The U.S. Army is to invest $6 million in riot equipment, a fact that has furthered fears that troops will be used inside the U.S. in order to quell any civil unrest resulting from the ongoing economic crisis.

The U.S. Army Contracting Agency, based at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, has a post on the Federal Business Opportunities website, requesting the equipment and has received several notices of interest from potential vendors.

The request titled “84–RIOT EQUIPMENT” outlines the need for hard polyethylene Shin and Chest Guards, shock absorbing Forearm Protectors, Interior leg brace supports as well as knee and ankle protectors.

The ACA asks that the equipment be able to “safely withstand a substantial blow… from non-ballistic weapons or flying debris”.

The Solicitation also states:

The associated North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for this procurement is 453998 with a small business size standard of $6M. This requirement is a [ Small Business ] set-aside and only qualified offerors may submit bids.

Interested vendors include Irish Brigade inc., manufacturers of hunting and safety gear with facilities located in the heart of Kansas City , Missouri. Federal and Military resource company MCLEARVISION, LLC is another interested party, as is Kentucky based U. S. CAVALRY STORE, INC.

In our article yesterday we highlighted the fact that Urban warfare training drills are taking place across the country as top analysts as well as officials predict a potential “summer of rage” across Europe and America as civil unrest from the economic fallout builds.

Are such drills really for the purpose of preparing troops for foreign combat zones? Undoubtedly - but other factors indicate that the drills may very well also be aimed at preparing troops for dealing with mass civil unrest as the economic crisis worsens.

There’s no question that U.S. authorities have been closely observing riots that have toppled governments in Iceland and Latvia and also threatened to do so in several other European countries. The fact that they have contingency plans in place to deal with such scenarios should they unfold in America cannot be disputed.

Indeed, before a media exposé forced them into a denial, Northcom revealed that one of the duties of at least 20,000 active duty troops that are being placed inside the United States would be dealing with “civil unrest and crowd control”.

The U.S. Army War College in November released a white paper called Known Unknowns: Unconventional ‘Strategic Shocks’ in Defense Strategy Development. The report warned that the military must be prepared for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,” which could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse,” “purposeful domestic resistance,” “pervasive public health emergencies” or “loss of functioning political and legal order.” The “widespread civil violence,” the document said, “would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.”

U.S. Army To Buy $6 Million Of Riot Equipment - Will The Economic Crisis Lead To Civil Unrest?

Posted: February 20, 2009
4:24 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
2009 WorldNetDaily

DES MOINES, Iowa – Following publicized reports that the Army National Guard was planning a military training exercise on the streets of a rural Iowa town, the commanding officers have called off the mock “invasion.”

The Guard had planned a four-day urban military operation in tiny Arcadia, Iowa, population 443, sending troops to take over the town and search door-to-door for a suspected weapons dealer.

The exercise was designed as a mock scenario to give soldiers the skills needed for deployment in an urban environment, and military officials stressed that only households that consented to be part of the drill would be searched.

“It will be important for us to gain the trust and confidence of the residents of Arcadia,” Sgt. Mike Kots, readiness NCO for Alpha Company, told Carroll’s Daily Times Herald. “We will need to identify individuals that are willing to assist us in training by allowing us to search their homes and vehicles and to participate in role-playing.

“We really want to get as much information out there as possible,” Kots continued, “because this operation could be pretty intrusive to the people of Arcadia.”

Military spokesman Lt. Col. Greg Hapgood, however, told WND that the operation has now been “scaled back” and no longer involves an “invasion” of Arcadia.

And while Hapgood confirmed the Guard had been inundated with objections from citizens concerned about soldiers patrolling the streets of an American town, he said most came from people out of state and unfamiliar with the operation. Iowans, he explained, typically cooperate with the Guard. The change in plans was based on troop evaluation, he said, not public outcry.

“Higher headquarters leadership,” Hapgood told WND, “given the unit’s status of training proficiency, made a decision to scale back the exercise.”

Kots described the original operation to the Herald as set to begin on Thursday, April 2, with reconnaissance and exploratory patrols. On April 4 convoys were to be deployed from the armory in Carroll to nearby Arcadia, where soldiers would knock on doors, showing a picture of the invented “arms dealer.”

“Once credible intelligence has been gathered,” said Kots, “portions of the town will be road-blocked and more in-depth searches of homes and vehicles will be conducted in accordance with the residents’ wishes.

“One of the techniques we use in today’s political environment is cordon and knock,” Kots explained. “We ask for the head of the household, get permission to search, then have them open doors and cupboards. The homeowner maintains control. We peer over their shoulder, and the soldier uses the homeowner’s body language and position to protect him.”

The planned drill had also included overhead supervision from a Blackhawk helicopter, crowd-control measures and simulated extraction of “injured” people, culminating in capture of the “arms dealer.”

“This exercise will improve the real-life operational skills of the unit,” said Kots. “And it will hopefully improve the public’s understanding of military operations.”

“There are no active duty bases in Iowa, so there are no urban warfare training areas of any size,” Hopgood said. “In order to get that larger neighborhood feel or city feel, we have to be creative and partner with our communities.”

Hopgood further told WND that in past cooperative exercises with the community, the people of Iowa have welcomed learning how their sons and daughters operate in action.

Plans for the urban operation training, Hopgood explained, are still set to continue, but will be conducted in a smaller, platoon-by-platoon basis in the near vicinity of the Carroll armory.

National Guard scraps plans to invade rural town

By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, December 1, 2008; A01

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

The long-planned shift in the Defense Department’s role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.

There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the new homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law restricting the military’s role in domestic law enforcement.

But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response — a nearly sevenfold increase in five years — “would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable,” Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted “a fundamental change in military culture,” he said.

The Pentagon’s plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack have been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corps activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such efforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq was invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil support personnel across the United States.

In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized “preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents.” National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to grind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include those who “want to inflict such brutality on our society that we give up the fight,” such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.

In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005.

Last month, McHale said, authorities agreed to begin a $1.8 million pilot project funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through which civilian authorities in five states could tap military planners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on a particular threat — pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane, earthquake and catastrophic chemical release, respectively — speeding up federal and state emergency planning begun in 2003.

Last Monday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered defense officials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves can respond adequately to domestic disasters.

Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates. He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which concluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready and that they lack equipment and training.

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College’s Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon approach “breaks the mold” by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.

“This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn’t something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for,” said Tussing, who has assessed the military’s homeland security strategies.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU’s National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.

“There’s a notion that whenever there’s an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green,” Healy said, “and that’s at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace.”

McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act, that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for security and that their duties will be to protect the force, not other law enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger units to respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riot in 1992.

U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first reaction force is built around the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April after 15 months in Iraq. The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces that are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal, emergency care and logistics.

The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade’s next scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get additional time in the United States to rest and regroup, compared with other combat units, but it may also face more training and operational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.

Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two wars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families. “We want to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan,” he said. The 1st Brigade’s soldiers “will have some very aggressive training, but will also be home for much of that.”

Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in May after more than a year in Afghanistan.

Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security and calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said, Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.

“It’s one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it’s something else to make it happen,” he said. “It’s time to put our money where our mouth is.”

Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

3rd Infantry’s 1st BCT trains for a new dwell-time mission. Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active Army
By Gina Cavallaro - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Sep 30, 2008 16:16:12 EDT

The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.

Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.

It is not the first time an active-duty unit has been tapped to help at home. In August 2005, for example, when Hurricane Katrina unleashed hell in Mississippi and Louisiana, several active-duty units were pulled from various posts and mobilized to those areas.

But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.

After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one.

“Right now, the response force requirement will be an enduring mission. How the [Defense Department] chooses to source that and whether or not they continue to assign them to NorthCom, that could change in the future,” said Army Col. Louis Vogler, chief of NorthCom future operations. “Now, the plan is to assign a force every year.”

The command is at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colo., but the soldiers with 1st BCT, who returned in April after 15 months in Iraq, will operate out of their home post at Fort Stewart, Ga., where they’ll be able to go to school, spend time with their families and train for their new homeland mission as well as the counterinsurgency mission in the war zones.

Stop-loss will not be in effect, so soldiers will be able to leave the Army or move to new assignments during the mission, and the operational tempo will be variable.

Don’t look for any extra time off, though. The at-home mission does not take the place of scheduled combat-zone deployments and will take place during the so-called dwell time a unit gets to reset and regenerate after a deployment.

The 1st of the 3rd is still scheduled to deploy to either Iraq or Afghanistan in early 2010, which means the soldiers will have been home a minimum of 20 months by the time they ship out.

In the meantime, they’ll learn new skills, use some of the ones they acquired in the war zone and more than likely will not be shot at while doing any of it.

They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.

Training for homeland scenarios has already begun at Fort Stewart and includes specialty tasks such as knowing how to use the “jaws of life” to extract a person from a mangled vehicle; extra medical training for a CBRNE incident; and working with U.S. Forestry Service experts on how to go in with chainsaws and cut and clear trees to clear a road or area.

The 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.

The package is for use only in war-zone operations, not for any domestic purpose.

“It’s a new modular package of nonlethal capabilities that they’re fielding. They’ve been using pieces of it in Iraq, but this is the first time that these modules were consolidated and this package fielded, and because of this mission we’re undertaking we were the first to get it.”

The package includes equipment to stand up a hasty road block; spike strips for slowing, stopping or controlling traffic; shields and batons; and, beanbag bullets.

“I was the first guy in the brigade to get Tasered,” said Cloutier, describing the experience as “your worst muscle cramp ever — times 10 throughout your whole body.

“I’m not a small guy, I weigh 230 pounds … it put me on my knees in seconds.”

The brigade will not change its name, but the force will be known for the next year as a CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF (pronounced “sea-smurf”).

“I can’t think of a more noble mission than this,” said Cloutier, who took command in July. “We’ve been all over the world during this time of conflict, but now our mission is to take care of citizens at home … and depending on where an event occurred, you’re going home to take care of your home town, your loved ones.”

While soldiers’ combat training is applicable, he said, some nuances don’t apply.

“If we go in, we’re going in to help American citizens on American soil, to save lives, provide critical life support, help clear debris, restore normalcy and support whatever local agencies need us to do, so it’s kind of a different role,” said Cloutier, who, as the division operations officer on the last rotation, learned of the homeland mission a few months ago while they were still in Iraq.

Some brigade elements will be on call around the clock, during which time they’ll do their regular marksmanship, gunnery and other deployment training. That’s because the unit will continue to train and reset for the next deployment, even as it serves in its CCMRF mission.

Should personnel be needed at an earthquake in California, for example, all or part of the brigade could be scrambled there, depending on the extent of the need and the specialties involved.
Other branches included

The active Army’s new dwell-time mission is part of a NorthCom and DOD response package.

Active-duty soldiers will be part of a force that includes elements from other military branches and dedicated National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams.

A final mission rehearsal exercise is scheduled for mid-September at Fort Stewart and will be run by Joint Task Force Civil Support, a unit based out of Fort Monroe, Va., that will coordinate and evaluate the interservice event.

In addition to 1st BCT, other Army units will take part in the two-week training exercise, including elements of the 1st Medical Brigade out of Fort Hood, Texas, and the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade from Fort Bragg, N.C.

There also will be Air Force engineer and medical units, the Marine Corps Chemical, Biological Initial Reaction Force, a Navy weather team and members of the Defense Logistics Agency and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

One of the things Vogler said they’ll be looking at is communications capabilities between the services.

“It is a concern, and we’re trying to check that and one of the ways we do that is by having these sorts of exercises. Leading up to this, we are going to rehearse and set up some of the communications systems to make sure we have interoperability,” he said.

“I don’t know what America’s overall plan is — I just know that 24 hours a day, seven days a week, there are soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines that are standing by to come and help if they’re called,” Cloutier said. “It makes me feel good as an American to know that my country has dedicated a force to come in and help the people at home.”

———
Correction:

A non-lethal crowd control package fielded to 1st Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, described in the original version of this story, is intended for use on deployments to the war zone, not in the U.S., as previously stated.

Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1

As the global economic crisis deepens, tempers around the world are getting shorter. French and British trade unions are organizing strikes, Putin is sending troops into the streets and Beijing is trying to buy itself calm.

REUTERS
A rally against car import duties in Krasnoyarsk, Russia: Citizens around the world are protesting against their governments’ handling of the economic crisis.

In the cabinet of French President’s Nicolas Sarkozy, there was talk of a “Black Thursday,” and from Sarkozy’s perspective, that was exactly what Jan. 29, 2009 turned out to be. Schools were closed, and so were railroads, banks and stock markets. Theaters, radio stations and even ski lifts were shut down temporarily. Trash receptacles were set on fire in Paris once again, and a crowd gathered on the city’s famed Place de l’Opéra to sing the “Internationale,” the anthem of revolution.

The global financial crisis has already reached France, bringing business failures, mass layoffs for some workers and reduced working hours for others. On that infamous Thursday, it drove up to 2.5 million people into the streets, in cities from Marseilles to Brest and Bordeaux. The situation was not like in May 1968, when France was in a state of emergency. Nevertheless, the country’s unions called the demonstrations “historic,” characterizing them as the most important protest movement to date against the current French president.

Paris is not the only place plagued by unrest. Across the English Channel in Britain, workers protested at a refinery near Immingham in Lincolnshire, triggering solidarity strikes in 19 other locations in the United Kingdom. The demonstrations became a symbol for the fears of the British lower classes, because the country — according to the International Monetary Fund — faces the worst downturn among all highly developed economies. Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s approval rating is following the decline of the British pound.

In Russia, dismal labor statistics have driven Communists and anti-government protestors into the streets from Pskov to Volgograd in recent days, and in Moscow members of the left-wing opposition even ventured onto Red Square. They ripped up pictures of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, until police arrested and removed them.

In China, workers returned from festivities marking the spring festival to hear shocking news from their own government. Beijing announced that about 20 million migrant workers — more than the combined populations of Denmark, Sweden and Norway — would likely become unemployed in the coming months. The fast pace of economic growth that has lent legitimacy to the Communist Party’s hold on power until now has slowed considerably. According to a government spokesman, 2009 will be the “most difficult” year since the turn of the millennium.

About 50 million jobs could be lost worldwide in the next 11 months and more than 200 million people could drift into total poverty, warns the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). Guy Ryder, the group’s general secretary, believes that these changes represent a “social time bomb,” and that the resulting instability could become “extremely hazardous to democracy” in some countries.

In the West, the crisis could cost heads of state their jobs, as was recently the case with the prime minister of Iceland. But what does it mean for the giant countries in the East? Could the regime in Beijing falter as the country faces its greatest challenge since the beginning of market reforms? Are the Russian people terminating their political moratorium with the government, because prices are rising while the ruble falls, or could the middle class even be about to rebel?

Cabinets in London, Moscow, Beijing and Paris have been overcome by a sense of helplessness. Self-confessed workaholic Gordon Brown is trying to cope with calamity by taking constant countermeasures, while Putin sends his police officers into the street and Beijing distributes gifts to the poorest of the poor. French President Sarkozy, on the other hand, remained silent for a full seven days after the first major, large-scale demonstration.

The French president, who usually seizes every possible opportunity to grab the limelight, waited an entire week before finally reacting to nationwide strikes. Last Thursday evening, on instructions from the Elysée Palace, 90 minutes of broadcast time was made available for a television interview, and Sarkozy quickly switched into propaganda offensive mode on multiple TV and radio stations. The gist of his message was that there would be no change in direction, and that the government would continue to emphasize reforms.

In light of what he dubbed a “crisis of brutal proportions,” the president knowingly pointed to “hardships” and “worries” and massaged the soul of the nation with therapeutic platitudes. But that was the extent of it, because Sarkozy knows that the Jan. 29 demonstrations did not reach critical mass by a long shot. The motley alliance of protesting professors, nurses, steel workers and students lacked a shared list of economic and political demands. Their banners made a case for wage increases, purchasing power parity or the repeal of tax reforms for the rich. At the same time, however, the protests revealed a deep-seated malaise that penetrates deeply into the conservative electorate of the governing UMP. The overwhelming majority of the French are plagued by fears of unemployment, lower incomes and shrinking savings.

The galloping decline in the economy has further damaged the president’s standing. Now that his approval rating has dropped to only 39 percent, Sarkozy is very much on edge. After being booed by angry citizens during a visit to the normally tranquil town of Saint-Lô, the president reacted by imposing a disciplinary transfer on the town’s prefect and chief of police.

Two-thirds of the French believe that their government — despite the €26 billion ($34 billion) economic stimulus package, which even includes plans to renovate churches, government ministries and prisons — is not engaging in effective crisis management.

Politically speaking, the man in charge at the Elysée Palace will remain unchallenged until 2012. Sarkozy has a solid majority in both the National Assembly and the Senate. The Communists have shrunk to the point of insignificance, and the Socialists are crippled by internecine feuds. This week, however, the alliance of trade unions is discussing new battleground tactics, and it knows that it can depend on the support of the majority of French people.

“The sympathy for the strike movement highlights the ever-deepening rift between the French and their president,” warns political scientist and opinion researcher Stéphane Rozès. “We are on the brink of a new epoch, one that will be marked by growing political instability.”

‘The Fight Goes On’

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s popularity is falling even faster than Sarkozy’s. Despite a temporary boost last fall, when Brown showed leadership strength at home and internationally with his plan to recapitalize the banks, fewer and fewer Britons are now confident that the man at 10 Downing Street has the right recipe for the crisis.

According to recent polls, the opposition Tories have further widened their lead to a comfortable 10 to 12 percent, while only one in three Britons would vote for Labour today. The drop in the approval ratings of Brown and Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling is especially dramatic on issues of economic competence, where the pair lost a full 12 percentage points within only a month.

These are disconcerting numbers, especially for Brown’s Labour party, which almost kicked the prime minister out of office last summer. Coming to grips with the public’s growing anger will be one of the prime minister’s most important tasks. Although Brown’s smart, academic analyses against protectionism are impressive to listeners in places like Davos, the premier is increasingly alienating concerned traditional voters like the folks in Lincolnshire.

In better times, for example, the strike in front of the Lincolnshire refinery would have elicited nothing but a shrug from most British workers. The operator of the plant, the French energy company Total, had wanted to use 300 skilled workers from Italy and Portugal, provided by an Italian subcontractor, for a construction project. According to the unions, the workers were being paid less than they should have been, which Total denied.

After days of unruly strikes, the parties reached an agreement last Wednesday, in which Total agreed to provide 102 additional jobs for British workers. It was a courtesy gesture by the company to preserve the peace. Under the current law, there was nothing illegal about temporarily employing the Italian and Portuguese workers.

The 102 additional jobs are the price the company paid for social peace, but whether it will last is more than questionable. “We may have won the battle, but the fight goes on,” says Shaune Clarkson of the GMB union. No one knows whether the message has reached Brown in London, where more and more observers believe that the prime minister lost touch with the public long ago.

Buying Patience

If anyone has a receptive ear for angry grumbling in the streets, it is governments like those in Beijing and Moscow. Both China and Russia experienced serious crises in the 1990s, when their old communist, state-owned enterprises were shut down. In China, 50 million people became unemployed within a short space of time, and in Russia the economic crash almost cost President Boris Yeltsin his reelection in 1996. But both regimes persevered, because both the Chinese and the Russians, after long years of communist planned economies, were undemanding. But in the wake of the economic boom of recent years and the growing prosperity of large segments of the middle class, those days are over.

Ironically, in the year in which the Chinese Communist Party plans to celebrate the 60th anniversary of its rule with a great deal of pomp, the country, for the first time in a long while, will not be able to boast impressive economic statistics. The economy grew by only 6.8 percent in the last quarter. To keep high-school and university graduates employed, China must increase its manufacturing production or the services it provides by about 8 percent annually.

No one truly believes that Communist Party leader Hu Jintao or Premier Wen Jiabao could suffer the fate of former Indonesian President Suharto, who was swept away by the 1998 Asian economic crisis after ruling the country for more than 30 years. Nevertheless, “Chinese society will likely be confronted with more conflicts and clashes in 2009, which will test the abilities of the party and government even further,” warned the government-owned magazine Outlook.

Preventing unrest is the order of the day, and to that end Beijing has approved an economic stimulus package worth €460 billion ($598 billion). A portion of the money is to be spent on better social insurance programs, so that people will save less and consume more. A plan to raise the minimum wage has been postponed. Nevertheless, local governments handed out so-called “red envelopes,” each containing 100 to 150 yuan (€11-17 or $14-22), to the poorest of the poor during the spring festival so they can buy food.

In addition, Beijing came up with an unusual program. As of Feb. 1, farmers are receiving a cash rebate from the government equivalent to 13 percent of the purchase price when they buy television sets, washing machines, motorcycles or refrigerators. The Communist Party hopes the program will increase consumption — but also that it will buy it patience and sympathy.

The party is especially concerned about migrant workers, who are losing their jobs at a breathtaking rate. There is hardly any one left in their native villages for farming. The tenseness of the situation is palpable in China’s so-called “job markets,” such as the one in Canton’s Huadu district. Last week, on a side street wedged between factories, shops and apartment buildings, hundreds of men and women jostled up to tables at several leather factories that make bags for the domestic, Russian and American markets. Jobs were available — for a 10-hour day and without employment contracts.

Nevertheless, the mood in Canton still seems relaxed. And yet no one can predict how long the public’s confidence will last. Those who, despite all efforts, can no longer afford the tuition to send their children to school or their parents to the doctor may eventually lose patience with the authorities. In recent weeks, several protests in front of factory gates have turned violent, with police vehicles going up in flames and workers ransacking party offices.

The party is especially concerned about students, who have rarely dared to take to the streets since the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. But this could change when their dreams of enjoying a successful career in return for the hard work of their student years threaten to evaporate.

Of the roughly 5.6 million Chinese who graduated from universities and technical colleges in 2008, about a million are still without work. This year, the number of graduates entering the job market will be even higher, at 6.1 million. “If you are worried, you can rest assured that I am even more worried,” Premier Wen told a group of students.

Strong Steps

These are not the kinds of words Russians hear from their prime minister. Since the fall, when Putin was still publicly denying that the world financial crisis posed a threat to Russia, Moscow has primarily been preparing itself for one thing: to keep its own people in check if worse comes to worst.

The rulers’ fear of the ruled has plagued every Russian government since the days of the czars. It suddenly reappeared when Yevgeny Gontmacher, a respected social economist, published his essay “Novocherkassk 2009,” in which he warned against uprisings in the provinces. The essay alluded to the riots that broke out in the southern Russian industrial city of Novocherkassk in June 1962, following price increases. Five thousand angry workers took to the streets, and the police and army were ordered to shoot the protestors. More than 20 people died, and seven ringleaders were executed.

The mere mention of this long-suppressed drama was enough for the authorities to threaten to withdraw the license of the liberal business magazine Vedomosti, which had published Gontmacher’s article. The magazine was accused of “incitement to extremism” — and this despite the fact that the author had held an important post under Putin.

But in taking this approach, the Kremlin merely confirmed Gontmacher’s core thesis, namely that the Putin system, which increasingly emphasized central control and repression of political foes already during times of economic growth, is incapable of responding flexibly in a serious crisis. Indeed, the government reacted in panic immediately after the first demonstrations by angry merchants in Vladivostok, who were incensed over an increase in import duties for Western used cars, by portraying the protestors as the victims of foreign intelligence services.

Pavel Verstov, a member of Putin’s United Russia party until recently, can also attest to the Kremlin’s helplessness. Verstov, a local journalist, had reported on suicides at the largest steel mill in Magnitogorsk, an industrial city in the Ural Mountains region. Four workers had killed themselves because they could no longer repay their debts. Hundreds of thousands of Russians are now under similar pressure, after having taken out euro or dollar loans from banks to buy houses or cars. But now that the ruble has lost 47 percent of its value against the dollar since last September, the borrowers’ salaries are no longer sufficient to service their debt.

Verstov was expelled from the government party. A local party official branded him as a “troublemaker” and declared: “the security forces will take strong steps to thwart all attempts to destabilize society.” He called upon his fellow party members to stand behind President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

The two men are still strong in the polls, with Putin’s approval rating at 83 percent. However, polls conducted by the public opinion research institute Levada Center show that confidence in the government is vanishing almost as quickly as the country’s financial reserves. While only 27 percent believed that the country is moving “in a wrong direction” in October 2008, that number had already risen by half by the end of December. Almost one in two citizens fears that “the government cannot effectively combat inflation and salary losses.”

To bolster the banks, the ruble and heavily indebted major companies, the government has already spent a third of its once formidable foreign currency reserves. After a still-respectable economic growth figure of 5.6 percent in 2008, German Gref, a former economics minister who now heads the country’s largest bank, now expects three years of recession and stagnation. “The government does not have a plan to cope with the crisis,” says Gref.

In this situation, it is not Garry Kasparov, the leader of the extra-parliamentary opposition, who poses a threat to the Moscow power elite, because the former world chess champion has far more supporters in the West than in Russia. And Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov, for his part, has made his peace with the powers that be.

The real threat comes from another direction. The Kremlin fears that members of the middle class, loyal Putin supporters, will withdraw their support if the prosperity of recent years vanishes. In December alone, disposable income sank by 11.6 percent, and 5.8 million people are already officially unemployed. Arkady Dvorkovich, economic advisor to President Medvedev, believes that the unofficial figure is closer to 20 million.

So far, few have protested in Putin’s giant realm. But the fact that there have already been open calls for Putin to resign — as in Vladivostok — shows how quickly supposedly stable power can be eroded.

A respected Moscow political scientist points to a dangerous disaffection between the “ruling elite” and the passive majority, warning that there are no longer any functioning relations between the country’s rulers and its population, television excluded. In times like these, he says, this could prove to be devastating — and it could ruin the Putin system.

THOMAS HÜETLIN, ANDREAS LORENZ, CHRISTIAN NEEF,
MATTHIAS SCHEPP, STEFAN SIMONS

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan