and now a new war in Libya.

There are many fronts on which this governments military wars abroad and economic war at home can be contested. The forthcoming GLA elections is one arena. We will be approaching others in the student and anti-cuts movement, those opposed to war and the tide of Islamophobia it has generated, and others on the left, to discuss standing a united slate with the aim of defeating the Tories in City Hall and putting into the assembly the strongest anti-cuts, anti-racist and pro-peace voices".

Statement from the RESPECT Party Officers Group
Why there should be a left challenge in the GLA elections

Cameron’s Enoch Powell moment

David Cameron complains about people coming to this country who don’t speak the language. It is nothing more than hypocrisy from a government that is closing the door on the very classes that help people to learn English.

From September, spending on ESOL classes (English as a second language) is being slashed. They are hugely popular, with over 180,000 students attending classes in England alone. Up to 100,000 people will now lose the chance to learn the language.

Of course, Cameron’s speech is not really directed at immigrants. It is not meant to welcome, or encourage, or point the way towards getting the language skills that people need.

No, for all his talk about integration, his words are directed at those who don’t like immigrants at all, whether or not they speak English. His speech means to press the xenophobic buttons of parts of the electorate.

As Rebecca Galbraith and Mel Cooke from Action for ESOL note:

‘From Jewish workers arriving in London’s East End in the late nineteenth century to the diverse groups of people migrating to the UK today, the ability of migrants to speak English has long been a preoccupation of politicians and the right-wing press. And blaming migrants for social and economic problems is nothing new and is always more heightened in times of economic depression”.

Three weeks before an election, with opinion poll ratings falling, the health reforms in crisis, and the economic looking ever more fragile, David Cameron has conjured up the ghost of Enoch Powell.

George Galloway on West's intervention in Libya

Fear or Hope?

I have been thinking about the recent ‘Fear and Hope’ research published by Searchlight. On the face of it, the results are worrying. They appear to show growing support for the far right, increased opposition to immigration, and a particular hostility to Muslims in Britain.

Certainly, these most negative findings were seized upon by the media. Featuring prominently was the assertion that “almost half of voters would back a far right party that did not promote violence”.

This is news, of course, and any serious evidence about attitudes to race and immigration needs to be considered carefully. But I am concerned about the way the report was spun by its own authors, who often seemed to be accentuating the negative.

This is an important debate, and Unite Against Fascism have now published a comprehensive response to the Fear and Hope report. It concludes:

“At a time when austerity and cuts are creating fertile ground for scapegoating and racism, providing a breeding ground for the extreme right, the real priority should be to explain the enormous economic and social contribution that generations of immigrants have made to this country, and defending Muslim communities from those who would blame them for their feelings of malaise”

5,000 march in anti Lib Dem protest

Read the full reports here and here

Government 'war' on welfare state is hitting women hardest

One hundred years ago that struggle was for basic equality for women like the right to vote. Today, that struggle is increasingly about women's right to work and maintain basic living standards.

As the TUC point out the governments 'war' on the welfare state is hitting women hardest. Unemployment is increasing and cuts in child benefit, maternity grants, working tax credit and housing benefit are all impacting on women disproportionately.

This year is the centenary of the founding of International Women's Day.

I can think of no better way to celebrate it, and the memory of the suffragette activists, than for women the length and breadth of this country to travel to London for the TUC's March for the Alternative on March 26th.

Mubarak Goes! Let Tyrants Tremble.

The departure of Hosni Mubarak is a world historic victory for the poor, the oppressed and the exploited of Egypt, the Arab world - and indeed for the wider world..

For decades we have been told that the Arab masses were apatheitic and impotent, that the best that could be hoped for were venal and autocratic rulers whose job was to support US policy in the region while lining their own pockets. Yet in just a few short weeks the masses of, first Tunisia and now Egypt have torn this view to pieces.

While US politicians toyed with the idea of democracy, as a stick to beat their enemies, they resolutely turned their back on democracy when it came to supporting their own puppet presidents and princes. Today the democratic demands and heroic bravery of the Egyptian people have begun a process of genuine people's regime change.

The victory in Egypt today - despite the fact that there is so much further to go - is already fueling further revolutionary developments across a region. These developments will have the US and its allies quaking - as their imperial order, so secure for decades, is now under threat.

The Egyptian revolution is a glorious advance. Everyone who believes in genuine progress owes the Egyptian masses a profound debt of gratitude. There is much yet to do, but for the moment we join with the celebrations of the Egyptian people on this historic day.

Victory to the Eyptian Revolution.

Mubarak is gone!

I listened to the breaking news last night. It is fantastic!! Good riddance to an old tyrant.

The removal of Mubarak from power by a people's revolt, which itself was inspired by a similar uprising in Tunisia, is proof that the best way to remove dictatorships in the Middle East is to leave it to the people there to do so.

It is difficult not to guffaw at comments from Western leaders about how they now welcome and embrace the democratic revolt, after 30 years of propping up military rule.

Or at the Swiss government, who have suddenly discovered a conscience and frozen Mubarak's loot, after their bankers feasting for decades off the billions stashed in their banks which was stolen from the Egyptian people.

But we can deal with Western double standards and hypocrisy another time.

And Mubarak's key allies, complicit in despotic rule, are still very much in power, so the fight for a thoroughgoing revolution is only beginning.

Right now, as one Egyptian commentator said, 'tonight we are celebrating, we will worry about the future tomorrow!'

US hypocrisy on Egypt

President Obama last night called for 'concrete steps' to advance democratic rights in Egypt. Here is one concrete step he could make. He could cut the American aid that is propping up the rotting Mubarak dictatorship the Egyptian people are so heroically striving to rid themselves of.

If Obama were to do so, Mubarak would be running for his plane with the same speed that the Tunisian dictator Ben Ali ran for his.

The Mubarak regime is the second largest recipient of US aid in the world. And as the democracy protestors on the streets are directly experiencing, that money is buying the tear-gas they are choking on (see picture). Without American support Mubarak's days would be numbered.

So why does Obama not just do the right thing? How can the US Vice President Joe Biden say the craven thug Mubarak is 'not a dictator'? Why was it that even after dozens of deaths in Tunisia, and right up to the overthrow of their dictator, American Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was stating the Americans 'would not be taking sides'?

Neither the Americans nor our own government will take the side of the protestors. They are not on the side of 'democracy',  they are on the side of what Tony Blair described, in typically Orwellian language, as 'stability'. 'Stability' is code for supporting those regimes in the Middle East who best support American interests. And Egypt is a key ally. It protects the Suez Canal, vital for the movement of oil supplies to the West; and it is a willing supporter of America's most important ally in the Middle East, Israel, in its repression of the Palestinians.

The movement for democracy is not just terrifying Mubarak and other dictators across the Arab worlds, it is scaring the daylights out of their backers in the White House and Downing Street. If the Arab peoples had anything approximating democracy in their countries there is no way they would allow their natural resources to be exploited by Western multinationals, no way they would allow their governments to do the bidding of the West and collude in the oppression of the Palestinians. Hosnai Mubarak knows this too well, as does President Obama.

If the Americans calculate that Mubarak is finished they will no doubt try to pose as friends of the people. But if democracy is to be won in Egypt it will be the Egyptian people who will deliver it.

The reports of the demonstrations describe people of all classes, ages and even entire families taking to the streets. Their bravery and heroism is inspiring. At the time of writing Al Jazeera is reporting that tanks sent onto the streets of Egypt to quell democracy protestors were instead fraternising with them. Other reports suggest clashes between the army and the people. My sincere hope is that these are signs that the Egyptian soldiers are starting to side with their brothers and sisters and not the tyrants.

As hundreds of thousands of Egyptians again take to the streets today, my thoughts and prayers are with them.

George in top form on Question Time

If you didn't catch it last night, watch and enjoy here.

A victory for equal rights

Imagine turning up to a hotel with your partner, only to be turned away because the hotel decides they don’t like the look of you. This sort of thing used to be common. Landlords could get away with displaying signs that said “No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs”. Places of entertainment could employ doorman to turn away the ‘wrong sort’.

This soul-destroying experience of discrimination and bigotry is one that black, Irish and Muslim communities have known only too well in recent decades. And, behind the scenes, this sort of discrimination goes on today. If your face doesn’t fit, then you may still find that there is ‘no room at the inn’.

But at least the law is acting to put an end to this discrimination. Recently a court in Bristol ruled that a Christian couple did not have the right to turn away a gay couple who had booked to stay at their hotel.

People should have the right to live their own lives according to their own beliefs, religious or otherwise. Who you choose to invite into your own home is your concern. But if you run a public business, then you have a responsibility to all of us to treat people fairly, equally, and with dignity.

These legal landmarks are critical moments in challenging discrimination. They help to establish the norm that we are all equal, irrespective of our differences. They help to make our society more civilised and humane. In upholding the rights of the gay couple, the court is protecting the rights of all us who do not want to find the door slammed in our face because of the colour of our skin, or indeed our religion.

'Bin Laden and Ben Ali. Tunisia says no thank you!'

A big thanks to Naima Bouteldja for her report and photos of the Tunisian solidarity demo held in Paris on Saturday.

"About 10000 people marched through the streets of Paris in a show of support for the "Jasmine Revolution" yesterday.

Demonstrators, in their great majority French of Tunisian and Arab descent, assembled at Place de la République, customising the statue of Marianne with Tunisian flags.

Makeshift signs and slogans outnumbered the official flags and placards of the various political groupings the most popular being “Ben Ali Assassin” and "Ben Ali, clear off". One slogan also read “Bin Laden and Ben Ali. Tunisia says no thank you!”

Alongside the Tunisian national anthem, songs of independence and religious recitations filled the air. The atmosphere was of great celebration and joy.

Among the demonstrators were families and people of all ages glad to see the back of Ben Ali. Not only was this a day of rejoicing among many of the Tunisian diaspora, estimated at around 600,000 living in France, but also an opportunity for many in the rest of the North African communities to show their solidarity hoping that the spark in Tunisia catches alight particularly in Algeria and Egypt.

Nobody knows what will happen next. One Tunisian political dissident told me: "we can expect the best as the worst" but for the time being and after all those years of political disillusions and defeats let's just all enjoy the moment."

People's power in Tunisia

Great news from Tunisia! Popular protest has forced the corrupt President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali to flee the country. Good riddance!

The uprising of the Tunisian people was sparked by increases in the costs of cooking oil and sugar but underneath it is a desire for economic justice, civil liberties and democracy.

The intifada in Tunisia will be scaring the living daylights out of corrupt rulers across the Arab world. They are right to be afraid. For far too long the Arab peoples have had to endure the humiliation of being ruled by corrupt, dictatorial, Western-backed stooges. My hope is that the Tunisian intifada will be the spark for a broader revolt that will give to the Arab peoples the justice for which they so desperately yearn.

Egypt's Muslims and Christians unite

Reports of the recent suicide attack on Egyptian Christians attending a church service in Alexandria made for depressing reading. There are fears that the attack signals a growth in religious sectarianism.

I was really heartened therefore to read about the inspiring acts of solidarity Egyptian Muslims have shown towards their Christian brothers and sisters in the aftermath of the New Year's Day bombing.

Juan Cole reports that:

"Thousands of Muslims honored a promise made by their leaders and showed up at Christmas Mass or at candlelight vigils outside Egyptian churches offering their bodies as human shields against any acts of terrorists…

Father Marqus, the Bishop of Alexandria, said that in his entire life he had never seen the degree of solidarity of Muslims with Coptic Christians that he has witnessed in recent days. He said that Muslims attending the funeral of the Christian victims of the New Year’s Day bombing had treated them like Muslim martyrs, pronouncing ‘God is Great!’ in mourning, and had erupted in applause at the condemnation of the terrorists."

A new wave of student protests in 2011

It is great to see that students are getting ready for a new wave of protest in 2011. The Tories and Lib Dems rushed through a vote in parliament on tuition fees in the hope that everyone would just meekly accept the damage they have done. Instead they have inspired a movement that is determined to fight for education.

A major national demonstration has now been called for 29 January, with the support of several trades unions and a range of student campaigns.I was shocked to read that the National Union of Students have voted against supporting this demonstration. Surely the role of NUS is to throw everything it can into reversing this disastrous attack on education? If not, what is the point of a student’s union?

Mary Roberston, who was part of the occupation at the School of Oriental and African Studies, explains why a campaign is underway to get rid of the NUS President, Aaron Porter. You can read her piece on the Guardian’s Comment is Free site.

Students debate fees fight

The fight against education cuts is opening up heated debate inside the National Union of Students.

Student activists from the Free Education Campaign are deeply critical of the role being played by NUS National President, Aaron Porter.

You can read their case here.

Photo: Fiona Edwards, from the Free Education Campaign.

There is an alternative to the VAT rise

VAT hammers the poor hardest, because they spend almost all their meagre incomes, whereas the rich save a big chunk of theirs…Instead of raising VAT and national insurance this year, the government could introduce taxes on carbon and financial transactions next year. And it should levy a tax on land values. Since all the land in Britain is worth some £5 trillion, an annual levy of 1% could raise £50bn a year – without depressing economic activity, because land is in fixed supply: central London can't be spirited away to a tax haven. As well as preventing property bubbles (and busts), a land tax would be fair. A mere 160,000 people (mostly hereditary landowners) own more than two-thirds of Britain – and the value of that land increases not through their own striving, but through that of others. Surely it would be better to tax this windfall gain than the hard work and enterprise of those who generate it?


Excellent article from Phillippe Legrain in Guardian. You can read it in full here.

Police have to win trust for new powers

According to reports in the Guardian, the police are asking for new powers to stop and search people without the need to suspect them of any involvement in crime. We are entitled to ask whether the police can be trusted with such exceptional powers.

There is no doubt that the police have a difficult job to do. Faced with a possibly devastating terrorist attack in a crowded location, it might be necessary for all of us to accept that they need the ability to stop and search anyone they choose, for any reason. In those situations we would have to trust the police to act only when truly necessary, and to do so effectively and fairly.

Unfortunately, recent experience suggests we should be careful before giving the police too many powers. After all they are asking for new powers because the previous legislation – Section 44 of the Terrorism Act – was so grossly misused that European judges ruled it unlawful.

More than 100,000 people were stopped under Section 44 in 2009. Not a single one of these stops led to an arrest for terrorism. Those being stopped were disproportionately from black and minority ethnic communities. On top of that, Section 44 was used against photographers and peaceful protestors. This type of discriminatory and disproportionate policing does not make us safer, but simply generates anger and distrust among law-abiding members of the community.

If the police are going to make the case for additional powers, they need to show that they have learned the lessons from these failures. They have some way to go.

The Queen's question

After listening to an lecture on the financial crisis at the prestigious London School of Economics in November 2008, the Queen somewhat impertinently asked, 'how come nobody could foresee it?'

How come indeed. In his new book, '23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism' Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang provides some answers.

Chief among them is that for the last 30 years we have been blinded by endless propaganda from economist and politician alike about how free market capitalism is the best way to organise society.

Like a religious mantra it has been drummed into our heads that, if subject to only the lightest regulation, markets are inherently self correcting and guaranteed to ensure the most optimum and efficient allocation of resources.

Chang demonstrates this is nonsense. He dismantles myth after myth about how capitalism actually works as opposed to how we are led to believe it works. Again and again he illustrates a conviction, learned the hard way by our ancestors during the 1930's, that it was in the public interest that market capitalism be regulated.

While the economists of today became hypnotised by the apparent infallibility of the finance sector, their predecessors half a century ago would not gave been.

They had lived through the Great Depression. They had seen how economies driven to meet the short term needs of shareholders did long term damage to the underlying economy. They had experienced how the interests of the private financial sector was opposed to interests of society as a whole, and therefore had to be tightly regulated.

That's why the Roosevelt administration introduced strict regulations, including the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, putting a wall between investment and commercial banking (torn down by the Clinton Administration in 1999). And it is why Labour's 1944 manifesto carried the pledge to return finance 'to it's role as the servant, and the intelligent servant, of the community and productive industry; not their stupid master'.

Chang agrees that the market 'is an exceptionally effective mechanism for coordinating complex economic activities across numerous economic agents'. He argues that while the Soviet command economies could be remarkably successful when confronted with tasks which were relatively simple and clear during it's early industrialisation phase, once the economy developed and became more complex, decision making became more complicated and the central planning mechanisms in place were simply not up to the task.

However, he disagrees in investing markets with some divine power.

The market is nothing more than a mechanism-a machine that like a powerful car needs careful steering and good breaks. He highlights over and over how the state not only regulated the market, but subverts it by intervening and allocating resources in the public interest.

Chang also points out that you did not have to be alive during the Great Depression of the 1930's to learn the lesson that capitalism has inherent destructive tendencies.

Since the 1980's there have been dozens of smaller financial crisis: the 1982 Third World debt crisis, the 1995 Mexico peso crisis, the 1997 Asian crisis and the 1998 Russian crisis. For those not blinkered to see it, the writing was on the wall.

We have been failed by a right wing economic model and those politicians, on both right and left, who became enthralled to it. Today millions of people around the world pay the price for that failure in unemployment, cuts to wages and welfare provision. If we are to see any silver lining in the dark clouds above, one must be an opportunity for public re-education about the need to subvert markets to people, not the other way around.

To that end, Chang's book should be required reading.

Christians in Iraq

Wednesday's Channel Four News report on the plight of Iraq's Christians made for sad viewing. This is a community that has existed in the region for 2,000 years. Some of them still speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus. Yet their very future is under threat.

Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq the size of its Christian community has literally halved. While unfavorable demographics and immigration are contributing factors, thousands more have been forced to seek refuge abroad as sectarian religious hatred has made their lives unbearable.

The primary responsibility for this exodus lies with Al Qaeda and their ilk. It is they who are planting the bombs in Churches; it is they who are murdering priests and worshippers; and it is they who seek to sow the seeds of religious hatred. Their intention is clear. They intend to attack Christians 'wherever they can be reached' and fully intend to 'open upon them the doors of destruction and rivers of blood."

It is too simplistic to describe what is taking place as a Muslim-Christian conflict or a 'clash of civilizations'. The vast majority of those fleeing Iraq seek refuge in Muslim majority countries elsewhere in the Middle East. And there is a long history of religious coexistence and tolerance in the region.

But it undeniably the case that the invasion of Iraq has stoked the flames of religious hatred and provided a fertile breeding ground for those hate filled agendas. As William Dalrymple notes, it is ironic that a war championed by self avowed Christians in Bush and Blair, and described as a 'crusade' by one of them, has 'created the environment that led to the destruction of Christianity in one of its ancient heartlands – something Arab, Mongol and Ottoman conquests all failed to pull off'.