theAnalysis.news

Retired Ambassador Chas Freeman, Nixon's translator during his 1972 trip to China, says U.S. policy to China remains a desire to hold on to primacy globally and regionally. Biden's approach so far is not much different than the aggressive posture of Trump.

UMass Amherst professor and PERI Co-Director Robert Pollin discuss his latest book that he co-authored with Noam Chomsky, about the Global Green New Deal and the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead in addressing the climate crisis. Hosted by Rob Johnson on his podcast Economics and Beyond.

UMass Amherst professor and PERI Co-Director Robert Pollin discuss his latest book that he co-authored with Noam Chomsky, about the Global Green New Deal and the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead in addressing the climate crisis. Hosted by Rob Johnson on his podcast Economics and Beyond. www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/podcasts

Transcript:

Rob Johnson:

I’m here today with Bob Pollin from the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, and the co founder and co director of the Political Economy Research Institute, PERI. We’re here to talk about anything he wants to talk about, but particularly his brilliant work related to climate in his recent co authored book with Noam Chomsky, and how this new administration in this world is going to embrace the challenges that they frame in their writing. Bob, thanks for joining me today.

Robert Pollin:

Great being on. Thank you, Rob.

Rob Johnson:

So right now, we’re in this turmoil. The notion in March of last year was that the pandemic was a surprise, a transient surprise, it seems to be much more resilient. We’ve gone through a presidential election, we have a new administration, and this ominous specter of climate change and how would I say, the displacement of just about everything, including life on earth stands out on the horizon. What do you see? What gives you heartburn? What are you cheering for? What do you wish you were seeing in this context?

Robert Pollin:

That’s a lot, but right, since the pandemic hit basically, in mid March, we can look at the standard statistics on employment that I find more illuminating. Just look at the number of people that have applied for unemployment insurance, since March to now, I just actually calculated it last night. It’s 47% of the labor force. Meaning sometime between last March and now, roughly half of the people that work in the United States have become unemployed. So in terms of the severity of the downturn, it’s equivalent, or not more so than the 1930s. We’ve got to get out of it. Sure, when people get inoculated, hopefully we’ll be able to reopen.

But we do need the booster, because people have been left behind, businesses have failed. State and local governments are broke. And in March, we passed the first stimulus program that was 10% of GDP, the CARES Program. We need more. In December, they passed the COVID-19, that was 900 billion, about 4% of GDP. And now, Biden is talking about another 1.9% of GDP about 9%, all of that is needed in order to just lift the economy back off. Otherwise, we’re going to be stuck in a very, very slow halting recovery. That’s short term. In terms of a sustainable growth path to return to, obviously, we have to deal with climate change in a dramatic way, that has not happened.

The proposal that Biden had when he was the candidate, Build Back Better, was reasonably good. There were things about it that I thought were okay. The number one thing that I thought was okay, was the scale of spending. He’s proposing 2 trillion over four years, which is more or less in line with what I think is a reasonable number. The other parts that I thought were okay, was that he does give attention to the quality of job creation, not only numbers of jobs, the quality of jobs. And he does talk about the transition for workers and communities in the fossil fuel-dependent area. So those are all good things. There are things I don’t like about it, but those are the basics. And these are things that I think have to pass in the next few ...

UMass Amherst professor and PERI Co-Director Robert Pollin discuss his latest book that he co-authored with Noam Chomsky, about the Global Green New Deal and the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead in addressing the climate crisis. Hosted by Rob Johnson on his podcast Economics and Beyond.

The bombing of Syria was a violation of U.S. and International law. It was the U.S. that violated the nuclear deal with Iran and Biden should rejoin the agreement without new conditions. Phyliss Bennis and Larry Wilkerson join Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news

The bombing of Syria was a violation of U.S. and International law. It was the U.S. that violated the nuclear deal with Iran and Biden should rejoin the agreement without new conditions. Phyliss Bennis and Larry Wilkerson join Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news

Paul Jay

Hi, welcome to theAnalysis.news. I'm Paul Jay. Please don't forget the donate button at the top of the webpage.

On February 28th, Iran rejected the U.S. offer to attend a meeting of the P5+1 countries Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United States to chart a diplomatic way forward on the Iran nuclear deal. Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said that the Biden administration had not set aside President Donald Trump's so-called maximum pressure policy, quote, "Given the recent moves and positions of the U.S. and the three European countries, the Islamic Republic doesn't assess the timing of an informal meeting proposed by the EU coordinator as appropriate."

Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman also said the path ahead is very clear. The U.S. should end its illegal unilateral sanctions and return to the JSCPOA. That's the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action commitments. Last week, the U.S. military bombed bases in Syria it claims belong to a pro-Iranian militia. U.S. defense officials announced the strikes without providing details and with no mention of casualties, saying only they were retaliation for a rocket attack in Iraq earlier last month that killed one civilian contractor and wounded a U.S. service member.

The U.S. attack was carried out without a declaration of war or authorization from Congress as Syria had not attacked the United States. The bombing on Syrian territory was also a violation of international law. Now joining us to discuss U.S. policy towards Iran is Phyllis Bennis, who is the director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. Among her latest books are understanding ISIS and the new Global War on Terror, as well as the updated edition of Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict.

Thanks for joining us, Phyllis.

Phyllis Bennis

Good to be with you, Paul.

Paul Jay

And also joining us again is Lawrence Wilkerson. He's a retired United States Army colonel and former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Thank you, Larry.

Lawrence Wilkerson

Thanks for having me on the analysis.

Paul Jay

So, Larry, kick us off. First of all, from the legal perspective, was this bombing legal either by U.S. law or international law?

Lawrence Wilkerson

As far as I read it, both in terms of the law of war and international law in general, the U.S. operations in Syria are all violative. That is to say, they are all wrong, they're illegal. We were not invited into Syria by the existing government. We didn't have a reason in our own defense, self-defense, if you will, Article 51, for example, to go into Syria. It's all illegal. Everything we are doing in Syria is illegal.

Now, the administration is arguing that it's under the AUMF that gave us carte blanche to attack every terrorist on the face of the earth, wherever they might appear in whatever decade or century. And that's what we're doing. It's illegal.

Paul Jay

This is the post 9/11, quote-unquote, authorization.

Lawrence Wilkerson

Yes.

Phyllis Bennis

Phyllis, what's your take?

The bombing of Syria was a violation of U.S. and International law. It was the U.S. that violated the nuclear deal with Iran and Biden should rejoin the agreement without new conditions. Phyliss Bennis and Larry Wilkerson join Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news

Paul Jay joins host David Swanson to discuss the events of Jan. 6th and what the Financial Times called a coup in progress - on Jan. 4th. Why are so few talking about this now?

Paul Jay joins host David Swanson to discuss the events of Jan. 6th and what the Financial Times called a coup in progress - on Jan. 4th. Why are so few talking about this now?

Paul Jay joins host David Swanson to discuss the events of Jan. 6th and what the Financial Times called a coup in progress - on Jan. 4th. Why are so few talking about this now?