Global Research

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Syria once again finds itself at another critical juncture. Having secured virtually all territory in the nation’s southwest, Damascus’ attention is now fixated on Idlib in the north.

Reuters has recently reported on a so-called “National Army” based in northern Syria that appears poised to confront Syrian efforts to restore peace and security nationwide.

In an article titled, “Syrian rebels build an army with Turkish help, face challenges,” Reuters would claim:

A “National Army” being set up by Syrian rebels with Turkey’s help could become a long-term obstacle to President Bashar al-Assad’s recovery of the northwest…

Reuters would also report:

The National Army compromises some 35,000 fighters from some of the biggest factions in the war that has killed hundreds of thousands of people and forced some 11 million people from their homes over the last seven years.

And:

Assad, backed by Russia and Iran, has vowed to recover “every inch” of Syria, and though he has now won back most of the country, the Turkish presence will complicate any government offensive in the northwest.

The idea of having NATO military forces on the ground in Syria, providing protection for Western-backed militants in safe-havens has been stated US policy since the beginning of the Syrian conflict.

Seeking Safe-Havens Since 2012

The Brookings Institution – a US-based corporate-financier funded policy think tank – in its March 2012 “Middle East Memo #21″ titled, “Saving Syria: Assessing Options for Regime Change” (PDF), stated explicitly that (emphasis added):

An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.

The document would also state in regards to a NATO invasion of Syria that:

Turkey would have to be willing to provide the logistical base and much of the ground troops for the operation. Turkey is best placed of any country to intervene in Syria: it has a large, reasonably capable military; it has vital interests in Syria; and its interest is in seeing peace and democratic transition. 

While Brookings policymakers noted Turkey’s hesitation to do this in 2012 due to fears that Syrian Kurds might be used in some form of retaliation, the dynamics have since shifted due to Turkey’s incremental occupation of northern Syria and Washington’s minding of Kurds east of the Euphrates River.

Building a Better Proxy Army

Another more recent Brookings paper titled, “Building a Better Syrian Opposition Army” (PDF), published in 2014 would designated both Jordan and Turkey as potential bases from which to train and deploy a US backed “Syrian opposition army.”

The plan included the seizure of a significant swath of Syrian territory after which the US could recognize the militants as the “new provisional Syrian government,” then lend them more direct military, political, and economic support. In northern Syria, particularly around the city of Idlib, a slow-motion version of this plan has been unfolding for years, under the protection of the Turkish military.

Of course, both Brookings papers were written before Russia intervened directly in the Syrian conflict in 2015. Iran also has a sizable presence in Syria. Militant-held territory has been retaken all the way up to the Syrian-Jordanian border and Syrian forces are reportedly mobilizing for operations against Idlib itself.

Ankara and Washington also appear to be at odds, while at the same time, Ankara has been making overtures toward Moscow and Tehran. Of course, all of this could be geopolitical theater. It is not unprecedented for nations – particularly those aligned to the US – to feign a shift in policy only to backtrack and double down. Turkey is heavily dependent on Europe in particular economically and the vector sum of its foreign policy still appears to favor Western interests.

Turkey Created and Backed Terrorists. Turkey is Still Harboring Terrorists 

Turkey still finds itself overseeing a nearly verbatim execution of stated US foreign policy in northern Syria. The militant groups it has consolidated and harbored under its protection have been refitting and rearming – many of them having been flushed out from across Syria as Damascus and its allies retake the country. These are groups that have rejected peace deals and have rejected offers to join Syrian forces in the fight against extremists still holding out across the country.

In many cases, these militants come from groups either fighting under Al Qaeda’s banner, or alongside it.

Turkey still finds itself overseeing one of the last bastions of anti-government militancy in Syria – the other being US-occupied eastern Syria.

Only Damascus, Moscow, and Tehran’s intelligence services can know for sure what Ankara’s intentions are, what its true disposition is in northern Syria, and what if anything Turkish forces can or will do if Syrian forces begin retaking Idlib.

For Damascus and its allies, promises and good will from Ankara must be coupled with realist provisions to ensure good will is the only good option Ankara has to choose from.

Ultimately, one of the last showdowns in Syria’s long-fought war to foil Western-sponsored terrorism and subversion will be in territory Turkey has harbored US-backed anti-government militants in. Only time will tell if these militants are incrementally disbanded and Turkish forces withdraw thus bringing this conflict one step closer to an end, or a dangerous standoff with Turkey – mirroring Israel’s illegal occupation of Syria’s Golan Heights – begins.

*

Tony Cartalucci is Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

With the ongoing crisis involving Turkish lira, the Indian rupee fell to an all-time low on Tuesday. The Indian currency dropped to the level of 70.1 to the US dollar and ended at 69.93 at the end of the day, recording its largest one-day fall in five years.

Indian officials have attempted to downplay the severity of the crisis confronting the Indian economy and its currency. Economic Affairs Secretary Subhash Chander Garg told the media on Tuesday that there was “nothing at this stage to worry” about the fall of the rupee as it was due to “external factors.” He claimed that India had sufficient foreign exchange reserves to withstand the decline.

At the same time, Garg admitted that the country’s central bank, known as the Reserve Bank of India, was limited in what it could do to contain the fall. He said:

“As currencies of other economies are also depreciating, intervention by the Reserve Bank of India, by selling dollars in the country, will not help much at this stage for stabilising the rupee.”

Indian officials have been forced to admit their inability to control “external factors” on the country’s economy. According to Garg, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has spent about $US23 billion so far in this year in its attempt to stabilise the rupee.

The fall of the Indian rupee has been unfolding over several months, in response to moves by the US Federal Reserve to lift interest rates and end its “quantitative easing,” thus reversing the flow of relatively cheap dollar-denominated loans. The Indian currency has declined about 8 percent so far this year. Now, amidst the sharp fall of the Turkish lira, which underscores the far-reaching implications of an upward movement of the dollar as a result of the US Fed’s moves on so-called emerging markets, the decline of the Indian rupee is accelerating.

Pointing to the role of foreign investors in the fall of the rupee, B. Prasanna, group executive and head of ICICI Bank, said:

“The swift move [of the rupee] past 69 happened due to foreign portfolio investor (FPI) outflows and the need to hedge existing short dollar positions in the market, driven by global market sentiment rather than actual importer demand.”

The decline of Indian rupee is a part of global rush by investors away from so-called emerging markets. Radhika Rao, an economist at DBS Bank in Singapore, said:

“The fall in rupee was not in isolation, rather a part of the broader sell-down in emerging markets currencies.”

As a further indication of the growing economic crisis confronting the Indian elite, the country’s trade deficit rose to $18 billion last month, from $16.6 billion in June. The major factor was the increase in oil prices. India imports more than 80 percent of its crude-oil needs.

Some sections of Indian big business welcome a weaker rupee as a favourable factor for exports, arguing that it will make the country’s products competitively cheaper in the world market. Anand Mahindra, the executive chairman of the Mahindra Group, which has interests ranging from cars to construction equipment to insurance, tweeted:

“With this boost to India’s export competitiveness could we now convince global companies that it’s time to switch to India for world-scale, export-focused manufacturing?”

However, a weaker rupee will not favour all sections of Indian industries as argued by Mahindra. Those which rely on imported raw materials, component parts and machinery will face increases in their manufacturing costs in rupee terms.

Moreover, a weaker rupee could lead to higher inflation under conditions of increases in import bills of crude-oil, commodities, electronic items and engineering equipment. According to the Indian oil ministry, every rupee change in the exchange rate against the US dollar makes a change of 108.8 billion rupees ($1.58 billion) in the country’s crude-oil import bill, which reached $12.4 billion in July, 57.4 percent higher than a year ago.

While Indian officials boast the country’s foreign reserves are sufficient to push back against the downward pressures on the rupee, the current level of about $402 billion would not cover import costs for a year.

The global economic shocks will intensify the political crisis confronting the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The Hindu supremacist Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP) will face national elections next year. Its ability to allocate spending toward some cosmetic social policies, in an effort to retain support, is increasingly limited.

The higher inflation resulting from the depreciation of the rupee will intensify the already immense burden on the working people and rural poor in the form of increasing prices for fuel, food and other essential goods and services. It will lead to a further escalation of class struggle.

This year, significant sections of workers and the oppressed have engaged in strikes and mass protests over the attacks on their wages, jobs and working conditions, by both the national BJP government and administrations at state level. Bank employees throughout the country, public-sector bus workers in the southern state of Tamil Nadu, cab drivers attached to major taxi companies Uber and Ola, and farmers in western, eastern and northern India were among them.

Immense class antagonisms exist due to the poverty and widening social inequality caused by the pro-investor economic reforms carried out by successive governments since 1991. The top 1 percent of country’s population enjoys nearly a quarter of all income and owns 60 percent of the country’s total wealth, under conditions where about 70 percent of the population lives on less than $2 a day. Only a tiny minority of big bourgeoisie and privileged section of upper middle class has benefited from more than a quarter century of economic reforms in the expense of vast majority of workers and oppressed masses.

India’s social powder keg is on the verge of explosion under conditions where the main opposition Congress Party and the Stalinist parliamentary parties—the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPM and the Communist Party of India (CPI)—are discredited among the workers and oppressed masses due to their role in imposing pro-investor economic policies and associated austerity measures. These organisations will not be able to contain working-class resistance as they have in the past.

First published by GR on October 26, 2017. In recent developments, several countries are repatriating their gold holdings held in the U.S.

The Central Bank of Russia has more than doubled the pace of its gold purchases, and tripled its gold reserves—from around 600 tonnes to 1,800 tonnes—bringing its international gold reserves to the highest level since Putin became president 17 years ago, according to the World Gold Council.

The impetus for the massive increase in Russian gold reserves is their desire to break away from the hegemony of the U.S. petrodollar and dollar-based payment systems. Currently, over 60 percent of global reserves and 80 percent of global payments are denominated dollars, according to James Rickards, author of Currency Wars.

Additionally, the U.S. is the only country with veto power at the International Monetary Fund, known as the global lender of last resort. Thus, one of the most crucial weapons wielded by Russia, in its war to free itself from the hegemony of the petrodollar, is gold.

The reason gold is so critical is that it cannot be manipulated by U.S.-based economic warfare, as it cannot be frozen out as other forms of digital and paper fiat can be.

Gold can simply be loaded onto pallets and shipped to another state to make a payment, thus bypassing targeted economic sanctions that are often used by the United States as a means of attempting to force geopolitical compliance by Russia and other countries. The strategic significance of gold is so great, that even when oil prices and Russian financial reserves were collapsing in 2015, they continued to acquire gold.

In fact, during the second quarter of 2017, Russia accounted for 38 percent of all gold purchased by central banks. The massive increase in Russian gold reserves has taken place while simultaneously abstaining from purchasing foreign currency for more than two years.

Even as global demand for gold fell to a two-year low in the second quarter, Russia maintained its strong position due to gold being one of the most geopolitics-proof investments in the world. In a time of increased economic warfare, with the petrodollar being utilized as a weapon by the U.S., gold is a means of bypassing U.S. sanctions.

“Gold is an asset that is independent of any government and, in effect, given what is usually held in reserves, any Western government,” said Matthew Turner, metals analyst at Macquarie Group in London. “This might appeal given Russia has faced financial sanctions.”

In addition to being the largest international purchaser of gold, Russia is also one of the three biggest gold producers in the world, as the Central Bank of Russia purchases gold from domestic mines using commercial banks and not in the open market.

Russia’s accelerated pace of gold bullion purchases began in 2007, with Russian gold holdings now having quadrupled to 1,556 tonnes at the end of June. In terms of total reserves, Russian now comes in just behind China and has more gold reserves than India, Mexico and Turkey combined, with a total of nearly $427 billion in reserves.

Additionally, Russia is simultaneously pursuing other strategic dollar alternatives besides gold. Russia and China have built a non-dollar payment system for regional trading partners.

One of the most threatening uses of U.S. financial influence has been its utilization of the SWIFT payment system, which acts as a hub of global money transfer message traffic, as the U.S. threatens to cut other nations off from the system if they refuse to be subservient to U.S. hegemonic dictates.

Russia clearly understands its vulnerability to U.S. domination and has worked diligently to reduce that vulnerability. In turn, Russia has created an alternative to SWIFT.

“There was the threat of being shut out of SWIFT. We updated our transaction system, and if anything happens, all SWIFT-format operations will continue to work. We created an analogous system,” Elvira Nabiullina, head of Russia’s central bank, reported to Vladimir Putin.

Russia is also part of a reported Chinese plan to install a new international monetary order that excludes U.S. dollars. Under that plan, China could buy Russian oil with yuan and Russia could then exchange that yuan for gold on the Shanghai exchange.

Jay Syrmopoulos is a geopolitical analyst, freethinker, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at the University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs and holds a BA in International Relations. Jay’s writing has been featured on both mainstream and independent media – and has been viewed tens of millions of times. You can follow him on Twitter @SirMetropolis and on Facebook at SirMetropolis.

Featured image is from TheFreeThoughtProject.com

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

For almost seventeen years, Global Research, together with partner independent media organizations, has sought Truth in Media with a view to eventually “disarming” the corporate media’s disinformation crusade.

To reverse the tide, we call upon our readers to participate in an important endeavor.

Global Research has over 50,000 subscribers to our Newsletter.

Our objective is to recruit one thousand committed “volunteers” among our 50,000 Newsletter subscribers to support the distribution of Global Research articles (email lists, social media, crossposts). 

Do not send us money. Under Plan A, we call upon our readers to donate 5 minutes a day to Global Research.

Global Research Volunteer Members can contact us at [email protected] for consultations and guidelines.

If, however, you are pressed for time in the course of a busy day, consider Plan B, Consider Making a Donation and/or becoming a Global Research Member. 

*     *     *

Turkey’s Financial Crisis Raises Questions About China’s Debt-driven Development Model

By James M. Dorsey, August 19, 2018

The latest crisis in Turkey’s boom-bust economy raises questions about a development model in which countries like China and Turkey witness moves towards populist rule of one man who encourages massive borrowing to drive economic growth.

Complicity with Saudi Crimes Limits Canada’s Response

By Yves Engler, August 19, 2018

The Trudeau government has largely maintained the Conservative government’s pro-Saudi policies and support for Riyadh’s belligerence in the region. They’ve mostly ignored its war on Yemen, which has left 15,000 civilians dead, millions hungry and sparked a cholera epidemic. Rather than oppose this humanitarian calamity, Ottawa armed the Saudis and openly aligned itself with Riyadh.

Dangerous Meddling – Spy Games in Iran

By Catherine Shakdam, August 18, 2018

Washington’s distaste of Iran is rooted in Tehran’s commitment to stand free and independent against the call of unfettered neo-imperialism.

To put it more plainly Iran disturbs America’s established world order by the principle it exercises, represents, and encourages others to enact: freedom of choice.

Revolt in Iraq. The Lion of Babylon Roars Again

By Dirk Adriaensens, August 18, 2018

July was always a politically turbulent month in Iraq. But the violent protests that have swept South Iraq over the past weeks are unseen, both in terms of size and targets. Ports were blocked, airports closed, provincial government buildings besieged and most striking: the local headquarters of Islamic Shiite parties and Allied militias were attacked. In a recent International Crisis Group report, the death toll is estimated at fifty, and hundreds are injured. 

Sanctions, Sanctions, Sanctions – The Final Demise of Dollar Hegemony?

By Peter Koenig, August 18, 2018

Sanctions left and sanctions right. Financial mostly, taxes, tariffs, visas, travel bans – confiscation of foreign assets, import and export prohibitions and limitations; and also punishing those who do not respect sanctions dished out by Trump, alias the US of A, against friends of their enemies.

Article from our Asia-Pacific Research site:

Kerala Flood Is Thousands of Times the Magnitude of Thai Cave Rescue! Yet Still…

By Binu Mathew, August 18, 2018

The Kerala floods is a disaster thousands of times more vast in its magnitude. Tens of thousands of people are stranded in remote areas, in the upper floors of the houses, on trees and even on roof tops. Reports of people dying in their shelters of starvation and disease have started coming out. Dead bodies are floating around in flood waters. And nobody moves.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Societies are best judged by how they treat children, the elderly, the infirm, their most disadvantaged and prisoners. 

America fails on all counts under Republicans and undemocratic Dems – violator of core international and constitutional, and US statute law principles.

Torture and abuse are illegal at all times, under all conditions, with no allowed exceptions.

The UN Convention against torture defines the practice as:

“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain and suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity…”

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states:

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or de- grading treatment or punishment.”

Article 10 states:

“All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the dignity of the human person.”

America and Israel are the only developed nations officially permitting the practice.

The Bush/Cheney regime “Torture Memo” discarded all legal restraints.

It authorized extreme interrogation methods amounting to torture, including infliction of “intense pain or suffering” short of what would cause “serious physical injury so severe that death, organ failure, (loss of significant body functions), or permanent damage.”

It swept away habeas rights, due process, and equal protection under law – core legal protections for everyone charged, detained or imprisoned.

The Obama regime continued  illegal torture and abusive practices. So do hardliners in charge of Trump regime’s geopolitical policies.

America’s gulag prison system operates at home and abroad, including unknown numbers of global black sites in numerous countries.

Torture is standard practice by various means, including silently in solitary confinement – substituting punishment for justice.

Longterm isolation and other forms of torture are constitutionally banned cruel and unusual punishment.

Isolation is emotionally destruction. Prisoners become zombies, others sociopaths. PTSD symptoms are commonplace – including paranoia, hallucinations, depression, anxiety, anger and suicide.

Short and longer-term cruel and unusual punishment encourages a death wish to end pain and suffering.

Other abusive practices in US prisons include detainees and inmates savaged by dogs, brutally shocked with cattle prods, burned by toxic chemicals, harmed with stun guns, raped, beaten, repeatedly stripped naked, denied adequate medical care, subjected to extreme cold or heat, and abused in various other ways.

A 2008-released “Omar Broadway Film” documented abuse of inmates in one US prison, typical of most others, saying the following:

“As the prisoners stand motionless next to each other and cover themselves with plastic bags to protect themselves from chemical weapons, the riot squad bursts in, spraying torrents of mace and freely swinging their batons.”

“The inmates offer no resistance. They later sport black eyes and broken jaws. One disappears for months after being dragged by his shackles down the stairs and across the floor, bleeding and screaming.”

“Disturbingly, these scenes are also often filmed by ‘Internal Affairs’ agents – employees of the prison in charge of procedural enforcement – who can be seen pointing their cameras toward the ceiling as the blows start raining down.”

“The other prisoners who are locked in their cells also choke on the gas. No preparations are made for their safety.”

“When this happens on Thanksgiving, the styrofoam- encased dinners sit undistributed all night in full view of the inmates. They are stacked behind two canisters of Mace.”

These practices are commonplace in America nationwide at federal, state and local facilities – state-sponsored brutality, torture by any standard, unreported by major media.

Communication Management Units (CMUs) in some US prisons segregate Muslims from the general prison population for exceptionally harsh treatment,  violating US Bureau of Prisons regulations – prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, disability, or political beliefs.

Countless numbers of political prisoners in America and abroad endure unlawful cruel and unusual punishment.

Maria Butina is one of a number of Russian nationals unlawfully incarcerated in America as political prisoners.

RT said her mistreatment amounts to “borderline torture.” Falsely charged with operating as unregistered Russian agent, she’s been unlawfully detained since mid-July under harsh conditions.

She was moved from a Washington facility to an Alexandria, VA prison without warning or explanation.

Before transfer, she “was subjected to a ‘degrading full strip search,’ and all her (possessions) were taken away, including books, shoes, towels and other hygiene items,” RT explained.

She’s isolated in “administrative segregation.” After visiting her, Russia’s embassy sent an official protest to the State Department.

A separate one accused the Trump regime of “cruel and inhumane treatment,” including frequent humiliating strip searches.

While awaiting unwarranted trial, Butina has been subjected to “psychological pressure and humiliation,” including isolation and sleep deprivation, aiming “to break her will,” brutalizing her to confess to the false charge against her.

Her lawyer said brutality in confinement harmed her health, proper medical care denied her.

Russia’s embassy equated her mistreatment to earlier Salem witch trials in America. She remains “determin(ed) to prove her innocence,” the embassy said.

She’s one of countless numbers of political prisoners in America’s global gulag – operating at home and abroad.

*

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

When Turkish diplomats pencilled this week’s conference in Ankara into their diaries, little did they know it would be the epicentre of a dramatic diplomatic and economic crisis.

They arrived in the big luxury hotel in the centre of capital city on Sunday, and one day later they saw the country’s currency hit an all-time low against the US dollar.

Though the lira subsequently steadied, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan‘s rhetoric against the United States did not, accusing the Nato ally of stabbing his country in the back by doubling key tariffs in response to Turkey’s refusal to free US pastor Andrew Brunson.

Attending the week-long conference – dubbed “Enterprising and Humanitarian Foreign Policy in the Presidential System of Government” – they listened to briefings by many of Turkey’s ministers and also by the chairmen of some trade organisations, in a big hall surrounded by dozens of security guards.

After all the presentations, reflected on the big screen in the windowless hall, around 250 ambassadors were given a 10-minute break. That’s when they went out of the hall and, while having a cup of coffee, exchanged views on the issues they were dealing with.

That smaller hall was surrounded by foreign ministry employees in addition to the security guards, to prevent any journalists or any hotel guests entering it. Behind the big glass door, you could see the ambassadors from the same regions gathering together to discuss their country’s policies on that specific region. Or sometimes old friends from very different points of the world got together, hugging each other and chatting to catch up.

In another part of the hall, you could see a recently appointed young ambassador asking questions to her predecessor.

They spent most of their week in the big hall, sitting next to old colleagues, listening to new foreign and economy policies. For the ambassadors attending the conference, it has been a front-row seat to a nail-biting moment in Turkish history, and many had a thing or two to say about the crisis, under condition of anonymity.

Turkish diplomats attend a wreath-laying ceremony in Ankara (MFA)

One of the calmer envoys said that economic and diplomatic crises are bound to arise from time to time, and reminded Middle East Eye that it was their job to solve them.

However, the conduct of US President Donald Trump, who has not shied away from a confrontational approach to the crisis, seemed to ruffle some feathers.

 “Trump’s attitude doesn’t help,” he said.

In fact, according to the diplomat, representatives from many countries told each other that they were worried by the US president’s hardline approach to diplomacy.

“In the country I work, officials told me Trump has bigger problems with their leader, and they are just waiting for him to target their country.”

Another Turkish ambassador was keen to highlight that the economy has been signalling a downturn for a while due to the large amount of international debt.

“It would be wrong to see Trump as the only reason, but of course we cannot deny the fact that he is attacking our already worsening economy,” he said. “But Trump’s tone is not helping, he is closing the ways for diplomacy.”

However, he stressed, such attacks from the White House would do little if better economic policies had been pursued.

His colleague, an ambassador working in a Western country, agreed:

“We need to cool down the tension with the US first for a relief in our economy. And this is only possible through diplomatic channels. But the heated statements are damaging these channels and making it even harder to turn back where we started.”

Not all the diplomats placed the blame on Trump or previous fiscal issues. One believes the largest problem is the expenses caused by Ankara’s entanglement in the Syrian war to the south.

“I think the financial problems started with the wide-ranging military operations in Syria. I am not discussing if they were necessary or not, I am only saying we spent big. And now, with the crisis with the US, the economy is getting worse,” he said.

The experienced diplomat was also concerned about the refugees in the country.

“In such periods of economic crisis, people might look for somebody to blame and it would easily be the refugees in the country. I hope the refugees, especially the Syrians, won’t be affected by this crisis,” added the ambassador.

Positives

Not all the envoys MEE spoke to had words of doom and gloom to offer.

One, who used to work in one of Turkey’s high-level economic councils, avoided giving any opinions altogether, saying only:

“I am hopeful it will get better. They [the Turkish government] actually know what they need to do.”

Another, who is assigned to a European country, even saw positives in the crisis.

“The crisis with Trump helped us to ease the tensions with Europe, and now we are getting closer. Not only do they want a stable Turkish economy, they are now open for more defence and security cooperation.”

He also said that the European countries which have been critical of Turkey’s purchase of an air-defence system from Russia see that now as an issue of  minor importance.

For one Turkish diplomat, the most important thing was that everyone pulls together and helps take their country out of this economic mess.

“It’s getting harder for us to tell the business people in our countries that the Turkish economy is solid and Turkey is still safe to invest in. But we have to keep doing this because when any of them talk about recession scenarios the lira is being affected,” he said.

“We have to work hard to prevent this kind of talk. And this crisis should be solved as soon as possible.”

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

The Turkish government has made the decision to repatriate all of its gold reserves that are currently housed in the US Federal Reserve System (FRS). Overall Turkey was storing 220 tonnes, valued at $25.3 billion, in the US, which it repossessed on April 19, 2018.

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has toughened his stance against the US dollar (USD), declaring that international loans should be made in gold instead of the American currency. Ankara is seeking to reduce dependence on the US financial system. The gold’s homecoming was partly prompted by the US threats to impose sanctions if Turkey goes through with the signed deal to purchase Russian S-400 missile defense systems.

This is a dramatic move reflecting an international trend. Venezuela repatriated its gold from the US in 2012. In 2014, the Netherlands also retrieved its 122.5 tonnes of gold that were stored in US vaults. Germany brought home 300 metric tonnes of gold stashed in the United States in 2017. It took Berlin four years to complete the transfers. Austria and Belgium have reviewed the possibility of taking similar measures.

Few people believe the US Treasury’s assurances that the 261 million ounces (roughly 8,100 tonnes) in official gold reserves that are stored in Fort Knox and other places are fully audited and accounted for. The Federal Reserve has never been fully and independently audited. The pressure for a full, independent audit of all US gold reserves has always been resisted by the government and in Congress. Nobody knows if the gold is really there. What if the vaults turn out to be empty? It’s wiser to bring your gold home while you can, rather than to just keep on wondering.

The gold bars that the US claims to hold are of low purity and do not conform to international industry standards. Even if the US has the amount of gold it claims to have, most of it would not be acceptable for trading on the international market. While other countries are pulling their gold out of the FRS banks, Russia and China are boosting their reserves, creating gold-backed currencies for themselves and thus moving the world away from the dominance of the USD.

The US dollar’s status as the global reserve currency has been called into question. It faces some tough competition. The tariffs introduced by the US administration as an instrument of coercion against other countries are failing to bolster the greenback, which may soon face headwinds. An international currency war looms as a possibility. This makes investors look for other options. Indeed, why should other countries rely on a US dollar that is not backed by gold or anything but “the good faith and credit of the American worker,” when America itself is not trusted internationally?

For instance, the Chinese yuan is going strong. Russia, Turkey, and Iran are considering the prospects for making payments in their national currencies. Iran has recently announced it is switching from the dollar to the euro as its official reporting currency. Russia and China have a currency swap agreement that avoids settlements in the USD.

The quest to reduce dependence on the dollar was provoked by the ongoing use of sanctions as a political weapon, a kind of foreign-policy tool of choice. Even America’s closest allies are threatened by these restrictive measures. The recent attack on the Nord Stream 2 gas project is a good example. It’s only natural for other countries to be looking for ways to resist the US policy of twisting arms. Using alternative currencies and bringing gold home are ways to do that.

America has always opposed such efforts. Any methods would do. Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, was toppled and killed after he came up with the idea to introduce a golden dinar to be used as an international currency in the Middle East and Africa. Iran has recently banned the use of the USD in trade. It refuses to sell its oil for the US currency. President Trump is likely to kill the Iran deal in May, provoking Tehran into reviving its nuclear program.

An armed conflict with Iran might be much closer than generally believed. The nuclear deal has been honored, to everyone’s satisfaction but to Washington’s chagrin. Iran undoubtedly has no military capability that would be a threat to the US. It has never been responsible for any terrorist acts committed abroad or things like that. But it has done something unforgivable in the eyes of the US. It has threatened the USD. That’s what Washington cannot accept, because if it does not support the dollar, there will be problems financing the US government’s huge federal debt. A war with Iran would eliminate the largest non-USD oil exporter. One thing leads to another. The gold repatriations are a precursor to a currency war and armed conflict. That’s what drives US foreign policy.

*

Peter Korzun is an expert on wars and conflicts.

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Featured image: A view of the Gran Chaco as it naturally appears in Paraguay. Photo by Ilosuna licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 1.0 Generic license.

The Gran Chaco ecosystem is in trouble, though the threats to this biodiverse region have been little publicized. This vast semi-arid subtropical plain covers 1.28 million square kilometers (494,210 square miles) and encompasses parts of Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia and a tiny portion of Brazil.

It is home to an estimated 3,400 plant species, 500 birds, 150 mammals and 220 reptiles and amphibians, as well as threatened wildlife including jaguars, giant anteaters, the Southern Three-banded Armadillo (Tolypeutes matacus), and the Endangered Chaco Side-necked turtle (Acanthochelys pallidipectoris).

Bounded to the west by the Andes Mountains, and to the east by the Brazilian Plateau, this immense plain was once covered in grasslands, wet palm savannahs, upland and dry thorn forest. But soy producers and global commodities traders recently moved in, bringing massive deforestation, and destroying the rich biodiversity and ways of life of local indigenous peoples.

Gran Chaco ecosystem devastated to make way for soy fields. Image by Jim Wickens, Ecostorm via Mighty Earth.

South American deforestation provides EU with meat

Much of the soy grown in the Gran Chaco — a word that means vast “hunting territory” in the Quechua indigenous language — is destined for the European market, the second biggest global consumer of the oily bean after China.

The European Union (EU) imports 97 percent of the soy it consumes. In 2016, it bought 46.8 million tons in total, with 27.8 million tons, or 59.4 percent, imported from South America, according to the English think tank Chatham House. The figures for 2017 are not yet available.

Last year, a team from Mighty Earth, an environmental NGO, traveled 4,200 kilometers (more than 2,600 miles) through the Argentinean and Paraguayan Gran Chaco to determine “how soy raised for European animal feed drives deforestation in two of the leading South American soy-producing countries.”

Their overall finding is summarized in the title of their recent report “The Avoidable Crisis.” The NGO’s analysis shows that the Gran Chaco needn’t be sacrificed for the sake of industrial agribusiness or to feed European poultry. Rather, much of the remaining native vegetation could be protected with less than a million dollar investment, according to Mighty Earth.

The Bolivian Gran Chaco and the Brazilian Cerrado were the subject of previous research by the Washington, D.C.-based Mighty Earth, with findings published in February 2017 in a report called the “Ultimate Mystery Meat.” That document identified deforestation and cleared land totaling 697,592 hectares (2,693 square miles) in the Brazilian Cerrado between 2011 and 2015 associated with the transnational trading companies Bunge and Cargill. In Bolivia’s Gran Chaco, 289,000 hectares (1,115 square miles) were deforested on average per year between 2010 and 2015, according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) are the most active traders in that country.

The NGO’s reports identify transnational commodities firms as the key drivers of deforestation in these regions:

“In addition to their role in trade, these companies also play a more direct role in driving ecosystem conversion by providing [soy] plantation owners with financing, fertilizer, infrastructure, and other incentives for new deforestation to expand their supply base.”

Anahita Yousefi, Mighty Earth’s Latin America campaign director, told Mongabay:

 “Very little attention has been given to areas such as the Gran Chaco. Without public scrutiny, many of the same companies that have committed to protecting the forest and respecting human rights in the Amazon are operating in the Gran Chaco without safeguarding local communities or wildlife.”

In the foreground, land in Argentina cleared for a soy plantation; in the background, more forest burns to make way for more soy, for which there is a tremendous global demand. Image by Jim Wickens, Ecostorm via Mighty Earth.

An EU supply chain with deforestation as its first link

Yousefi said that Mighty Earth is in dialogue with some of the traders mentioned in the report (which also include Wilmar International and the Louis Dreyfus Company), and has written letters to major marketing companies in Germany and France, but noted that most of these firms have not been proactive in preventing deforestation.

“Although many state that they have sustainability policies for their soy, most fail to be able to even track where it comes from,” she added.

The soy grown in the Gran Chaco and Cerrado doesn’t flow directly into the bellies of European consumers, she explained.

“While the chickens, pigs, and cows that [producers] sell are normally raised in Europe, the feed consumed by the livestock often comes from thousands of miles away [in South America]. As such, the locally grown labeling [on EU pork, beef and chicken] only represents half the truth about the origins of this meat.”

This is the case with the English retailer Marks & Spencer, among others, who have a history of buying EU grown meats fed on foreign soy. The company’s food department attests on its website:

“From corned beef to fillet steak, every single piece of beef that M&S sells has two things in common – it can be traced back to the farm and animal it came from AND it is British.”

English fast food restaurants and grocery chains, including Tesco, Morrisons and McDonald’s, successfully helped pressure Cargill and other transnational commodities companies to stop sourcing soy from newly deforested land in the Amazon in 2006. However, they still buy their chicken from Cargill, which feeds its poultry with imported soy, much of it apparently coming from the Bolivian Amazon, the Cerrado and the Gran Chaco — areas rapidly being deforested for new soy plantations.

Starting in 2017, a voluntary Cerrado Manifesto Statement of Support (SoS) was signed by many EU and U.S. supermarkets and fast food chains, including McDonalds, Walmart, Marks & Spencer and Unilever, that proposes the elimination of soy producers who cause deforestation from their supply chains. However, large commodities firms such as Cargill, Bunge, and ADM have yet to sign the SoS.

Stark comparison between Gran Chaco native vegetation (right) and forest burned during conversion to soy planting (left). Image by Jim Wickens, Ecostorm via Mighty Earth.

The promise of sustainability

Contacted by Mongabay, Marks & Spencer, along with the German supermarket chain Aldi Süd and France’s Carrefour did not respond to interview requests. Carrefour informs through its website that:

“soya is frequently imported from Brazil, where it is one of the causes of deforestation” while “The Group’s policy on forests sets out to ensure the sustainable management of soya,… giving priority to… Non-GMO soya for Carrefour’s ‘fed on GMO-free feed’ animal product brand.”

Mighty Earth, however, found little evidence of sustainable growing practices. In their investigation, they determined that

“soy grown [in the Gran Chaco] is genetically modified and requires vast amounts of chemical fertilizers and toxic pesticides like the herbicide glyphosate [produced by Monsanto and known as Roundup. These chemicals] are transforming the Chaco. Waterways have become polluted, and local community members report a surge in birth defects, cancers and respiratory illnesses.”

Aldi Süd, with stores in several European countries, the United States and Australia, maintains a sustainability page on its website, but it doesn’t say how it tackles the soy deforestation and chemical fertilizer and pesticides problem.

These giant retailers belong to the largest single business sector in Europe, the food and beverage industry, with sales of over € 1 trillion (US $1.14 trillion) in 2016. In order to constantly supply their shelves with meat and dairy goods, livestock producers in Germany, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Spain and England all buy foreign soy, mainly from Cargill and Bunge, which, in turn, are increasing their presence in the Gran Chaco.

A tractor clears still smoldering burned forest in the Gran Chaco, Argentina. Image by Jim Wickens, Ecostorm via Mighty Earth.

“In several places [in the Gran Chaco] where deforestation was occurring, the farmers we interviewed said they sold to these two traders. Although competitors like Louis Dreyfus Company and Wilmar International have expressed willingness to extend the Brazilian [Amazon Soy Moratorium’s] success across South America, Cargill and Bunge have bitterly resisted efforts to expand deforestation-free production,” according to Mighty Earth.

“ADM operates in regions that are less exposed to deforestation, but has recently backtracked on its previous support for industry-wide conservation measures. ADM has told Mighty Earth that they’ve resisted action because they ‘don’t want to break ranks’ with their competitors – prioritizing industry solidarity over both the environment and fair marketplace competition,” said the NGO.

Contacted by Mongabay, Susan Burns, Bunge’s director of global media relations and agribusiness communications, stated:

“Our first priority is applying our commitment to eliminate deforestation from our supply chains globally. Our plan is public and we are reporting on our progress transparently. We are also working alongside SoS [Cerrado Manifesto] signatory companies, peers, NGOs and others in the Cerrado Working Group, which is focused on achieving collective agreement on how to eliminate deforestation and go even further.”

Cargill also responded to Mongabay’s questions regarding Gran Chaco and Cerrado deforestation via email:

“Cargill supports the goal of eliminating deforestation in South America. We agree with the intent of the Cerrado Manifesto and support the Cerrado Working Group’s (GTC) commitment to end the conversion of natural habitats in the Cerrado in the shortest amount of time considering the social and economic realities of the region.”

Cargill continued:

“It is imperative that we balance forest protection with inclusive growth and sustainable development. Solutions for forest protection must also promote farmers’ economic livelihoods, community wellbeing, indigenous rights, and global food security needs.”

Importantly,

“Cargill and the GTC itself believes that a moratorium on soy in the Cerrado isn’t the answer.  A moratorium risks driving further agricultural expansion – and deforestation – into new areas. We need the buy-in of all local stakeholders as part of an effective land use planning process. We participate in the GTC with the World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace and other partners to identify local, broad-based, solutions.”

ADM did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

Illegal forest clearance in the Gran Chaco as seen from the air in Argentina. Image by Jim Wickens, Ecostorm via Mighty Earth.

Can the Gran Chaco be saved?

An article published in the journal Science in February 2017, “Forest Conservation: Remember Gran Chaco,” summarizes the state of the world’s largest continuous dry forest: “This region is a global deforestation hotspot. Yet, only 9 percent of the Gran Chaco is currently protected. For these reasons, the Gran Chaco is one of the most threatened ecoregions worldwide.”

Faced with destruction by industrial agribusiness, this little known South American region is not just biodiverse. It is also home to numerous indigenous groups, including the Ayoreo, Chamacoco, Enxet, Maka’a, Nandeva and Wichi. Unfortunately for these indigenous communities, and for the region’s unique flora and fauna, there seems to be little movement toward conservation by agribusiness, commodities traders, or national governments in South America and Europe.

Mighty Earth asserts that protecting the Gran Chaco would be relatively inexpensive:

“Technical experts administering a successful system that has virtually eliminated deforestation for soy in the Brazilian Amazon estimate that extending forest monitoring to other soy growing regions in Latin America, including the Gran Chaco, would cost only [between] US $750,000 and US$ 1,000,000 to establish.” That seems like a small price to pay to help make South American soy, and the soy supply chain, more sustainable and to preserve the unique people, plants and animals of the Gran Chaco.

Bulldozers clear Gran Chaco forest. Home to an estimated 3,400 plant species, 500 bird, 150 mammal, and 220 reptile and amphibian species, the Gran Chaco is fast being converted to soy. Image by Jim Wickens, Ecostorm via Mighty Earth.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

After 17 bloody years, the longest war in US history continues without relent or purpose in Afghanistan.

There, a valiant, fiercely-independent people, the Pashtun (Pathan) mountain tribes, have battled the full  might of the US Empire to a stalemate that has so far cost American taxpayers $4 trillion, and 2,371 dead and 20,320 wounded soldiers.  No one knows how many Afghans have died. The number is kept secret.

Pashtun tribesmen in the Taliban alliance and their allies are fighting to oust all foreign troops from Afghanistan and evict the western-imposed and backed puppet regime in Kabul that pretends to be the nation’s legitimate government.  Withdraw foreign troops and the Kabul regime would last for only days.

The whole thing smells of the Vietnam War.  Lessons so painfully learned by America in that conflict have been completely forgotten and the same mistakes repeated.  The lies and happy talk from politicians, generals and media continue apace.

This week, Taliban forces occupied the important strategic city of Ghazni on the road from Peshawar to Kabul.  It took three days and massive air attacks by US B-1 heavy bombers, Apache helicopter gun ships, A-10 ground attack aircraft, and massed warplanes from US bases in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Qatar and the 5^th US Fleet to finally drive back the Taliban assault.  Taliban also overran key military targets in Kabul and the countryside, killing hundreds of government troops in a sort of Afghan Tet offensive.

Afghan regime police and army units put up feeble resistance or ran away.   Parts of Ghazni were left in ruins.  It was a huge embarrassment to the US imperial generals and their Afghan satraps who had claimed ‘the corner in Afghanistan has finally been turned.’

Efforts by the Trump administration to bomb Taliban into submission have clearly failed.   US commanders fear using American ground troops in battle lest they suffer serious casualties.  Meanwhile, the US is running low on bombs.

Roads are now so dangerous for the occupiers that most movement must be by air.  Taliban is estimated to permanently control almost 50% of Afghanistan.  That number would rise to 100% were it not for omnipresent US air power.  Taliban rules the night.

Taliban are not and never were ‘terrorists’ as Washington’s war propaganda falsely claimed.  I was there at the creation of the movement – a group of Afghan religious students armed by Pakistan whose goal was to stop post-civil war banditry, the mass rape of women, and to fight the Afghan Communists.  When Taliban gained power, it eliminated 95% of the rampant Afghanistan opium-heroin trade. After the US invaded, allied to the old Afghan Communists and northern Tajik tribes, opium-heroin production soared to record levels.  Today, US-occupied Afghanistan is the world’s largest producer of opium, morphine and heroin.

US occupation authorities claim drug production is run by Taliban.  This is another big lie.  The Afghan warlords who support the regime of President Ashraf Ghani entirely control the production and export of drugs.  The army and secret police get a big cut.  How else would trucks packed with drugs get across the border into Pakistan and Central Asia?

The United States has inadvertently become one of the world’s leading drug dealers.  This is one of the most shameful legacies of the Afghan War.  But just one.  Watching the world’s greatest power bomb and ravage little Afghanistan, a nation so poor that some of its people can’t afford sandals, is a huge dishonor for Americans.

Even so, the Pashtun defeated the invading armies of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, the Mogul Emperors and the mighty British Raj.  The US looks to be next in the Graveyard of Empires.

Nobody in Washington can enunciate a good reason for continuing the colonial war in Afghanistan.  One hears talk of minerals, women’s rights and democracy as a pretext for keeping US forces in Afghanistan. All nonsense.  A possible real reason is to deny influence over Afghanistan, though the Chinese are too smart to grab this poisoned cup.  They have more than enough with their rebellious Uighur Muslims.

Interestingly, the so-called ‘terrorist training camps’ supposedly found in Afghanistan in 2001 were actually guerilla training camps run by Pakistani intelligence to train Kashmiri rebels and CIA-run camps for exiled Uighur fighters from China.

The canard that the US had to invade Afghanistan to get at Osama bin Laden, alleged author of the 9/11 attacks, is untrue.  The attacks were made by Saudis and mounted from Hamburg and Madrid, not Afghanistan.  I’m not even sure bin Laden was behind the attacks.

My late friend and journalist Arnaud de Borchgrave shared my doubts and insisted that the Taliban leader Mullah Omar offered to turn bin Laden over to a court in a Muslim nation to prove his guilt or innocence.

President George Bush, caught sleeping on guard duty and humiliated, had to find an easy target for revenge – and that was Afghanistan.

by Michel Chossudovsky

ISBN Number: 9780973714715

List Price: $24.95

click here to order

Special Price: $18.00

In this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky’s 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by “Islamic terrorists”.  Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.

According to Chossudovsky, the  “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

This article was first published in October 2017

The shift in political and military alliances is not limited to Turkey, a profound shift in geopolitical alliances is occurring which tends to undermine US hegemony in the broader Middle East Central Asian region as well as in South Asia. 

Several of America’s staunchest allies have “changed sides”. Both NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are in crisis. 

Turkey and NATO

NATO is characterized by profound divisions,  largely resulting from Ankara’s confrontation with Washington.

Turkey –which constitutes NATO’s heavyweight– is now fighting US-supported Kurdish rebels in northern Syria, –i.e  the US which is member of NATO is supporting and financing Kurdish rebels who are fighting a NATO member state.

While Turkey formally remains a member of NATO –which has an integrated and coordinated air defense system–, the Erdogan government has purchased Russia’s S400 air defense system which is slated to be used against America’s Kurdish proxies in Northern Syria.

A NATO member state is now using the air defense system of an enemy of US-NATO against US-NATO supported rebels.

In turn, Turkey has dispatched troops to Northern Syria with a view to eventually annexing part of Syria’s territory. In turn, Moscow and Ankara have established an alliance of convenience.

Israel is a firm supporter of the formation of a Kurdish state in Iraq and Northern Syria, which is considered as a stepping stone to the formation of Greater Israel.  Tel Aviv is considering the relocation from Israel of more than 200,000 Jewish ethnic Kurds to the Kurdistan region of Iraq.

In turn the bilateral military cooperation agreement between Turkey and Israel is in jeopardy. Needless to say these developments have also led to the reinforcement of US-Israeli military cooperation including the setting up of a US military base in Israel.

Meanwhile, Turkey  has established closer links with Iran, which ultimately contributes to undermining US-NATO strategies in the broader Middle East.

The New Middle East

Washington’s strategy consists in destabilizing and weakening regional economic powers in the Middle East including Turkey and Iran. This policy is also accompanied by a process of political fragmentation (see map below)

Since the Gulf war (1991), the Pentagon has contemplated the creation of a “Free Kurdistan” which would include the annexation of  parts of Iraq, Syria and Iran as well as Turkey (see US military academy map below). 

Under these circumstances, will Turkey remain an active member of NATO?

Ralph Peters Map: The Project for the New Middle East

Qatar and Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia’s economic blockade directed against Qatar has created a rift in geopolitical alliances which has served to weaken the US in the Persian Gulf.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is profoundly divided, with the UAE and Bahrain siding with Saudi Arabia against Qatar. In turn Qatar has the support of Oman and Kuwait. Needless to say, the GCC which until recently was America’s staunchest Middle East ally against Iran is in total disarray.

While the largest US military base in the Middle East is located in Qatar, the Qatari government has close links to Iran. Moreover, Tehran came to its rescue in the immediate wake of the Saudi blockade.

While US Central Command (USCENTCOM) has it’s headquarters at a US military base outside Doha, Qatar’s main partner in the oil and gas industry including pipelines is Iran. In turn, both Russia and China are actively involved in the Qatari oil and gas industry.

Iran and Qatar cooperate actively in the extraction of  maritime natural gas under a joint Qatar-Iran ownership structure. These maritime gas fields are strategic, they constitute the World’s largest maritime gas reserves located in the Persian Gulf.

In other words, while actively cooperating with Iran, Qatar has a military cooperation agreement with the US, which in practice is directed against Iran. US Central Command based in Qatar is responsible for military operations against enemies of  US-NATO including Iran, which happens to be Qatar’s main partner in the oil and gas industry. The structure of these cross-cutting alliances is contradictory. Will the US Seek regime change in Qatar?

Meanwhile, Turkey has established a military base in Qatar.

These new alignments also have a direct bearing on oil and gas pipeline routes. Qatar has abandoned the pipeline route project through Saudi Arabia and Jordan (initially sponsored by Turkey) in favor of the Iran based pipeline route out of Asuleyeh through Iran, Iraq and Syria, which is supported by Russia.

Russia’s geopolitical control over gas pipelines going to Europe has been reinforced as a result of the Saudi blockade.

In turn, Qatar is also slated to integrate the pipeline routes linking Iran to Pakistan and China via Iran’s port of Asaluyeh.

Pakistan, India and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)

Another major shift in geopolitical relations has occurred, which has a profound impact on US hegemony in both Central and South Asia.

On June 9, 2017, both India and Pakistan became simultaneously members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Eurasian economic, political and mutual security organization largely dominated by China and Russia. Needless to say, the membership of India and Pakistan in the SCO affects their military cooperation agreements with the US.

While the SCO with headquarters in Beijing is not officially a “military alliance”, it nonetheless serves as a geopolitical and strategic “counterweight” to US-NATO and its allies. In the course of the last few years, the SCO has extended its cooperation in military affairs and intelligence. War games were held under the auspices of the SCO.

With Pakistan and India as full members, the SCO now encompasses an extensive region which now comprises approximately half of the World’s population.

SCO Enlargement

The simultaneous instatement of both countries as full members of the SCO is not only symbolic, it marks a historic shift in geopolitical alignments, which has a de facto bearing on the structure of economic and military agreements. Moreover, it has also a bearing on the inner-conflict between India and Pakistan which dates back to the countries’ Independence.

Inevitably, this historic shift constitutes a blow against Washington, which has defense and trade agreements with both Pakistan and India.

While India remains firmly aligned with Washington, America’s political stranglehold on Pakistan (through military and intelligence agreements) has been weakened as a result of Pakistan’s trade and investment deals with China, not to mention the accession of both India and Pakistan to the SCO, which favors bilateral relations between both countries as well as cooperation with Russia, China and Central Asia at the expense of  their historical links with US.

In other words, this enlargement of the SCO weakens America’s hegemonic ambitions in both South Asia and the broader Eurasian region. It also has a bearing on energy pipeline routes, transport corridors, borders and mutual security, maritime rights.

With the development of Pakistan’s bilateral relations with China, since 2007, the US clutch on Pakistan politics — which largely relied on America’s military presence as well as Washington’s links to Pakistan’s military-intelligence establishment– has indelibly been weakened.

Pakistan’s full membership of the SCO, its links with China and Iran should contribute to reinforcing the powers of the Islamabad government.

Concluding Remarks

History tells us that the structure of political alliances is fundamental.

What is unfolding is a series of contradictory cross-cutting coalitions both “with” the US as well “against” the US.

We are witnessing shifts in political and military alliances which largely contribute to weakening US hegemony in Asia and the Middle East.

Is Turkey intent upon opting out of NATO? It’s bilateral relationship with Washington is in disarray.

Meanwhile, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) which constitutes America’s staunchest ally in the Middle East is no longer functional. Qatar has not only aligned itself with Iran, it is actively cooperating with Russia.

In turn, America’s bilateral military cooperation agreements with both Pakistan and India are also affected following the accession of both countries to the SCO, which constitutes a de facto military alliance dominated by China and Russia.

The Globalization of War is undoubtedly one of the most important books on the contemporary global situation produced in recent years. 

In his latest masterpiece, Professor Michel Chossudovsky shows how the various conflicts we are witnessing today in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and Palestine are in fact inter-linked and inter-locked through a single-minded agenda in pursuit of global hegemony helmed by the United States and buttressed by its allies in the West and in other regions of the world.   Dr Chandra Muzaffar, President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST)

The Globalization of War: America’s “Long War” against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

The Book can be ordered directly from Global Research Publishers. 

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Bridges are the great symbols of human connection. They suggest a certain animal pride in the human race, a technological capacity to trick, and even subordinate nature.  Across ravines, rivers and bodies of space, the bridge suggests the raising and linking of the miraculous, a suspension that facilitates contact and speed.  They also suggest power, triumph, and continuity.

Little wonder then, that such disasters as the collapse of the Morandi Bridge in Genoa on August 14 cripple pride and shock the senses.  On this occasion, nature was not going to be tricked.  A storm did its work, and duly brought down a 100 metre section of the viaduct, inaugurated in 1967, with ferociously lethal consequences.  Decades of maintenance had failed to stem the fall, and 35 cars and heavier vehicles plummeted some 45 metres below. This beast of Italian structural engineering was gone.

Almost 40 people are dead, several lie in critical condition and more bodies promise to be found.  In the words of fire fighter Stefano Zanut,

“We are trying to find points where we can penetrate these incredibly heavy slabs.  Then the earthmoving equipment moves in to create a passageway where dogs can enter.”

The Italian government duly blamed the operator of the viaduct, Autostrade per l’Italia, promising mild retribution in the form of stripping contracts and revoking operating licenses.

“It is the company that holds the license who is responsible for maintenance and safety,” explained Transport Minister Danilo Toninelli, an observation that suggested more than a hint of hand washing of responsibility.  “If a bridge like this one collapsed it means this maintenance hasn’t been carried out.”

The process of revocation began over the weekend, with Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte promising in a statement that the government had “formally sent to Autostrade per l’Italia the letter of complaint that launches the process of revoking the concession.”  The company, for its part, is claiming that it did all that was necessary to ensure monitoring “with highly specialised technology.”

But the broader picture was hard to ignore: creaking infrastructure is back on the cards, and various agents are being viewed as catalysts.  Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has issued an irate order to the company to pay 500 million euros to assist the families and local government.  In a move that suggests that the horse has all too readily bolted, the Ministry of Infrastructure will be given more intrusive powers of monitoring and inspection and compel motorway operators to shift more profits from their enterprise towards safety and maintenance.

A number of the grieving families of the dead showed little interest in participating in a state funeral duly run in the hall in Genoa on Saturday.  They have pointed fingers in fury at state authorities who have all too readily divested their obligations on safety, favouring the good graces of the private sector.

“It is the state who has provoked this; let them show their faces, the parade of politicians is shameful,” came the remarks of one aggrieved mother, whose views of resigned fury were noted in La Stampa.

Where there is crisis, there are those willing to speculate and exploit.  Crisis breeds chances and prospects.  Large dollops of blame are being handed out to a range of players, much of it done with calculated effect.  More reactionary elements of the British press, ever keen to suggest traces of primitive provincialism in Italy, suggested that the mafia might have had a hand in it, notably in its link to using an inferior form of cement known as “cemento depotenziato”.  No hard evidence has been adduced on that specific connection in the Genoa disaster, but that hardly stops speculation from flapping its wings.

Rescue workers are seen at the collapsed Morandi Bridge in the Italian port city of Genoa (Source: PBS)

Italian authorities have also found their handy alibi: spending constraints stemming from Brussels in the name of budgetary prudence.  Salvini is certainly convinced, linking the bridge collapse in Genoa to EU budget rules.

“If external constraints prevent us from spending to have safe roads and schools, then it really calls into question whether it makes sense to follow these rules.”

Ever sniffing a populist chance, Salvini insisted that there could be “no trade-off between fiscal rules and the safety of Italians.”

The EU budget commissioner, Günther Oettinger, dismissed Salvini’s remarks as being “very human”, which was another way of claiming he was being erringly foolish.

“It is very human to look for somebody to blame,” he tweeted with dripping condescension, in the face of such disasters.

Nor could the EU be accused of being miserly on the issue of funding.  It had already forked out some 2.5 billion euros to fund Italian roads and trains for the current budgetary cycle.

Commission spokesperson Christian Spahr felt a need to issue a clarification over the remarks of the interior minister.

“Under agreed fiscal rules, member states are free to set specific policy priorities, for instance, the development and maintenance of infrastructure.”

The Commission had also been generous, approving in April 2018 “under European state aid rules an investment plan for Italian motorways.”

The shoe, came the implication, was actually on the other foot.  Indigenous factors had come into play.  Italy needed to ensure that infrastructure such as motorways needed to be monitored and inspected on a regular basis.  Neither Salvini nor his populist ally Luigi Di Maio of the Five Star Movement, have much time for such paperwork niceties. A point worth noting here is that the Five Star Movement citizen’s committee in Genoa had declared, in an April 2013 release, that any potential collapse of the Morandi bridge was the stuff of fairy tales.  For them, the EU looms like a chiding, despotic behemoth, dictating budgetary rules of prudence that have duly sacrificed efforts to keep Italian infrastructure in good hands.

On the home front, the Italian government will be facing a bind.  Autostrade is hardly going out of pocket, nor will it do so without a fight.  Cancellation of the license will result in compensation – some 20 billion euros is one estimate.  Where infrastructure fails, death might ensue, but money payments will always follow.  In the meantime, the problems of funding ailing infrastructure will continue to give the government profound headaches.  The battle over irresponsibility will continue to be fought.

*

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Email: [email protected]

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Financial injections by Qatar and possibly China may resolve Turkey’s immediate economic crisis, aggravated by a politics-driven trade war with the United States, but are unlikely to resolve the country’s structural problems, fuelled by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s counterintuitive interest rate theories.

The latest crisis in Turkey’s boom-bust economy raises questions about a development model in which countries like China and Turkey witness moves towards populist rule of one man who encourages massive borrowing to drive economic growth.

It’s a model minus the one-man rule that could be repeated in Pakistan as newly sworn-in prime minister Imran Khan, confronted with a financial crisis, decides whether to turn to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or rely on China and Saudi Arabia for relief.

Pakistan, like Turkey, has over the years frequently knocked on the IMF’s doors, failing to have turned crisis into an opportunity for sustained restructuring and reform of the economy. Pakistan could in the next weeks be turning to the IMF for the 13^th time, Turkey, another serial returnee, has been there 18 times.

In Turkey and China, the debt-driven approach sparked remarkable economic growth with living standards being significantly boosted and huge numbers of people being lifted out of poverty. Yet, both countries with Turkey more exposed, given its greater vulnerability to the swings and sensitivities of international financial markets, are witnessing the limitations of the approach.

So are, countries along China’s Belt and Road, including Pakistan, that leaped head over shoulder into the funding opportunities made available to them and now see themselves locked into debt traps that in the case of Sri Lanka and Djibouti have forced them to effectively turn over to China control of critical national infrastructure or like Laos that have become almost wholly dependent on China because it owns the bulk of their unsustainable debt.

The fact that China may be more prepared to deal with the downside of debt-driven development does little to make its model sustainable or for that matter one that other countries would want to emulate unabridged and has sent some like Malaysia and Myanmar scrambling to resolve or avert an economic crisis.

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad is in China after suspending US$20 billion worth of Beijing-linked infrastructure contracts, including a high-speed rail line to Singapore, concluded by his predecessor, Najib Razak, who is fighting corruption charges.

Mr. Mahathir won elections in May on a campaign that asserted that Mr. Razak had ceded sovereignty to China by agreeing to Chinese investments that failed to benefit the country and threaten to drown it in debt.

Myanmar is negotiating a significant scaling back of a Chinese-funded port project on the Bay of Bengal from one that would cost US$ 7.3 billion to a more modest development that would cost US$1.3 billion in a bid to avoid shouldering an unsustainable debt.

Debt-driven growth could also prove to be a double-edged sword for China itself even if it is far less dependent than others on imports, does not run a chronic trade deficit, and doesn’t have to borrow heavily in dollars.

With more than half the increase in global debt over the past decade having been issued as domestic loans in China, China’s risk, said Ruchir Sharma, Morgan Stanley’s Chief Global Strategist and head of Emerging Markets Equity, is capital fleeing to benefit from higher interest rates abroad.

“Right now Chinese can earn the same interest rates in the United States for a lot less risk, so the motivation to flee is high, and will grow more intense as the Fed raises rates further,” Mr. Sharma said referring to the US Federal Reserve.

Mr. Erdogan has charged that the United States abetted by traitors and foreigners are waging economic warfare against Turkey, using a strong dollar as ”the bullets, cannonballs and missiles.”

Rejecting economic theory and wisdom, Mr. Erdogan has sought for years to fight an alleged ‘interest rate lobby’ that includes an ever-expanding number of financiers and foreign powers seeking to drive Turkish interest rates artificially high to damage the economy by insisting that low interest rates and borrowing costs would contain price hikes.

In doing so, he is harking back to an approach that was popular in Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s that may not be wholly wrong but similarly may also not be universally applicable.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) warned late last year that Turkey’s “gross external financing needs to cover the current account deficit and external debt repayments due within a year are estimated at around 25 per cent of GDP in 2017, leaving the country exposed to global liquidity conditions.”

With two international credit rating agencies reducing Turkish debt to junk status in the wake of Turkey’s economically fought disputes with the United States, the government risks its access to foreign credits being curtailed, which could force it to extract more money from ordinary Turks through increased taxes. That in turn would raise the spectre of recession.

“Turkey’s troubles are homegrown, and the economic war against it is a figment of Mr. Erdogan’s conspiratorial imagination. But he does have a point about the impact of a surging dollar, which has a long history of inflicting damage on developing nations,” Mr. Sharma said.

Nevertheless, as The Wall Street Journal concluded, the vulnerability of Turkey’s debt-driven growth  was such that it only took two tweets by US President Donald J. Trump announcing sanctions against two Turkish ministers and the doubling of some tariffs to accelerate the Turkish lira’s tailspin.

Mr. Erdogan may not immediately draw the same conclusion, but it is certainly one that is likely to serve as a cautionary note for countries that see debt, whether domestic or associated with China’s infrastructure-driven Belt and Road initiative, as a main driver of growth.

*

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site: The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer.

Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, co-director of the University of Würzburg’s Institute for Fan Culture, and co-host of the New Books in Middle Eastern Studies podcast. James is the author of The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer blog, a book with the same title and a co-authored volume, Comparative Political Transitions between Southeast Asia and the Middle East and North Africa as well as Shifting Sands, Essays on Sports and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa and just published China and the Middle East: Venturing into the Maelstrom

Featured image is from Daily Reckoning Australia.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

The US army has announced a new proposal for what really looks like a program to develop supersoldiers and wonder-dogs capable of fast healing, optimized physiological and mental performance, withstanding extreme environments, and wearing high-tech bio-enhancements and other gear. 

According to documents from the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), the “primary emphasis of the USSOCOM Biomedical, Human Performance, and Canine Research Program is to identify and develop techniques… for early intervention in life-threatening injuries, prolonged field care, human performance optimization, and canine medicine/performance.”

The project will allocate $15 million on bio-enhancement studies which could result in soldiers with “enhanced physiological performance” that require a fraction of a normal night’s sleep, as well along with other “human performance optimization,” according to documents from the Defense Department.

The scope of the project includes:

1. Damage Control Resuscitation
   • Global Treatment Strategies and Next Generation Wound Management
   • Analgesia
   • Far Forward Blood, Blood Components, Blood Substitute, & Injectable Hemostatic
   • Austere Surgical Stabilization
2. Prolonged Field Care (PFC)
   • Medical Sensors and Devices (includes rapidly deployable medical sensors and/or devices for extended care beyond initial trauma resuscitation; wireless biosensors that demonstrate physiological monitoring capabilities; see FOA for details)
3. Portable Lab Assays and Diagnostics
   • Occupational and Environmental Health (OEH) Hazards
4. Force Health Protection and Environmental Medicine
   • Optimal Acclimatization Strategy
   • Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Rapid Diagnostics, Treatment, and Prophylaxis
   • Operational Monitoring (wireless biosensors in extreme environments and/or hazards materials exposure)
5. Medical Simulation and Training Technologies
6. Human Performance Optimization
   • Improve Sleep
   • Diagnostics for Performance Sustainment
   • Nutritional Status
   • Enhanced Physiological Performance
   • Enhanced Mental Performance
   • Optimal Performance Strategy
   • Pharmaceutical and Nutritional Supplement interactions
   • Wearable Devices
7. Canine Medicine
   • Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Canine Decontamination, Treatment, and PPE from possible exposure
   • Sensory Optimization and Protection
   • Trauma Resuscitation
   • Non-Traditional Anesthesia Protocols
   • Optimizing Canine Performance and Nutrition
   • Pre and Post Trauma Training / Behavioral Issues
   • Environmental Extremes

This won’t be the first such program to enhance the US military’s assets. In 2017, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) announced a plethora of plans to create an elite fighting force.

One of the projects on the horizon is to create software which could be uploaded directly to the brain to give their soldiers heightened senses while also attempting to cure ailments such as blindness, paralysis and speech disorders creating an army of Captain Americas. –Express

Darpa said the program – known as the Neural Engineering System Design (NESD) “aims to develop an implantable neural interface able to provide advanced signal resolution and data-transfer bandwidth between the brain and electronics.”

Program manager Phillip Alvelda said that the brain-computer interface (BCI) “program looks ahead to a future in which advanced neural devices offer improved fidelity, resolution, and precision sensory interface for therapeutic applications.”

Another DARPA program aims to give super-human sight to soldiers.

The Soldier Centric Imaging via Computational Cameras (SCENICC) program is attempting to create a small contact lens which would improve fighters vision tenfold.

Research began on this project in 2011, and DARPA hopes to “develop novel computational imaging capabilities and explore joint design of hardware and software to give war fighters access to systems that greatly enhance their awareness, security and survivability.”  –Express

They’re also working on exoskeletons, such as the XOS2 – currently being developed in conjunction Raytheon – which could make soldiers up to 17 times stronger.

Apparently battery technology is the limiting factor for now.

Business Insider also provides this list of 8 technologies the Pentagon is pursuing to create supersoldiers: 

1. Bulletproof clothes made of carbon chainmail

Researchers tested the potential ballistic protection of graphene by firing tiny bullets of gold at it. They found that the material was stronger, more flexible, and lighter than both the ballistic plates and the Kevlar vests troops wear. And, a million layers of the stuff would be only 1 millimeter thick.

MIT’s Institute for Soldier Nanotechnologies is working on an effective manufacturing method for graphene-based chainmail, potentially giving troops better protection from a T-shirt than they currently get from bulky vests.

2. Synthetic blood

Synthetic blood would be much more efficient than natural cells. The most promising technology being investigated is a respirocyte, a theoretical red blood cell made from diamonds that could contain gasses at pressures of nearly 15,000 psi and exchange carbon dioxide and oxygen the same way real blood cells do.

Super soldiers with respirocytes mixed with their natural blood would essentially have trillions of miniature air tanks inside their body, meaning they would never run out of breath and could spend hours underwater without other equipment.

3. Seven-foot leaps and a 25 mph spring

Scientists at MIT and other research universities are looking for ways to augment the human ankle and Achilles tendon with bionic boots that mimic kangaroo tendons. Humans equipped with such boots would be able to leap seven feet or more, sprint at inhuman speeds, and run all day without wearing out their muscles.

4. Pain immunizations

DARPA’s Persistence in Combat initiative aims to help soldiers bounce back almost immediately from wounds. Pain immunizations would work for 30 days and eliminate the inflammation that causes lasting agony after an injury. So, soldiers could feel the initial burst of anguish from a bullet strike, but the pain would fade in seconds. The soldiers could treat themselves and keep fighting until medically evacuated.

5. Freedom from sleep

Not all animals sleep the same way. DARPA wants to find a way to let humans sleep with only half of their brain at a time like whales and dolphins or possibly even skip sleep for long periods of time like ENU mice, a genetically-engineered species of mouse, do.

6. Telepathy

Not all brain implants look very comfortable.US Patent Application Richard A. Normann

Part of DARPA’s “Brain Machine Interface” project is the development of better computer chips that can directly connect to a human brain via implants. In addition to allowing soldiers to control robotics with thought alone, this would allow squads to communicate via telepathy.

While the chips are already improving, the project has some detractors. One offshoot of the research is the ability to remote control mice via implanted chips, and some defense scientists worry about the risk of troops having their minds hacked.

7. Powered underwear

While the Harvard researchers working on it prefer the term “soft exoskeleton,” the DARPA-funded robotic suit is essentially a series of fabric muscles worn under the clothes that assist the wearer in each step or movement. This reduces fatigue and increases strength without requiring the huge amounts of power that bulkier, rigid exoskeletons need.

8. Gecko-like climbing gloves and shoes

Geckos use tiny hairs on their feet to grab onto surfaces on the molecular level. While the “Z-Man” project wouldn’t necessarily give humans the ability to crawl along a ceiling like a gecko, special climbing gloves and shoes would allow soldiers to easily climb sheer rock faces or up skyscrapers without any other equipment, drastically easing an assault on the high ground.

We can picture it now…

*

All images are from Zero Hedge.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Governments, like gardeners, reap what they sow. Trudeau’s continuation of Harper’s Conservative Mideast foreign policy has reaped the current mess with Saudi Arabia.

The Liberal brain trust must be wondering, “what do we have to do? We slavishly back the odious Saudi regime and they freak over an innocuous tweet.”

The Trudeau government has largely maintained the Conservative government’s pro-Saudi policies and support for Riyadh’s belligerence in the region. They’ve mostly ignored its war on Yemen, which has left 15,000 civilians dead, millions hungry and sparked a cholera epidemic. Rather than oppose this humanitarian calamity, Ottawa armed the Saudis and openly aligned itself with Riyadh.

Some of the Saudi pilots bombing Yemen were likely trained in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Since 2011 Saudi pilots have trained with NATO’s Flying Training in Canada (NFTC), which is run by the Canadian Forces and CAE. The Montreal-based flight simulator company trained Royal Saudi Air Force pilots in the Middle East, as well as the United Arab Emirates Air Force, which joined the Saudi-led bombing of Yemen.

As Anthony Fenton has demonstrated on Twitter, Saudi backed forces have been using Canadian-made rifles and armoured vehicles in Yemen. Saudi Arabia purchased Canadian-made Streit Group armoured vehicles for its war, which have been videoed targeting Yemeni civilians. The Trudeau government signed off on a $15 billion Canadian Commercial Corporation Light Armoured Vehicle (LAV) contract with the kingdom. Over a decade and a half, General Dynamics Land Systems Canada is to provide upwards of a thousand vehicles equipped with machine guns and medium or high calibre weapons. The largest arms export contract in Canadian history, it includes maintaining the vehicles and training Saudi forces to use the LAVs.

With the LAV sale under a court challenge, in late 2016 federal government lawyers described Saudi Arabia as “a key military ally who backs efforts of the international community to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and the instability in Yemen. The acquisition of these next-generation vehicles will help in those efforts, which are compatible with Canadian defence interests.” In a further sign of Ottawa aligning with Riyadh’s foreign policy, Canada’s just-expelled ambassador, Dennis Horak, said in April 2016 that the two countries have had “nearly similar approaches on Syria, Yemen, Iraq and the Middle East Peace Process” and the Canadian Embassy’s website currently notes that “the Saudi government plays an important role in promoting regional peace and stability.”

Within six weeks of taking up his new post, Trudeau’s first foreign minister Stéphane Dion met his Saudi counterpart in Ottawa. According to briefing notes for the meeting, Dion was advised to tell the Saudi minister,

“I am impressed by the size of our trade relationship, and that it covers so many sectors …You are our most important trading partner in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.”

The Trudeau government also sought to deepen ties to the Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), whose members almost all intervened in Yemen. Announced in 2013, the Canada–GCC Strategic Dialogue has been a forum to discuss economic ties and the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Dion attended the May 2016 meeting with GCC foreign ministers in Saudi Arabia.

Canada is a major arms exporter to the GCC monarchies. Canadian diplomats, the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC), and the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI) promoted arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the rest of the GCC. With support from Global Affairs Canada and the CCC, a slew of Canadian arms companies flogged their wares at the Abu Dhabi-based International Defence Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) in 2016, 2017, 2018 and are already preparing for 2019.

Canadian companies and officials sold weapons to monarchies that armed anti-government forces in Syria. In an effort to oust the Bashar al-Assad regime, GCC countries supported extremist Sunni groups, which have had ties to Daesh/Islamic State.

The Trudeau government continued with the previous government’s low-level support for regime change in Syria. It provided aid to groups opposed to Assad and supported US cruise missile strikes on a Syrian military base in April.

With the Saudis, Israel and the US generally antagonistic to Iran, there has been only a minor shift away from the Harper government’s hostile position towards that country. The Trudeau government dialed down the previous government’s most bombastic rhetoric against Tehran but has not restarted diplomatic relations (as Trudeau promised before the election) or removed that country from Canada’s state sponsor of terrorism list. One aim of the Canada-GCC Strategic Dialogue is to isolate Iran. A communiqué after the May 2016 Canada-GCC ministerial meeting expressed “serious concernsover Iran’s support for terrorism and its destabilizing activities in the region.” An April 2016 Global Affairs memo authorizing the LAV export permits noted that “Canada appreciates Saudi Arabia’s role as a regional leader promoting regional stability, as well as countering the threat posed by Iranian regional expansionism.”

The Trudeau government continued to criticize Iran for their human rights abuses while regularly ignoring more flagrant rights violations by the rulers of Saudi Arabia. In the fall of 2017, Canada again led the effort to have the United Nations General Assembly single Iran out for human rights violations.

Saudi Arabia’s over the top response to an innocuous tweet has given the Liberals a unique opportunity to distance Canada from the violent, misogynistic and repressive regime. If there were a hint of truth to Trudeau’s “feminist”, “human rights”, “Canada is back”, etc. claims the Liberals would seize the occasion. But the Saudis are betting Canada backs down. Based on Trudeau’s slavish support for the kingdom so far it is a safe bet.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Many Americans who think their country is unquestionably the greatest have been chagrined by recent events that brought them to a new low point. The treatment of families seeking asylum at our southern border with forced separation of children from parents, some shipped to distant parts of the country, is shocking, embarrassing and reprehensible. Overwhelmingly, whatever their political leanings, people want that policy reversed. Some blame the Trump administration, others runaway ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) procedures, others inept management. 

Do those gross measures mark the end of what was known as The American Dream? Most Americans are unwilling to see the morality of the policy, but a conservative British weekly views this immigration fiasco though a moral lens, referring to an “ill-fated moral debasement of American values”. The article attributes that state of disgrace specifically to the current US administration, pointing to the nation’s “moral shortcomings…. under Trump… Though America has experienced many moral corrections, from abolitionism to the civil rights movement, they have never come (to this) emetic moment…”, the feeling of revulsion, it charges. Notwithstanding many Americans’ disgust over the caging and separation of children, The Economist’s invocation of moral standards is largely unvoiced within the USA. Even though morality underlies many of our current woes. 

Why is it impolite to speak about moral markers in our society? Maybe morality is simply redundant today. Yet, without a moral compass, we may be becoming lost. Consensus is impossible; so too, any dignified leadership. Anything seems acceptable, evidenced by the ongoing gun violence and unattended massacres, uncontrolled police shootings of Black men and ugly online dialogue.

We’re not talking about sin with its theological connotations. Morals can operate in the secular sphere too, within culture. Ask any parent, journalist or teacher. 

Right and wrong is a hard business for anyone to address nowadays, especially in so-called liberal circles. The perceived immorality of the US leader is answered by Robert DeNiro shouting “F..k You Donald Trump”, on stage at the Tony Awards. Is DeNiro exhibiting moral strength by this declaration? Did he reflect on his action beforehand? There were cheers from his audience; but then what? Did the Hollywood star suffer any retaliation? Would DeNiro have made the same declaration against movie mogul Harvey Weinstein or fellow actor Morgan Freeman when their crimes and misdemeanors were exposed? Has DeNiro now become an activist? And is this all his declaration signifies?

And what about Roseanne Barr’s ugly tweet, her racist statement about former White House advisor Valerie Jarrett? Oh that’s different. Is it? Yes, to many of ‘us’, such utterances are offensive. Yet we are told Barr was already known for her indiscretions and personal attacks. With that tweet, she crossed a line and her show was cancelled. Yet Barr is still sought after by TV hosts and to many she remains a hero.

Everyone seems to be pushing the envelop—to test today’s moral limits. How much can we offend? How wild can we look? How much dare we share of our phone snaps? How much violence can be created and tolerated as entertainment, or art? How much verbal abuse in the name of free speech; how much sexual or racial abuse to get or to keep a job?

The current occupant of the White house is a moralistic man. Yes. Calling others boorish names and winning accolades for his rudeness is nasty and insulting, but at the same time moralistic—to some. Your and my disgust is matched it seems, by others’ applause. Strange times. 

All this has me wondering: What is activism? And what’s the relation of political activism to cultural morality? I’m trying to understand this as a student of culture as well as a citizen of a country known for its openness. Can a healthy culture have no moral limits, whether it’s the behavior of its immigration officials, soldiers or celebrities?

We speak about social behaviors as unethical or corrupt, decent or distasteful, respectable or dishonorable, progressive or illiberal (whatever illiberal means). Morality itself seems to be absent from our vocabulary, although it surely underlies all these attributes. Is there just too much borderline conduct flowing through our fluid, censor-free culture, that no mooring can contain it? 

Perusal of the Moral Monday campaign of Rev. William Barber started my reflections on morals. Moral Monday evolved into The Poor People’s Campaign (PPC): A National Call for Moral Revival led by Barber. Bruce Dixon writes critically of Barber, faulting him for blaming everything on immoral persons and policies, on lack of moral commitment. Barber calls for a cleansing of America with a “massive moral rest”, a “moral resistance”. 

“The problem”, Dixon maintains, “is that labeling your political opponents, their leaders, their misguided values and their persons as “immoral” is never a persuasive political tactic. It might make those already on your side feel nice and comfy to know they’re all moral and the other guys are not”.

Dixon makes a worthy point. Especially today, when Americans are more aware than ever of increasingly economic, social and ideological polarization. So-called liberals have become sacrosanct about their own access to ‘truth’ while so-called conservatives, angry at how they are regarded and maligned, aggressively promote their own truth. 

Let’s not forget how yesterday’s immoral activists are later sanctified. Behavior (e.g. homosexuality) once attacked as sick and immoral eventually becomes codified into law. Our most esteemed American (moral) leader Martin Luther King Jr. was for many years vilified; then, when King moved beyond domestic injustices and called the American war in Vietnam immoral:– well, that was unpatriotic which in some circles is treasonous. That charge was leveled at another memorialized leader, Malcolm X. He crossed a moral line when he defined Black Americans’ struggle for justice as not their civil right, but their ‘human right’. In that declaration Malik Shabazz (X) challenged American moral standards.

During that same era when cultural standards were in flux, as they are today, and when military conscription was in force, boxing champion Muhammad Ali refused to be drafted into the US military to fight against Vietnamese: “Shoot them for what? They never called me Ni..er; they never lynched me…never set dogs against me…”, he argued. Ali’s stand so challenged American morals that he was stripped of his boxing titles and banned from boxing– punishment hard to fathom today. 

Or is it? Ali’s now forgotten moral stance is in my view comparable to football star Colin Kaepernick’s decision to place a knee on the ground instead of a hand on his heart as others do for the US national anthem. The moral principle on which he acted – injustice, specifically police brutalization of Black and Latino citizens–was eclipsed in the ensuing controversy. (In time, it will become enshrined in US history.)

Try to put yourself in Kaepernick’s position leading up to his declaration. He felt compelled to speak, somehow. Did he consult others–his religious guide, his family, fellow players? Did he ask others to join him? Did he consider the repercussions? What a supreme moral act! It made Kaepernick a hero for many (including this non-football fan); he was Amnesty International’s 2018 Ambassador of Conscience. Meanwhile he was fired from his job, and, I would argue, in its moralist retort, the National Football League banned players from ‘taking a knee’ in public. Although we don’t hear any charge of immorality against Kaepernick, some call his action unpatriotic– a grave allegation in the USA. Kaepernick himself, accepting the AI award, invokes moral issues behind his action, just as Ali did in his defense after his banishment from boxing in 1966.

That the names of music, sports and film celebrities come into our discussion of activism and morality may not be accidental. Favorable or not, celebrity is where morality today is defined and disseminated. Author Peter King has 4.8 million followers; actor Anne Hathaway has 12+ million instagram fans; Sean Hannity’s FB friends may exceed those numbers. Then there’s The Donald. And don’t forget what his celebrity led too.

*

This article was originally published on www.RadioTahrir.org.

Aziz is a veteran anthropologist and radio journalist, also author of Heir to A Silent Song: Two Rebel Women of Nepal, published by Tribhuvan University, Nepal, and available through Barnes and Noble in the USA. She is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

While there may be no lost love in between Iran and the United States of America; more so since President Donald Trump moved to the White House – thus ushering the era of hyper neoconservatism, to have a US Secretary of State profess regime change as a mean to cancel out a political threat on a public forum somewhat broke that proverbial glass ceiling.

Only this July a belligerent Mike Pompeo told the world how Trump’s America would sow unrest in Iran to finally disappear what has been a thorn in the ‘Establishment’’s thigh: the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Sovereign on its land Iran’s greatest sin … from a western perspective, always has been its claim to political and territorial independence. The idea that Washington would object to Iran’s system of governance on the basis it does not fit its democratic paradigm is not only ludicrous but intellectually fallacious.

Readers will recall that before Iranians took it upon themselves to enact their right to political self-determination – something the US claims to be a champion of, they laid at the mercy of the Shah, an absolute  despot who squandered Iran’s wealth to his benefit and that of his political allies.

America has entertained too many friendships with autocrats and self-professed war criminals for anyone to remain under the illusion that its agenda is anything but pecuniary. 

Washington’s distaste of Iran is rooted in Tehran’s commitment to stand free and independent against the call of unfettered neo-imperialism.

To put it more plainly Iran disturbs America’s established world order by the principle it exercises, represents, and encourages others to enact: freedom of choice.

Speaking at a press conference Mike Pompeo announced that the US Broadcasting Board of Governors is taking steps to circumvent internet censorship in Iran, and creating a round-the-clock Farsi channel across television, radio, digital and social media formats, “so that ordinary Iranians inside Iran and around the globe will know that America stands with them.”

To which he added:

“To our Iranian American and Iranian friends,” Mr Pompeo said, “tonight I tell you that the Trump administration dreams the same dreams for the people of Iran as you do, and through our labours and God’s providence, that day will come true.”

If anything Pompeo made clear that Washington was intent on using whichever measures it deemed suitable to achieve its goals: regime change in Iran. If we consider that the US already played such games in countries such as Libya, Iraq, and Syria … to only name a few, one can easily imagine just what length the US will go to to score victory against its most defiant self-appointed enemy.

For the sake of accuracy, and to offer real context to this article I  must insist that if not for America’s insistence to threaten Iran’s sovereign integrity the two nations could quite easily resume all diplomatic and political ties. Tehran’s ire is tied to Washington’s illegal claim on world politics and America’s exceptionalism.

Although Pompeo was blunt when declaring Trump’s administration’s intention towards Iran and how it will push for unrest within Iran’s borders, he only enounced one mean of pressure: the media, leaving out America’s most insidious plan: deception through social manipulation. 

Alongside its media campaign, the US is also working on disrupting Iran’s socio-political fabric by directly targeting NGOs – turning such organisations into organisational asymmetrical weapons of war.

A report by Professor Vladimir Prav for SouthFront defines such agenda as follow:

“It entails two sets of activities. The first is establishing the pressure from above, in the form of planting “agents of influence” into the government and into associated organizations dealing with analysis and information dissemination, and pressure from below by creating a range of legal and shadowy societal and organization organizations to influence public opinion, organize mass protests, and  coordinate anti-government activities.”

America is doing just that and few are paying attention.

I give you Thomas Kaplan, the founder and president of Panthera, an organisation “devoted exclusively to the conservation of the world’s wild cats,” or so its front page reads.

While Panthera may indeed be instrumental in saving big cats, it also doubles as a convenient cover for less ‘holistic’ activities … spying being one of them.

To begin with, and to offer context to the above statement, readers will be interested to know that Kaplan is also one of the main financial supporters of UANI (United against Nuclear Iran), an organisation that has long petitioned for a series of punishing sanctions against Tehran. A close ally of Israel and Washington’s most fervent neocons, Kaplan has also closely worked with David Petraeus, a former CIA chief and Sheldon Adelson, the financier of America’s embassy move to Jerusalem.

Under Panthera’s umbrella Kaplan pushed his acolyte: George Schaller to work in Iran. Acting the devoted environmentalist Schaller traveled throughout Iran in collaboration with the Persian Wildlife Heritage, gathering along the way sensitive informations and photographs.

Alerted to the potential security breach Iran’s authorities proceeded to the arrest of several Panthera’s employees, among whom Kavous Seyed-Emami, who committed suicide soon after his arrest.

But let’s look closer still as some may argue that the above is circumstantial.

Panthera’s president, Fred Launay doubles as a close relation of no other than Iran’s most devoted enemy: Prince Mohammed bin Zayed (MBZ), himself a ‘special’ friend of US President Donald Trump.

Back in February 2018 following a meeting in between President Trump and MBZ the White House issued the following statement:

“The president thanked the Crown Prince for his leadership in highlighting ways all Gulf Cooperation Council states can better counter Iranian destabilising activities and defeat terrorists and extremists.”

One can deduct from the above that both the US and the UAE have an interest in seeing Iran lose its footing.

Launay, not content of his position at Panthera, moonlights as MBS’s head of the Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund.

It is rather clear that Panthera’s immediate interests in Iran exist far beyond their desire to protect endangered species. To use NGOs as convenient cover to promote shadowy political agendas are nothing out of the ordinary … after all such tactics have given way to the expression: coloured revolutions.

The risk here remains that of manipulation. If it is unlikely America will succeed in destabilising Iran by playing up the NGO card, it can still do quite a lot of damage as far as public opinion goes by presenting Tehran as a vindictive power.

Trump’s belligerent stand against Turkey over the detention of Andrew Brunson, an American pastor that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government accuses of being involved in an attempted coup in 2016 only emphasises such point.

One can only hope that the experience of the past few years will serve enough of a warning for the public to see beyond smoke and mirror.

*

Catherine Shakdam is a senior researcher at Al Bayan Centre (Iraq), and a PhD candidate.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Imprisoned in Turkey since October 2016 on charges of involvement in the failed months earlier coup attempt against President Erdogan, the Trump regime’s demand for Andrew Brunson’s release conceals what’s really behind the US/Turkey rift.

It’s all about what Michel Chossudovsky calls a “Russia-Turkey-Iran ‘triple entente,’” – growing Ankara ties with Washington’s main adversaries.

The US doesn’t give a hoot about the safety and well-being of its ordinary citizens at home or when abroad – only its privileged ones, no others.

Turkey is a key NATO member, its military second largest in the alliance to Washington’s.

The Trump regime wants Erdogan allied with its anti-Russia, anti-Iran agenda. He rejects US sanctions on both countries, intends maintaining normal political and economic relations.

Days earlier, Turkish Foreign Minister Cavusoglu said his government

“never supported any sanctions against Russia. We have already said that we are not going to support sanctions against Iran either.”

He called on the Trump regime to rescind sanctions on Turkey, adding

“(t)hey must drop their threats, otherwise there can be no progress in (bilateral) relations.”

His relationship with Washington deteriorated in the wake of the aborted 2016 coup attempt.

He blamed it on ex-pat cleric Fethullah Gulen, living in Pennsylvania. Washington refuses to extradite him. No evidence indicates his involvement in what happened. He denies accusations against him.

While his relations with America soured, they’ve grown stronger with Russia since a Turkish F-16 downed a Russian Su-24 warplane in Syrian airspace in November 2015.

His political and economic ties to Moscow and Tehran are growing. Washington treats Turkey as both ally (in NATO) and Eurasian adversary.

Erdogan is playing the Russia/Iran, and US cards simultaneously, increasingly shifting his allegiance East, away from the West – another body blow to Washington’s imperial agenda.

On August 17, Trump disgracefully tweeted:

“Turkey has taken advantage of the United States for many years. They are now holding our wonderful Christian Pastor, who I must now ask to represent our Country as a great patriot hostage. We will pay nothing for the release of an innocent man, but we are cutting back on Turkey!”

On Thursday, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin threatened more US sanctions on Turkey on top of others imposed “if they don’t release (Brunson) quickly.”

Erdogan’s foreign minister Cavusoglu responded, saying

“(t)he US does not know, it cannot see who its true friend is. We can easily solve problems with the US but not with its current mindset.”

Both countries sharply increased tariffs on each other’s products – on Turkish steel and aluminum, on US alcohol, tobacco and vehicles.

Ankara began selling off US sovereign debt, reduced from $32.6 – $28.8 billion in June, according to a US Treasury report. In November 2017, Turkey held $61.2 billion worth of US treasuries, less than half that amount now.

In 2018, Russia dumped over 80% of its US sovereign debt holdings, holding less than $15 billion now.

The Trump regime slammed Ankara’s agreement with Russia to buy its S-400 missile defense systems. It threatened non-delivery of contracted for US F-35s to its military.

Erdogan expressed ire over US support for Kurdish YPG fighters in northern Syria he wants removed or eliminated near Turkey’s border.

Washington wants all nations bending to its will. Erdogan’s support for what the Trump regime opposes lies at the root of the deep rift between both countries.

It’s got nothing to do with pastor Brunson the Trump regime didn’t give a hoot about until recent weeks.

*

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

*

Dear Mr. Birnbaum,

You write Trump “made no mention of Russia’s adventures in Ukraine”. Well, neither he nor Putin nor you made any mention of America’s adventures in the Ukraine, which resulted in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014, which led to the justified Russian adventure. Therefore …?

If Russia overthrew the Mexican government would you blame the US for taking some action in Mexico?

William Blum

***

Dear Mr. Blum,

Thanks for your note. “America’s adventures in the Ukraine”: what are you talking about? Last time I checked, it was Ukrainians in the streets of Kiev who caused Yanukovych to turn tail and run. Whether or not that was a good thing, we can leave aside, but it wasn’t the Americans who did it.

It is, however, Russian special forces who fanned out across Crimea in February and March 2014, according to Putin, and Russians who came down from Moscow who stoked conflict in eastern Ukraine in the months after, according to their own accounts.

Best, Michael Birnbaum

***

To MB,

I can scarcely believe your reply. Do you read nothing but the Post? Do you not know of high State Dept official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador in Ukraine in Maidan Square to encourage the protesters? She spoke of 5 billion (sic) dollars given to aid the protesters who were soon to overthrow the govt. She and the US Amb. spoke openly of who to choose as the next president. And he’s the one who became president. This is all on tape. I guess you never watch Russia Today (RT). God forbid! I read the Post every day. You should watch RT once in a while.

William Blum

Click to listen to Nuland’s “F*ck the EU Leaked Phone Call

To WB,

I was the Moscow bureau chief of the newspaper; I reported extensively in Ukraine in the months and years following the protests. My observations are not based on reading. RT is not a credible news outlet, but I certainly do read far beyond our own pages, and of course I talk to the actual actors on the ground myself – that’s my job.

And: yes, of course Nuland was in the Maidan – but encouraging the protests, as she clearly did, is not the same as sparking them or directing them, nor is playing favorites with potential successors, as she clearly did, the same as being directly responsible for overthrowing the government. I’m not saying the United States wasn’t involved in trying to shape events. So were Russia and the European Union. But Ukrainians were in the driver’s seat the whole way through. I know the guy who posted the first Facebook call to protest Yanukovych in November 2013; he’s not an American agent. RT, meanwhile, reports fabrications and terrible falsehoods all the time. By all means consume a healthy and varied media diet – don’t stop at the US mainstream media. But ask yourself how often RT reports critically on the Russian government, and consider how that lacuna shapes the rest of their reporting. You will find plenty of reporting in the Washington Post that is critical of the US government and US foreign policy in general, and decisions in Ukraine and the Ukrainian government in specific. Our aim is to be fair, without picking sides.

Best, Michael Birnbaum

***end of exchange***

Right, the United States doesn’t play indispensable roles in changes of foreign governments; never has, never will; even when they offer billions of dollars; even when they pick the new president, which, apparently, is not the same as picking sides. It should be noticed that Mr Birnbaum offers not a single example to back up his extremist claim that RT “reports fabrications and terrible falsehoods all the time.” “All the time”, no less! That should make it easy to give some examples.

For the record, I think RT is much less biased than the Post on international affairs. And, yes, it’s bias, not “fake news” that’s the main problem – Cold-War/anti-Communist/anti-Russian bias that Americans have been raised with for a full century. RT defends Russia against the countless mindless attacks from the West. Who else is there to do that? Should not the Western media be held accountable for what they broadcast? Americans are so unaccustomed to hearing the Russian side defended, or hearing it at all, that when they do it can seem rather weird.

To the casual observer, THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA indictments of July 14 of Russian intelligence agents (GRU) reinforced the argument that the Soviet government interfered in the US 2016 presidential election. Regard these indictments in proper perspective and we find that election interference is only listed as a supposed objective, with charges actually being for unlawful cyber operations, identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money by American individuals unconnected to the Russian government. So … we’re still waiting for some evidence of actual Russian interference in the election aimed at determining the winner.

The Russians did it (cont.)

Each day I spend about three hours reading the Washington Post. Amongst other things I’m looking for evidence – real, legal, courtroom-quality evidence, or at least something logical and rational – to pin down those awful Russkis for their many recent crimes, from influencing the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election to use of a nerve agent in the UK. But I do not find such evidence.

Each day brings headlines like these:

• “U.S. to add economic sanctions on Russia: Attack with nerve agent on former spy in England forces White House to act”
• “Is Russia exploiting new Facebook goal?”
• “Experts: Trump team lacks urgency on Russian threat”

These are all from the same day, August 9, which led me to thinking of doing this article, but similar stories can be found any day in the Post and in major newspapers anywhere in America. None of the articles begins to explain how Russia did these things, or even WHY. Motivation appears to have become a lost pursuit in the American mass media. The one thing sometimes mentioned, which I think may have some credibility, is Russia’s preference of Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016. But this doesn’t begin to explain how Russia could pull off any of the electoral magic it’s accused of, which would be feasible only if the United States were a backward, Third World, Banana Republic.

There’s the Facebook ads, as well as all the other ads … The people who are influenced by this story – have they read many of the actual ads? Many are pro-Clinton or anti-Trump; many are both; many are neither. It’s one big mess, the only rational explanation of this which I’ve read is that they come from money-making websites, “click-bait” sites as they’re known, which earn money simply by attracting visitors.

As to the nerve agents, it makes more sense if the UK or the CIA did it to make the Russians look bad, because the anti-Russian scandal which followed was totally predictable. Why would Russia choose the time of the World Cup in Moscow – of which all of Russia was immensely proud – to bring such notoriety down upon their head? But that would have been an ideal time for their enemies to want to embarrass them.

However, I have no doubt that the great majority of Americans who follow the news each day believe the official stories about the Russians. They’re particularly impressed with the fact that every US intelligence agency supports the official stories. They would not be impressed at all if told that a dozen Russian intelligence agencies all disputed the charges. Group-think is alive and well all over the world. As is Cold War II.

But we’re the Good Guys, ain’t we?

For a defender of US foreign policy there’s very little that causes extreme heartburn more than someone implying a “moral equivalence” between American behavior and that of Russia. That was the case during Cold War I and it’s the same now in Cold War II. It just drives them up the wall.

After the United States passed a law last year requiring TV station RT (Russia Today) to register as a “foreign agent”, the Russians passed their own law allowing authorities to require foreign media to register as a “foreign agent”. Senator John McCain denounced the new Russian law, saying there is “no equivalence” between RT and networks such as Voice of America, CNN and the BBC, whose journalists “seek the truth, debunk lies, and hold governments accountable.” By contrast, he said, “RT’s propagandists debunk the truth, spread lies, and seek to undermine democratic governments in order to further Vladimir Putin’s agenda.”

And here is Tom Malinowski, former Assistant Secretary of State for democracy, human rights and labor (2014-2017) – last year he reported that Putin had “charged that the U.S. government had interfered ‘aggressively’ in Russia’s 2012 presidential vote,” claiming that Washington had “gathered opposition forces and financed them.” Putin, wrote Malinowski, “apparently got President Trump to agree to a mutual commitment that neither country would interfere in the other’s elections.”

“Is this moral equivalence fair?” Malinowski asked and answered: “In short, no. Russia’s interference in the United States’ 2016 election could not have been more different from what the United States does to promote democracy in other countries.”

How do you satirize such officials and such high-school beliefs?

We also have the case of the US government agency, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has interfered in more elections than the CIA or God. Indeed, the man who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, Allen Weinstein, declared in 1991:

“A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”

On April 12, 2018 the presidents of two of NED’s wings wrote:

“A specious narrative has come back into circulation: that Moscow’s campaign of political warfare is no different from U.S.-supported democracy assistance.”

“Democracy assistance”, you see, is what they call NED’s election-interferences and government-overthrows. The authors continue:

“This narrative is churned out by propaganda outlets such as RT and Sputnik [radio station]. … it is deployed by isolationists who propound a U.S. retreat from global leadership.”

“Isolationists” is what conservatives call critics of US foreign policy whose arguments they can’t easily dismiss, so they imply that such people just don’t want the US to be involved in anything abroad.

And “global leadership” is what they call being first in election-interferences and government-overthrows.

What God giveth, Trump taketh away?

The White House sends out a newsletter, “1600 daily”, each day to subscribers about what’s new in the marvelous world inhabited by Donald J. Trump. On July 25 it reported about the president’s talk before the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention in Missouri:

“We don’t apologize for America anymore. We stand up for America. And we stand up for our National Anthem,” the President said to “a thundering ovation”.

At the same time, the newsletter informed us that the State Department is bringing together religious leaders and others for the first-ever Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom.

“The goal is simple,” we are told, “to promote the God-given human right to believe what you choose.”

Aha! I see. But what about those who believe that standing for the National Anthem implies support for America’s racism or police brutality? Is it not a God-given human right to believe such a thing and “take a knee” in protest?

Or is it the devil that puts such evil ideas into our heads?

The weather all over is not just extreme … It’s downright freakish.

The argument I like to use when speaking to those who don’t accept the idea that extreme weather phenomena are largely man-made is this:

Well, we can proceed in one of two ways:

1. We can do our best to limit the greenhouse effect by curtailing greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) into the atmosphere, and if it turns out that these emissions were not in fact a significant cause of the widespread extreme weather phenomena, then we’ve wasted a lot of time, effort and money (although other benefits to the ecosystem would still accrue).
2. We can do nothing at all to curtail the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and if it turns out that these emissions were in fact the leading cause of all the extreme weather phenomena, then we’ve lost the earth and life as we know it.

So, are you a gambler?

Irony of ironies … Misfortune of misfortunes … We have a leader who has zero interest in such things; indeed, the man is unequivocally contemptuous of the very idea of the need to modify individual or social behavior for the sake of the environment. And one after another he’s appointed his soulmates to head government agencies concerned with the environment.

What is it that motivates such people? I think it’s mainly that they realize that blame for much of environmental damage can be traced, directly or indirectly, to corporate profit-seeking behavior, an ideology to which they are firmly committed.

*

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site: The Anti-Empire Report.

Notes

1. Washington Post, November 16, 2017
2. Ibid., July 23, 2017
3. Ibid., September 22, 1991
4. William Blum, Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower, chapter 19 on NED
5. Washington Post, April 2, 2018

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

A border search-and-rescue group, Aguilas del Desierto, or “Eagles of the Desert,” found over a dozen remains of migrants after it was given special permission to search for a missing person within a limited southern section of the Barry Goldwater Air Force bombing range in Welling, Arizona, along the US/Mexico border.

The bombing range is a vast 70-mile vast swath of land that stretches from Southeast of Yuma, Arizona stretching all the way to the Sonoran Desert National Monument. The range crosses through well-known migrant routes and has remained inaccessible to human aid groups or forensics teams.

Eagles of the Desert (EED) was the first group ever allowed to perform searches on the high security bombing range which is utilized for air-to-ground bombing practice by A-10’s, F-16s and F-35 Lighting II Air Force Jets. The base is also used for Marine Corps and NATO allied flight crews while deployed to any of the aforementioned bases for training.

EED was allowed limited access to an unused area to search for the individual for whom they had a missing person’s report. The migrant was never found, but in the short time frame of searching, the group came across 13 human remains in a very small section of the bombing range.

The concentration of remains in the limited area leaves little doubt to EED that the numbers of remains are likely in the hundreds, if not thousands. Last year a Texas sheriff commented that,

“For every one [body] we find, we’re probably missing five.”

The treacherous deserts along the Southwest have taken the lives of untold tens of thousands of migrants coming to the United States.

Investigative reporter John Carlos Frey helped break the story, which points unmistakably to negligence by the authorities, as well as the utter disregard by officials for the lives of migrants.

Frey told Democracy Now that,

“for the most part, sheriffs, police departments, police agencies in the United States do not count migrants who are missing as missing persons. So these individual names are not being turned over to the database. So there’s no way for someone in Latin America to search for their loved ones through a DNA sample, because those names have not been entered in the database….The federal government has washed its hands of these individuals and is not assisting, either financially or by allowing names to be put into the database.”

Frey also commented on the direct correlation between the denial of asylum at the border and the high volume of those perishing while crossing. Hundreds of asylum seekers have continued to camp out for days and weeks, only to be turned away by Border Police citing the June announcement by US Attorney General Jeff Sessions that Washington will no longer consider victims of domestic or gang violence for asylum status.

“Individuals who are trying to make a claim of asylum have fled their countries because they don’t have a choice. They’re fleeing for their lives. If we are not allowing them in to make a claim of asylum, they will go another way. And the route that’s available to them are the deserts of the American Southwest. It is most likely now that individuals who cross that desert will be put in peril. They will suffer just going through, especially this time of year. We can count on the fact that many of these individuals may perish,” Frey told Democracy Now .

Refusing to accept asylum applications is a flagrant violation of international human rights law. The 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees “provides that no one shall expel or return a refugee against his or her will, in any manner whatsoever, to a territory where he or she fears threats to life or freedom.”

The reality is that Washington’s policies of denying asylum have forced many migrants to partake in the brutal 7-10 day journey across scorching desert in temperatures that soar over 110 degrees Fahrenheit. The endless lines at the border and outright denial of asylum is a truth which explodes all of the noxious rhetoric that immigrants should be crossing “legally.”

In 2015 revelations of another mass grave in Brooks County, Texas came to light, which contained the remains of more than 300 immigrants which Federal agents gathered from the desert. At that time, a reporting team that included Frey found that many of the migrants had died after waiting hours for Border Patrol to respond to their 911 calls.

It can only be concluded that Washington relies on great numbers perishing in the treacherous conditions. Revelations early this year detailed the systematic destruction of lifesaving aid by Border Patrol agents and the increasing harassment and surveillance of humanitarian organizations such as No More Deaths (NMD) and Border Angels.

Organizations reported that between 2012 and 2015, on average occurring more than twice a week, 3,586 gallons of water were vandalized.

In addition, this year nine members of NMD faced federal prosecution for the supposed “crime” of leaving water and medical aid to migrants on the verge of death in the Arizona desert. Scott Warren, an instructor at Arizona State University, faces a felony charges for harboring two people and providing “food and water for approximately three days,” according to the US District Court of Arizona.

Warren could face up to five years in prison. These charges harken back to the harboring of Jews during the Holocaust or of Japanese in California during internment. Increasingly, Washington continues to pursue the working class as it mounts an offensive to protect refugees and immigrants across the globe.

The devastation immigrants flee is the result of decades of US involvement throughout Central and Latin America, which have created violent conditions and maintain the high levels of poverty reflected in state and gang violence. The same process on the other side of the globe results in the death of countless hundreds and likely thousands who have drowned in the Mediterranean fleeing Washington’s wars.

Only the fight for socialism, predicated on internationalism and opposition to imperialist war, can break apart the violent, militarized borders and the nation state, finally allowing humanity to move freely across the globe.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

From the moment that she came to public attention Aretha Franklin appeared to be an anointed figure, elevated to a pantheon of greats that include Bessie Smith, Ma Rainey, Billie Holliday and Sister Rosetta Tharpe. Songs such as Respect, Natural Woman and I Say A Little Prayer testify to the power of her artistry.

Like Ray Charles and Sam Cooke -the key progenitors in transforming Gospel music into Soul music- she succeeded in working out an innovative hybrid of Black American music styles. But unlike Charles and Cooke, she was able to return to her gospel roots and receive popular and critical acclaim in 1972 by creating the seminal Amazing Grace, the highest selling album of her life, and the greatest selling live gospel album of all time.

She showed great versatility by recording songs for a cross-over audience such as her remake of Ben E. King’s Spanish Harlem and for the Disco-Funk era offered the classic Jump to It in 1982.

Aretha Franklin with her father and Martin Luther King

An indicator of her significance in popular music was the fact that like Elvis Presley, she became one of the few artists to be known by first name alone. As a celebrity stories of her marriages, weight battles as well as her loss of innocence at an early age under the parental regime of her father, the Reverend C.L. Franklin became the staple of news magazine gossip and book revelations.

It is true to say that she reflected the era that she lived in. Her afros spoke to the ‘Black Pride’ movement and her songs about freedom and respect attested to her commitment to the Women’s Liberation and Civil Rights movements. She helped finance several civil rights programmes and participated in fundraisers. Of her willingness to post bail for Angela Davis, the black, feminist radical in 1970, Franklin said the following:

Jail is hell to be in. I’m going to see her free if there is any justice in our courts, not because I believe in communism but because she’s a black woman and she wants freedom for black people.

The wealth of connections provided by her father meant that she had known the Reverend Martin Luther King since she was a young girl and he presented her with an award in Detroit only shortly before his assassination in 1968.

As a singer, Franklin was seemingly always on a pedestal and remained there until her death. Needless to say that she was the quintessential soul and gospel singer. She was, is and will be the standard by which serious singers will be appraised and defined.

Aretha Franklin was born on March 25th 1942 in Memphis, Tennessee and died on August 16th 2018 in Detroit, Michigan.

*

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site.

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has appointed Brian H. Hook, the State Department director of policy planning, to head a coordinated “Iran Action Group.”

Hook served in several important posts in the George W. Bush administration, indicating his support for lying the country into war with Iraq and the years-long US military occupation of that country. Putting a Bushie Neoconservative in charge of the Iran Action Group can fairly be seen as a signal that Pompeo wants to do to President Hassan Rouhani what Bush did to Saddam Hussein.

The Iraq War led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the wounding of millions, the creation of hundreds of thousands of widows and orphans, the displacement of 4 million Iraqis, the complete destruction of the Iraqi economy, and the rise of the ISIL terrorist group.

A Neoconservative, Hook has argued for coddling dictatorial regimes favorable to US interests such as the absolute monarchy Saudi Arabia and the brutal military junta in Egypt, rather than pressing them in any way on human rights or democracy. He blamed Jimmy Carter’s human rights policy for the revolutions in Nicaragua and Iran (an allegation almost completely divorced from any historical fact). He seems to imply that pressing a country over democratization should be reserved as a tactic for governments the US does not like.

Hook was likely involved in the memo for Trump arguing for promoting an “Islamic reformation,” which State Department experts on the Middle East privately castigated:

““These people are curating crap” from the far-right, anti-Muslim blogosphere, said a separate senior U.S. government official, referring to the unnamed authors of the State Department paper,” according to The Intercept.

Hooks appears to equate the government of Iran with the terrorist group al-Qaeda. You don’t have to like the Iranian government to think that that is ridiculous.

So we’ve got someone who has defended Bush’s war of aggression on Iraq but who thinks it was naive and dangerous for Carter to cut aid to the Argentinian colonels who were throwing dissidents out of airplanes.

Nice.

*

Juan Cole is the founder and chief editor of Informed Comment and Richard P. Mitchell Professor of History at the University of Michigan. Follow him at @jricole

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

Detroit artist and social activist Aretha Franklin passed into her ancestral realm on Wednesday morning August 16 while surrounded by family and friends in her Detroit Riverfront condominium downtown.

It had been announced the previous week that Aretha was gravely ill and was hospitalized. 

Later press accounts indicated that she was checked out of the hospital and sent home possibly under hospice care. These were difficult reports for many people in the Detroit area to accept at their face value. 

The Queen of Soul had been ill in the past and hospitalized. Several years before, media accounts claimed she was suffering from pancreatic cancer and was terminal. However, contradictory claims publicized through television, radio, print and internet platforms said these reports were unsubstantiated.

Several weeks later Aretha was seen attending a Piston’s basketball game at the Palace in Auburn Hills. Although she had lost considerable weight, her appearance and activity illustrated that the Queen was by no means making an immediate exit from the stage.

Just last year in June (2017), Aretha was honored in downtown Detroit through the renaming of a street after her while on the same day performing a free concert for the people of the city. Long term friends of Aretha such as Mary Wilson, formerly of the Supremes, Freda Payne, solo vocalist, the boxing champion Tommy Hearns and the Rev. Jesse Jackson accompanied the Queen of Soul when she entered the concert venue and while leaving.

Her passing has left a tremendous void in the social and cultural atmosphere in the city, nationally and internationally. The loss could be especially felt in Detroit because the landmarks of her upbringing and public celebrity ascendancy are still in existence and constitute key elements of the historical legacy of the African American community.

Origins and Catapulting to World Notoriety

Aretha Franklin was the second daughter and third child of Rev. C.L. Franklin and Barbara Siggers. She was born in Memphis, Tennessee on March 23, 1942 during World War II. 

Her father, originally from the Delta region of Sunflower County, Mississippi, began preaching as a teenager in small rural churches. Aretha’s mother, Barbara Siggers, was a musician and vocalist who was born in Shelby, Mississippi. In later years renowned gospel singer Mahalia Jackson said Aretha’s mother had one of the most beautiful voices in the field of sacred music.

Rev. C.L. Franklin was an effective public speaker and vocalist as well. He was brought to Memphis to preach at New Salem Baptist Church where he remained until 1944. For the following two years he served as pastor at Friendship Baptist Church in Buffalo, New York. 

In late 1945 Franklin visited Detroit to address the National Baptist Convention where he so impressed members of New Bethel, a church formed 14 years earlier as a women’s prayer group, that they invited him to pastor their congregation in the city. It was during this period of the late 1940s and early 1950s that Aretha’s father would become a nationally known religious figure.

His sermons were broadcast over radio on Sunday evenings directly from New Bethel which was located at the time on Hastings Street and Willis on the eastside. Music store and studio owner Joe Von Battle would be the first person to record and produce Franklin’s sermons and songs on vinyl. The circulation of his records on a mass level along with the broadcast of his sermons over W-LAC radio in Nashville, a station with a powerful range during evening hour, could be picked up in various regions of the United States.

Aretha and Rev. Franklin’s other children were brought up in the church where they participated in the choir. By 1956, Aretha had released her first recordings through the JVB label based on Hastings in the heart of the African American community at the time.

Detroit and the Convergence between National Liberation and Working Class Struggles

Rev. C.L. Franklin had selected the right municipality to launch a successful public career. The city had been a center of migration for African Americans since the early years of the 20^th century with the development and expansion of mass production utilizing the assembly line.

This migration accelerated after the beginning of World War I and continued from the 1920s through the period of WWII. The growth of heavy industry and parallel service sectors created a large working class which was divided along racial lines.

It was in 1942-43, the two years after the entry of the U.S. into the War, that racial unrest erupted in the city. Competition over scarce housing resources and public accommodations fueled by the exploitative character of industrial racialized capitalism, resulted in one of the deadliest outbreaks of racial unrest in June 1943. 34 people were killed, 25 of whom were African Americans, in the unrest which lasted for several days where 6,000 federal troops were deployed in an ostensible effort to restore order.

At least 17 of the African Americans killed fell victim to police and Michigan National Guard attacks. Others were murdered by blood thirsty white mobs which accosted African Americans along Woodward Avenue and other areas. African Americans retaliated against whites by destroying white-owned businesses in the heavily-populated Paradise Valley area on the near eastside which was a residential and business district occupied by Black working class people.

The white political establishment including the-then Mayor Edward Jeffries blamed African Americans for the violence. They described African American youth as “hoodlums” hell bent on committing crimes against whites. After the conclusion of WWII, two major urban renewal projects destroyed large swaths of the African American community on the eastside, both Paradise Valley and Black Bottom. These forced removals were implemented by Mayors Albert Cobo (1950-1957) and Louis Miriani (1957-1961).

Nevertheless, African Americans resisted national oppression, institutional racism and national oppression through organizational efforts. Although most were initially excluded from trade unions on a racial basis numerous organizations were founded or enjoyed engagement with the Black masses. The Nation of Islam (NOI) was founded in Detroit in 1930. Later African Americans played a pivotal role in the UAW campaign to win recognition by Ford Motor Company in 1941. 

Later in 1957 African American labor activists formed the Trade Union Leadership Council (TULC) which supported the struggle for Civil Rights in the South and the North. On the cultural front, Motown Records began in the late 1950s under the African American leadership of Berry and Esther Gordy. The music company grew to prominence during the early to mid-1960s.

The urban renewal program of the racist city administration directly impacted New Bethel Baptist Church and JVB Records located on Hastings. During the course of the 1950s, the African American community was slated for demolition under the guise of slum clearance. By 1961, most of the remaining neighborhoods and institutions were forced to relocate under imminent domain when they were later demolished for the construction of the Chrysler I-75 and Fisher Freeways. Tens of thousands of African Americans living in these communities moved further north and to the west side neighborhoods along 12^th, 14^th, Linwood and Dexter streets. Hundreds of small businesses, churches and social organizations were destroyed by the city administrations holding power in the 1950s and early 1960s. 

New Bethel eventually re-located in 1963 through the repurposing of a large movie theater on Linwood and Philadelphia in the Virginia Park District. JVB Records re-opened up on 12^th Street. The Virginia Park and surrounding communities, due to racial segregation policies in housing, was characterized by pockets of overcrowding in multiple-dwellings owned by absentee white landlords dividing up spacious apartments into additional units which were allowed to fall into disrepair.

City administration officials refused to enforce building codes designed for safety and quality of life in the Virginia Park District and other similar communities. Tensions escalated in the early 1960s prompting a radicalization of the African American people. 

Aretha Franklin with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and her father Rev. C.L. Franklin in Detroit at Cobo Hall in 1968.

On June 23, 1963, the largest Civil Rights demonstration in U.S. history was held in Detroit along Woodward Avenue mobilizing hundreds of thousands of residents. The march was made possible by the role of Rev. Franklin along with an alliance of community organizations. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), had backed Franklin’s leadership role in the march mobilization. Franklin was very much involved in SCLC and advocated the elimination of racial discrimination in Detroit. King would deliver one of his early renditions of the “I Have a Dream” speech which was recorded and later issued by Motown Records. 

Irrespective of these valiant nonviolent efforts, the general atmosphere became far more volatile as the predominantly white police force became notorious for their racial profiling, arbitrary arrests, brutality and murder of African Americans. By August 1966, the seeds of an urban rebellion occurred in the Kercheval Street area on the eastside. This rebellion was contained at the time.

Nonetheless, the following year, on July 23, 1967, the largest urban rebellion up until that time in U.S. history, was led by African Americans having been sparked by a police raid on 12^th Street in the early morning hours. The unrest continued for five days, when in the first 12 hours, the-then Democratic Liberal Mayor Jerome Cavanaugh and Republican Governor George Romney jointly agreed to send in thousands of National Guardsmen. By the second day of the rebellion, Romney appealed to Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson to send in 5,000 federal troops from the 82^nd and 101^st airborne division of the U.S. Army. 

43 people were officially reported killed as a result of the July 1967 rebellion. That same year similar incidents of civil unrest occurred in over 160 cities according to the finding of the Johnson administration appointed National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorder. The Commission headed by Illinois Governor Otto Kerner concluded that billions in redevelopment funding was necessary to correct the problems of a divided society, one black and one white.

Johnson, facing a rebuke of his War on Poverty, Model Cities and Great Society programs from a coalition of both Republican and Democratic lawmakers refused to accept the findings of the Kerner Commission. In the aftermath of the Detroit rebellion other organizations were founded in Detroit which sought revolutionary solutions to the problems of national oppression and economic exploitation.

Detroit Rebellion July 23, 1967 at the corner of 12th Street and West Euclid

Two of the most well-known were the Dodge Revolutionary Union Movement (DRUM), in 1968, which later expanded into the League of Revolutionary Black Workers (LRBW) the following year (1969). Also in late March 1968, the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika (RNA) was formed in Detroit bringing together Black Nationalists and other revolutionary forces from around the country to demand the creation of a sovereign nation in five southern states. 

New Bethel Baptist Church was located in the center of the 1967 rebellion where Linwood was the second hardest hit area second only to 12^th Street. That same year, Aretha Franklin released her first album on Atlantic Records entitled “I’ve Never Loved a Man.” The album catapulted her meteoric career to new heights. That same year she was designated as the Queen of Soul at the age of 25. 

The hit single “Respect”, written by the legendary Stax recording artist Otis Redding and later rearranged by Aretha, rose swiftly up the Rhythm and Blues and Pop Music charts in the spring and summer of 1967. The song was viewed as an anthem of resistance to the oppression of African Americans and women in particular. Aretha appeared on numerous local and national television programs. In early 1968, the city administration proclaimed a day of recognition for Aretha Franklin. She would later make a triumphant tour of Europe where she packed halls to the delight of Soul music fans throughout the continent. 

Aretha’s older sister, Erma Franklin, and younger sibling, Carolyn, too enjoyed commercial success and recognition in the popular music field. The rise of Aretha and her sisters in the cultural arena further enhanced the celebrity status of Rev. C.L. Franklin.

Later in 1969, the RNA convened its second national conference at New Bethel Baptist Church on March 29. As the meeting was breaking up around 11:00pm that evening, a shooting incident involving Detroit police and RNA security forces took place outside of the church on Linwood. Two white police officers were shot, one fatally. Just a few minutes later, dozens of Detroit police entered New Bethel firing live ammunition at those leaving the RNA gathering. At least four people were wounded and approximately 150 were detained and taken to area police lock-ups.

Soon enough Rev. Franklin, Recorder’s Court Judge George Crockett, Jr., who had just been elected in 1966, and educator, real estate businessman and politician James Del Rio, went to the police stations where the arrestees were being held. None of them had been properly read their rights or charged with specific crimes. Judge Crockett held court in the police stations and released the detainees. 

The shooting of the police officers and the subsequent release of the African Americans attending the RNA conference infuriated the white establishment in Detroit. A campaign by the corporate media, organized racists groupings and the police department sought to launch efforts to impeach Judge Crockett. The move to forced Crockett out of office failed as a broad coalition of political groups rallied under the banner of the Black United Front in defense of the community. 

No one was ever convicted in the shooting and killing of the police officers in the trials that followed. Within the next four years, in response to vicious police misconduct emanating from a decoy unit called Stop the Robberies Enjoy Safe Streets (STRESS), the African American community mobilized behind the-then State Senator Coleman A. Young who became the first Black mayor of the city elected in November 1973. 

Mayor Young relied on institutions such as New Bethel and the Shrine of the Black Madonna, formerly Central Congregational Church, pastored by the-then Black Power advocate and philosopher Rev. Albert B. Cleage, to secure his victory and a continuing political base for him to remain in office for the next two decades (1974-1994). Under the Young administration, significant reforms were enacted such as the implementation of an affirmative action program within the police department and among other municipal employees in general, championing African American political, proletarian and professional leadership. By 1977, Young had been re-elected easily for a second term being joined by a majority Black City Council including social democrats and Marxist lawyer turned politician Ken V. Cockrel, Sr. 

Detroit was undoubtedly the leading center for African American political leadership on an official level as well as through interventions in the labor movement and grassroots community organizations. The heritage of African Americans and other national minorities were recognized through various cultural and political gatherings. 

Contravening Forces and the Crisis in Modern Day Capitalism

These were times of monumental achievements for African Americans and women in the city of Detroit. However, other contradictory forces were in operation. 

The restructuring of industrial production which began in the mid-to-late 1950s caused a drop in the city’s population. Plant closings, automation, the suburbanization of metropolitan Detroit, discrimination in lending and insurance policies fueled the outmigration from the city. Two major recessions in the mid-1970s and the early 1980s took their disproportionate toll on Detroit. Under the perceived progressive leadership of Young and the majority Black City Council, sizable levels of disinvestment was carried out against Detroit.

These aspects of the political and economic crisis in Detroit during the 1970s directly impacted New Bethel Baptist Church and Rev. Franklin in a deadly fashion. The rise in street crime and homicide rates gained Detroit the reputation as “The Murder Capital of the World.” Heroin was flooded into the African American communities breaking up families and neighborhoods.

In June 1979, the Franklin home on LaSalle Blvd. in the Virginia District, where the rebellion had begun just twelve years before, was broken into by burglars. Rev. Franklin was shot by assailants. He was left bleeding for an extended period of time before help arrived. While being treated in an area hospital he stopped breathing but was revived. Nevertheless, due to the loss of blood, the most prominent African American minister of the period suffered irreversible neurological damage. For the following five years of his life (1979-1984), Rev. Franklin was never able to speak let alone deliver a sermon. The golden voice of the Black Church was silenced.

Aretha, who was living in California at the time of the shooting, was forced to relocate back to Detroit to supervise, along with her siblings, other relatives and church members, the around the clock medical care for Franklin. He remained in his home until just a few days prior to his death. After being moved to a nursing home on Grand River on the west side, Franklin died in July 1984. 

With the death of Rev. Franklin in 1984, the retirement of Mayor Young in early 1994, the continuing economic decline of the city of Detroit, many could ask: where is the Black Political Power movement in the city? The Great Recession of 2007 and beyond took a devastating toll on Detroit. The city was targeted through predatory lending by the financial institutions turning Detroit from being a municipality leading in home ownership for African Americans to its present-day status of a majority renter’s city. Homeownership, stable industrial and professional employment, had distinguished the African American community from other cities across the U.S. 

Today in 2018, under a white corporate-imposed mayor from Livonia who came into office under questionable circumstances during an illegally crafted system of emergency management and bankruptcy (2013-2014), the largest municipal re-organization in U.S. history, the people of Detroit are still struggling against property tax foreclosures, poverty, substandard wages, a state-looted and beleaguered educational system, environmental degradation, government-facilitated tax captures for the benefit of multi-national corporations, among other issues.

Yet there remains a social and political determination to resist. In response to the severe illness and later death of Aretha Franklin, people have come out in their thousands to express sincere condolences and to evoke the memories of times past where the struggle for survival, equality, self-determination and political power took precedent over all other concerns. This is the genuine legacy of the Queen of Soul, the Franklin family, along with the African American people as a whole and their allies.         

*

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of Pan-African News Wire. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Before the violence that started mid-April, Nicaragua had been the most peaceful, safest, and by far the most progressive country in Central America. Now that a semblance of peace has been restored in Nicaragua, the US government continues its campaign for regime change joined by some who formerly supported Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and his Sandinista party.

While much has been written for and against Ortega, what might replace him were he to leave is less well fleshed out. Latin Americanist academics Dan La Botz and Benjamin Waddell, both with extensive experience in and knowledge of Nicaragua, give us some insights into what might be expected were the opposition to take over.

US Regime Change Activities in Nicaragua

Although La Botz and Waddell are firmly in the “Ortega must go” camp, they are not naïve about US government interference in the internal affairs of Nicaragua. They are not among those that claim, incorrectly, that the uprising was simply a spontaneous phenomenon.

“International press has depicted the rapid escalation of civil unrest in Nicaragua as a spontaneous explosion of collective discontent.”

But Waddell contends

“it’s becoming more and more clear that the US support has helped play a role in nurturing the current uprisings.”

La Botz provides the background:

“US organizations such as USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and no doubt the CIA had for decades, of course, worked in Nicaragua as they do everywhere in the world.”

La Botz is not indifferent to US interference in Nicaragua. He was in fact critical of Washington’s early tepid reaction. US Vice President Pence, La Botz complained, “only demanded that the Ortega government protect its citizens and their rights,” but did not make a “general condemnation of the Ortega government, only a call for reform.”

La Botz concludes his article with the demand “the US must keep out.” But his evidence suggests that he should be demanding that the “US get out” of Nicaragua.

Waddell is more favourable to the efficacy of the US’s efforts in Nicaragua, reporting:

“Since 2014, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which was established in 1983 to promote democratic ideals in developing countries, has spent $4.1 million on projects in Nicaragua.”

Waddell describes,

“US Congress created the NED—as a non-profit, private NGO—in 1983 at the height of the Cold War.”

From “1984 to 1990, the US NED spent roughly $15.8 million dollars to fund civil society groups and to political parties, most of them opposed to the Sandinista government.” Waddell explains how this led to success for the US:

“In 1990, against all odds, Chamorro defeated Daniel Ortega, and ushered in three consecutive terms of conservative leadership.”

Waddell provides documentation on the US funding through NED to groups active in today’s opposition to the elected government of Nicaragua, including over half a million USD to Hagamos Democracia. Waddell commends these soft coup efforts by the US:

“Regardless of whether Mr. Ortega is removed from power, the NED’s involvement in Nicaragua reveals the potential for transnational funding to contribute to the cultivation of the type of skill sets, networking, and strategies necessary for civil society to successfully challenge authoritative (sic) governments.”

Composition of the Opposition to Ortega

“The Nicaraguan popular rebellion of this spring and early summer,” La Botz describes, “developed as a broad multi-class movement.” However, this movement “lacked a common political program.”  “The strongest organization with the clearest political ideas,” is not even remotely progressive, but has “fundamentally conservative, pro-capitalist ideas.” That leading organization “is COSEP (Consejo Superior de la Empresa Privada en Nicaragua), the leading business organization.”

The opposition leadership was joined by the “powerful” Catholic Church with its “conservative hierarchy,” according to La Botz. Other elements within the Catholic Church included “a theology of liberation current led by some university professors and parish priests, and the mass of pious believers.”

The third major group in the opposition are a diverse amalgam of students. In his brief overview, La Botz does not explain that prominent among the students are those from conservative private universities. Nevertheless, La Botz holds on to the wish that “a student ‘left’ could be emerging.”

Developments to date give little credence to the hope for a student opposition that is leftist. For instance, a delegation of opposition students went to Washington financed by the rightwing Freedom House to lobby for US sanctions against their own people. According to NACLA, these students “shared pictures on social media posing with Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), who represent most conservative, right-wing and hawkish sectors of the Republican Party.” More recently the Nicaraguan opposition student voice was heard on a regime change panel at the Koch brothers-funded, rightwing Hudson Institute. These are not leftists.

What’s Left in Nicaragua

“Two left opposition groups with social democratic politics do exist,” La Botz reports, “the Sandinista Renovation Movement (MRS) and the Movement to Rescue Sandinismo (MPRS).”

The MPRS or Rescate, an on-and-off left split from the MRS, is a minor actor. It is composed mainly of Mónica Baltodano and Henry Ruiz, who are active on the web and doing interviews.

The more prominent MRS broke from the main Sandinista party in the 1990s. The MRS, heavily composed of intellectuals, never developed a popular base among the Nicaraguan people. Starting off as a left opposition to the Ortega wing of the Sandinistas, the MRS has since shifted to the right. MRS leaders are partly supported by their connections to the US-funded NGO world and are in alliance “with parties with a neo-liberal agenda.” MRS national president Ana Margarita Vijil and Managua president Suyén Barahona hobnob with rightwing US politicians.

Calling the MRS left is like the Tea Party’s claim that Obama is a socialist; it’s a matter of perspective.

La Botz laments the absence of opposition left social movements: “they remain small and marginal to the society as a whole.” In a curious convolution of logic, La Botz blames Ortega for the failure of an anti-Ortega left opposition to emerge:

“Ortega’s FSLN has discredited the idea of socialism and repressed rival democratic socialist currents.”

This has not, however, prevented the emergence of a right opposition. The left-leaning, well-organized labor and agrarian unions in Nicaragua, according to La Botz, have largely avoided the opposition.

In a revolution, there are only two sides. Despite the highly polarized situation in Nicaragua, La Botz conjurers a third way:

“There is, however, the possibility that the democratic struggle could open up a social struggle that would create a new left.”

In sum, the picture presented by La Botz is that presently the opposition to Ortega is not democratic or left, but that he hopes it could be, despite troubling ties to US intelligence agencies and NGOs.

NACLA reports reactionaries, not progressives, are emerging from the opposition:

“In fact, many in the (opposition) movement and the civic alliance are fervent anti-Sandinistas. These are people who do not just oppose Ortega and Murillo in the current context but also pro-capitalists who have attacked the Sandinistas since their emergence. This group includes Somocistas (those who defend the legacy of the Somoza dictatorship), Liberals, Conservatives, and former Contras. There is growing evidence that from the ranks of anti-Sandinistas such groups are arming themselves and gaining momentum.”

The Lesson of Libya

The trajectory of the anti-Ortega opposition is to a rightist putsch. Were it to succeed, handing direction of the pension plan over to the IMF would not be socialism. Leaving the enforcement of Nicaragua’s anti-abortion laws to the tender mercies of the Catholic bishops would not be feminism. And this would not be the solution that long-time solidarity activists such as Dan La Botz seek. If we are to learn from history, the overthrow of the Libyan government did not result in the utopian emergence of a socialist third way. Nor would such an outcome transpire with regime change in Nicaragua.

La Botz criticizes what he calls the “neo-Stalinist left” who oppose US intervention in Nicaragua. These same people that La Botz criticizes were also opposed to US intervention in Libya, which left that formerly thriving country a disastrously failed state where slavery is now practiced. There is a lesson to be learned about consistent anti-imperialism, and it is not supporting US-backed regime change.

Nicaragua has been tragically destabilized, threatening to reverse the major social gains achieved by the Ortega government. The North American left should unite around “US out of Nicaragua.” Let the Nicaraguan people choose their own government through elections as they have in 2006, 2011, and 2016 when they returned Ortega to the presidency with ever increasing voting margins.

Beyond the US-backed interests and their NGO-activists are undoubtedly genuine social elements in opposition to Ortega. Likewise any political party, especially one that has been in power as long as the Sandinistas, could benefit from rectification. But these are agenda items to be addressed by the Nicaraguan people without outside interference. The ossification of polarized positions in a climate of opposition-provoked violence guarantees nothing gets rectified and everyone loses.

The US is the world’s hegemon, imposing global neoliberalism. The Ortega government in Nicaragua has been targeted by the hegemon precisely because it has not served as an unquestioning client state. The fall of the Ortega government would close one more space for any alternative to the empire to survive.

*

Roger D. Harris is on the board of the Task Force on the Americas, a 32-year-old anti-imperialist human rights organization.

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

“Sanctions are war by other means, invisible to most eyes.”

Corporate media in this country deliver a steady onslaught of anti-Venezuelan propaganda. The Washington Postfumes about Venezuelan “pirates ” while the New York Times reports that Ecuador is overwhelmed by desperate Venezuelan migrants . Unfortunately the propaganda has succeeded to a large degree. “Socialism doesn’t work, just look at Venezuela,” is an all too common trope. It is rare that anyone with a public platform reveals a simple truth. Venezuela’s problems were created by the United States government, first during the Obama administration and now continuing under Trump’s.

It is sanctions against the Venezuelan government and its people that have created hyperinflation, hunger, and a devastated health care system that was once the envy of that region. Sanctions are war by other means, invisible to most eyes. There are no troops, bullets, bombs, drones or military weaponry. But sanctions are as deadly as any military invasion, and Trump may do that yet.

“Venezuela’s problems were created by the United States government.”

In 2015 Barack Obama issued an executive order declaring Venezuela to be “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” That decree is necessary in order to impose economic sanctions. But sanctions do not only mean that American corporations and individuals cannot do business with the targeted country. Any country that conducts economic transactions with Venezuela will also be subject to sanctions. Even in its state of decline the United States is the 800-pound financial gorilla that can’t be ignored.

When the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC and the rest report on Venezuela’s depredations they never reveal that it is the United States which brought about it crisis condition. Because of sanctions Venezuela has oil that it can’t sell. Even individuals are prohibited from doing something as simple as sending money there.

A federal judge recently ruled that creditors can seize CITGO , Venezuela’s U.S.-based petroleum subsidiary. The creditors are Canadian mining company Crystallex and ConocoPhillips. They may get the chance to scavenge because sanctions make Venezuela unable to renegotiate any of its debts. This is the epitome of criminality brought about by international capital. Venezuela was deliberately impoverished, and then robbed of what little it has left.

“Even in its state of decline the United States is the 800-pound financial gorilla that can’t be ignored.”

Venezuela is isolated financially and is now surrounded by right wing governments in Brazil, Colombia and Ecuador. The United States could overthrow Maduro without sending even one soldier. The reliable crime of funding proxies could work as well on Venezuela as it did on Libya.

What have Venezuelans done to bring on this draconian punishment? They have dared to vote for socialist governments, first under the late president Hugo Chavez and again when he was succeeded by Nicolas Maduro. The corporate media derisively refer to Maduro as a “hand picked successor.” That means he was vice president and, just as in this country, succeeds a president who dies in office. The attempt to discredit his legitimacy is yet another example of how the state and media work closely together in a country that claims to have a free press.

Now the social media corporations have colluded with government to make certain that anyone who is interested in the Venezuelan perspective will be isolated as well. Facebook temporarily removed the Venezuela Analysis page claiming violations of terms of service. It was not the first time that Facebook has removed Venezuela Analysis and it may not be the last.

“Social media corporations have colluded with government to make certain that anyone who is interested in the Venezuelan perspective will be isolated.”

Black Agenda Report predicted that Russiagate would be the pretext for censoring the left. Social media platforms are as much a part of corporate media as the networks or major newspapers. The day may come when Venezuela’s presence is erased there altogether.

Barack Obama issued executive orders imposing sanctions in 2015 and 2016. In 2017 the order was renewed early in January in order to provide “a smooth transition ” to Donald Trump.

“This will ensure that the new administration will not need to immediately undertake renewals necessary to safeguard our national security as it works to put its national security team in place and secure Senate confirmation of relevant appointees.”

The security state is nothing if not consistent.

But is the anti-war movement consistent? Are people who claim to be on the left consistent? If Trump were to make good on threats to take military action, how many people would be in the streets protesting against U.S. aggression? Venezuelans impoverished by American dictates have no lobby to speak for them. No member of Congress takes to the floor and expresses outrage on their behalf. Even alleged socialist Bernie Sanders dismissed Chavez as “a dead communist dictator.” Unfortunately he isn’t alone in his assessment.

Anyone who claims to be anti-war must also oppose the ongoing horrors visited upon the Venezuelan people. They are suffering and dying because of decisions made by the bipartisan war party. If the left were consistent in its analysis and actions no president would dare to attack Venezuela or any other country in this manner. Let the whole world sanction the United States for its continuing aggressions that devastate so many people.

*

Margaret Kimberley’s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

GR Editor’s Note

It was Obama who launched the bombing campaign in 2014 allegedly against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. This operation was presented to public opinion as a bona fide counter-terrorism operation rather than a war of aggression.

According to Stephen Lendman, the US is not fighting the ISIS. Quite the opposite. ISIS-Daesh, namely the Islamic State is supported and financed by the U.S. and its allies. 

M. Ch. August 18, 2018

****

US support for ISIS is an open dirty secret – undiscussed by media, pretending it’s not so.

Washington actively arms, funds, trains, and directs ISIS and other terrorists – backing the scourge they pretend to oppose. 

Obama and Trump’s vow to degrade and destroy ISIS was and remains a bald-faced lie, using these and other cutthroat killers as proxy fighters in Syria and other countries where they’re deployed – their presence unjustifiably justifying illegal US occupation of northeast and southwest Syrian territory.

Last November, Russia’s Defense Ministry said the following:

“The Abu Kamal liberation operation conducted by the Syrian government army with air cover by the Russian Aerospace Force at the end of the last week revealed facts of direct cooperation and support for ISIS terrorists by the US-led ‘international coalition.”

“Americans peremptorily rejected to conduct airstrikes over the ISIS terrorists on the pretext of the fact that, according to their information, militants are yielding themselves prisoners to them and now are subject to the provisions of the Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.”

US-led “coalition’s aviation tried to create obstacles for the aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces in this area to safely shield militants of the Islamic State.”

“There is indisputable evidence that the United States pretends it is waging irreconcilable struggle against international terrorism in front of the international community, while in reality it provides cover for the combat-ready Islamic State groups to let them regain strength, regroup themselves and advance US interests in the Middle East.”

Washington directly aids ISIS and other terrorist fighters, deploying them where Pentagon commanders want them used, relocating them to new conflict zones in Syria and other countries.

Iran has credible documents showing US support for ISIS. Its armed forces deputy chief of staff Major General Mostafa Izadi earlier said

“(w)e are facing a proxy warfare in the region as a new trick by the arrogant (US-led) powers against the Islamic Republic,” adding:

“We possess information showing direct support by US imperialism for (ISIS) in the region which has destroyed Islamic countries and created a wave of massacres and clashes.”

Separately, Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani condemned Washington for “align(ing) itself with ISIS in the region.”

So-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are infested with ISIS and other terrorists. Washington’s objective in Syria remains regime change – why the Obama regime launched naked aggression in the country, continued by Trump regime dark forces in charge of Washington’s geopolitical agenda.

A new Security Council report showed renewed ISIS strength in parts of Syria controlled by US forces and allies, saying:

ISIS terrorists have “breathing space to prepare for the next phase of its evolution into a global covert network.”

Aided by the Trump regime and allied forces, they control “small pockets of territory in the Syrian Arab Republic on the Iraqi border.”

Russia’s General Staff earlier accused the Pentagon of training ISIS and other terrorists at its illegally established At Tanf base in southwest Syria – calling it a staging ground for US armed struggle against the Syrian government.

ISIS and other terrorists infest the Rukban refugee camp controlled by US Forces, holding tens of thousands of defenseless Syrians hostage, using the camp to recruit anti-government terrorists.

On August 15, AMN News said US-led forces “transported over 250 trucks filled with weapons (and other military hardware) to the Euphrates River Valley this morning” – intended for Syrian Democratic Forces terrorists in Deir Ezzor province, adding:

Washington is “expand(ing) (its) bases and airports in northern and eastern Syria” – indicating US forces will remain in the country, not leave, as Trump earlier said.

Separately on August 18, AMN News said Washington and its allies “sent reinforcements to their military bases in the towns of Tal Tamer, Al-Houl, and Al-Shaddadi.”

Syria’s liberating struggle continues, no end of it in sight as long as US regime change intentions remain unchanged.

*

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above

Criticism of Pakistan’s anti-money laundering and terrorism finance regime by the Asia Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG) is likely to complicate incoming Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan’s efforts to tackle his country’s financial crisis.

Addressing the criticism of the 41-nation APG, which reports to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism watchdog that earlier this year put Pakistan on a grey list with the prospect of blacklisting it is key to a possible Pakistani request for a US$ 12 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout.

A US demand that any IMF package exclude funding for paying off Chinese loans coupled with the APG/FATF criticism, against a backdrop of the Pakistani military’s efforts to nudge militants into the mainstream of Pakistani politics and the incoming prime minister’s mixed statements on extremism, could push Mr. Khan to turn to China and Saudi Arabia for rescue, a move that would likely not put Pakistan in the kind of straightjacket it needs to reform and restructure its troubled economy.

The APG criticism followed Pakistani efforts to demonstrate its sincerity by passing in February the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance of 2018, which gave groups and individuals designated by the UN as international terrorists the same status in Pakistan for the first time.

Pakistan, however, has yet to implement the ordinance by for example acting against Hafez Saeed, a leader of the banned group Lashkar-e-Taiba and the alleged mastermind of the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, who despite having been designated a global terrorist by the United Nations Security Council and having a US$ 10 million US Treasury bounty on his head, fielded candidates in last month’s election.

The APG, which just ended talks with Pakistani officials, has scheduled follow-up visits to Pakistan in September and October to monitor Pakistani progress in addressing its concerns, which focus on legal provisions governing non-profit and charitable organisations, transparency in the country’s beneficial ownership regime and the handling of reports on suspicious financial transactions.

Those concerns go to the heart of the effort by the Pakistani military and intelligence to mainstream militants who garnered just under ten percent of the vote in last month’s election but have a far greater impact on Pakistani politics. The military and intelligence have in the past encouraged militants to form political organizations with which mainstream political parties have been willing to cooperate and establish charity operations that have had a substantial social impact.

Similarly, Mr. Khan, who earned the nickname Taliban Khan, is likely to have to counter his past record of allowing government funds to go to militant madrassas, his advocacy for the opening in Pakistan of an official Taliban Pakistan office, and his support of the Afghan Taliban. His Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)-headed government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, gave in February US$2.5 million to Darul Aloom Haqqania, a militant religious seminary.

Dubbed a “jihad university,” Darul Aloom Haqqania, headed by Sami ul-Haq, a hard-line Islamist politician known as the father of the Taliban, counts among its alumni, Mullah Omar, the deceased leader of the Taliban, Jalaluddin Haqqani, the head of the Haqqani Network. Asim Umar, leader of Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, and Mullah Akhtar Mansoor, Mullah Omar’s successor who was killed in a 2016 US drone strike.

Those may be policies that, at least initially, may be less of an obstacle in assistance on offer from China and Saudi Arabia to replenish Pakistan’s foreign exchange reserves that have plummeted over the past year to US$ 10.4 billion, enough to cover two months of imports at best. Pakistan’s currency, the rupee, has been devalued four times since December and lost almost a quarter of its value.

Chinese loans have so far kept Pakistan afloat with state-owned banks extending more than US$5 billion in loans in the past year. PTI officials said this week that China has promised the incoming government further loans to keep Pakistan afloat and enable it to avoid reverting to the IMF, which would demand transparency in the funding of projects related to China’s US$50 billion plus investment in the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a crown jewel of its Belt and Road initiative.

And that is where the rub is. Despite Chinese officials reportedly urging Pakistan to reduce its deficit, neither China nor Saudi Arabia, which has offered to lend Pakistan US$4 billion are likely to impose the kind of regime that would put the country, which has turned to the IMF 12 times already for help, on a sustainable financial path.

Relying on China and Saudi Arabia would likely buy Pakistan time but ultimately not enable it to avoid the consequences of blacklisting by FATF, which would severely limit its access to financial markets, if it fails to put in place and implement a credible anti-money laundering and terrorism finance regime

Moreover, relying on China and Saudi Arabia, two of Pakistan’s closest allies could prove risky. Neither country shielded Pakistan from FATF grey listing in February. A Chinese official said at the time that China had not stood up for Pakistan because it did not want to “lose face by supporting a move that’s doomed to fail.”

*

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site: The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer.

Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, co-director of the University of Würzburg’s Institute for Fan Culture, and co-host of the New Books in Middle Eastern Studies podcast. James is the author of The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer blog, a book with the same title and a co-authored volume, Comparative Political Transitions between Southeast Asia and the Middle East and North Africa as well as Shifting Sands, Essays on Sports and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa and just published China and the Middle East: Venturing into the Maelstrom

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

At some point last weekend, America decided its First Amendment was outdated – that Free Speech was no longer as important as protecting the vulnerable from the menace of Hate Speech. This decision came down from on high amidst a whirlwind of banning, deplatforming, and terminology-redefining, the product of years of collaboration between Big Tech and Big Government on how to break down the resistance to censorship that was so stubbornly encoded in this country’s DNA.

Alex Jones was merely the test case – a toe dipped in the public stream of consciousness to gauge the effectiveness of the propaganda we’re being fed. Outside the conservative media sphere, the response to Jones’ un-personing – removed from YouTube, Facebook, Google, Apple, Spotify, Stitchr, MailChimp, LinkedIn, Vimeo, and finally Twitter in the course of a few days, a heavy blow the companies claim was not coordinated among themselves at all (wink, wink) – was tepid, with only a few brave commentators willing to bridge the partisan divide to defend Infowars’ right to free speech on principle. Some reprehensible shills even cried that the censorship hadn’t gone far enough. Big Tech took the Left’s cowardice as a green light and turned their censorship ray on the other end of the political spectrum. Telesur, the Caracas-based network home to Abby Martin, was booted from Facebook yesterday, an act the media greeted with a deafening silence far more terrifying than all the anti-speech “liberals” baying for Jones’ blood.

Telesur and Martin were logical choices to launch Big Tech’s un-personing on the Left. Facebook’s partner in silencing dissent – now lumped in with “fake news” – is the Atlantic Council, whose board of directors reads like a who’s-who of western imperialism, with Henry Kissinger, Michael Chertoff, and Michael Hayden rubbing shoulders with CrowdStrike founder Dmitri Alperovitch, the man behind the Russiagate conspiracy theory. Martin figured prominently in the Russiagate intelligence community assessment, which devoted several pages to wringing its hands about her old RT show “Breaking the Set,” even though it had been off the air for years before the 2016 election; a woman-on-the-street piece she recorded last year that revealed the shocking bigotry of average Israeli citizens was banned in 28 countries on YouTube. Venezuela, of course, sits on the largest oil reserves in the western hemisphere and has long been on the war machine’s “to do” list (Venezuelanalysis.com was also dropped from Facebook, but later reinstated). Together, they represent everything that keeps the NATO-backed Atlantic Council awake at night.

For all the hundreds of articles weighing in on the Passion of Alex Jones, hardly anyone mentioned Telesur’s disappearance – or the deletion of State Department whistleblower Peter van Buren, who was banned from Twitter for a relatively mild argument while all eyes were on Infowars; or the double vanishing act of Scott Horton and Daniel McAdams, two anti-war journalists whose Twitter accounts were yanked and then restored for defending van Buren. The narrative we are being fed is that Jones was out of line for his behavior – that questioning the facts of the Sandy Hook shooting is morally equivalent to yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre – so Big Tech made a Big Decision and silenced Infowars, in a precedent-setting move that won’t ever have sinister repercussions for anyone elsewhere on the political spectrum. Anyone capable of mustering a few scraps of historical context or even basic critical thinking understood that Jones was just the red-faced canary in the totalitarian coal mine, and that every alternative media content creator is now in peril. But the establishment media is telling us to move on – after all, Trump is attacking the press, and we have to stand with them! Pardon me while I puke on your solidarity.

The Enemy of My Enemy Is My Enemy

Big Tech’s Big Crackdown was driven not by social media platforms themselves, but by establishment media and their backers, who see the writing on the wall as the lion’s share of Americans now get their news from Facebook and Google. When Jack Dorsey dragged his feet on censoring Infowars, dozens of articles from the Verge and Vox shrieked about Twitter’s “amorality,” but it was CNN that actually deployed a reporter to dig through Jones’ old tweets in search of something that violated the platform’s terms of service. Facebook, instructed by the Atlantic Council, has begun removing “misinformation that contributes to violence” – fake stories it “believes” (after consultation with local “threat intelligence agencies”) are “created or shared with the intent of causing violence or physical harm” – but even this Orwellian overstep would not disqualify Infowars. The tech platforms and their ruling class manipulators are belatedly realizing their control grid is still full of holes, and the establishment media – another tentacle on the same octopus – is offering up some almost-clever solutions in a bid to regain its masters’ favor. Facebook could take a page from YouTube’s book and link to Wikipedia pages on the disputed topic (because Wikipedia is such an authoritative source)! They could draft a constitution (since they clearly respect the existing one so much)! Anything but positioning themselves as a neutral content platform like Twitter, enmeshed in “amoral, as well as regressive, terrible decision-making.”  

 The Hate Speech Trap

The not-so-secret weapon in the new-media censorship wars is Hate Speech – a nebulous term whose meaning is constantly shifting to suit the whims of whoever is using it. Since the 2016 election, Hate has been the domestic bogeyman of choice, the enemy within while Russia plays the role of enemy without. The Southern Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League and other fearmongering groups tell us Hate is on the rise, that Hate Crimes have skyrocketed since Trump’s election, that Haters are being radicalized online at a breakneck pace – and that only drastic, even unconstitutional measures will stop the insanity. The establishment media have rushed to cover anything that looks remotely like a white supremacist gathering, often outnumbering the actual participants with their camerapeople and reporters. Only by exposing the Haters, they say, will America free itself of the scourge of white supremacy – clearly the #1 problem in a country where the national debt is 940% of GDP and most of us live paycheck to paycheck, falling asleep to the lullaby that we live in the richest nation in the world.

Hate speech is the ideal weapon for the deplatforming aggressive precisely because the term has no universally agreed-upon definition even as it provokes an emotional reaction. Nearly all of the platforms that banned Infowars cited “hate speech” as their rationale without claiming a specific example, though Facebook claimed Jones’ account was full of anti-Muslim and anti-trans bigotry. YouTube was the first to block Jones, making it impossible for those unfamiliar with his material to ascertain the truth of these claims. A political performance-artist who took a hard ideological swerve right with Trump’s candidacy, Jones has replaced much of the anti-police-state rhetoric that endeared him to his early audience with more typical conservative talking points, including a reprehensible knee-jerk Zionism that sets him in clear opposition to Islam. Still, a rational mind would be hard-pressed to classify his words as “hate” unless one radically redefined “hate.” Which is precisely the idea. Liberals, unaware of Infowars content, take Big Tech’s word that it is hateful and repugnant – he questioned Sandy Hook! – but don’t bother evaluating it for themselves because of their visceral aversion to anything deemed “hate speech,” and his relatively anodyne comments retroactively come to embody hate speech, since no one is sure what the term means anyway. Definition creep sets in, and overnight half the conservative media finds itself on the wrong end of Big Tech’s terms of service.

Twitter clone Gab, the favored platform of the alt-right ever since it welcomed victims of the 2016 “Twitter purges,” was threatened by Microsoft with the cancellation of its web domain last week because of two anti-Semitic posts made a month ago by Republican Senate candidate Patrick Little. Why Microsoft would take down the entire platform because of two objectionable tweets was never properly explained – certainly, the platform is home to plenty of other objectionable messages by less-well-known users. The threat may have been an effort to force Gab to betray the principles that originally attracted users like Little who’ve been expelled from other platforms – “free speech, individual liberty and the free flow of information online” – principles sure to attract more users as Twitter begins purging anew. Little removed the offending tweets, and Gab survived to offend another day. Meanwhile, PayPal has been quietly dropping users linked to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s infamously inaccurate “hatewatch” list since last year.

“Pre-Hate,” Brought to You By Google

Banning the “haters” is only the first step in Big Tech’s Big Crackdown. Google’s shadowy Jigsaw arm recently developed a tool called Perspective which aims to root out “hate speech” before it spreads. Built in collaboration with the New York Times and Wikipedia, Perspective uses “machine learning” to “spot abuse and harassment online,” analyzing the flow of online conversations in the hope of predicting (and preemptively redirecting) their trajectory. The tool could presumably be deployed against content creation on Big Tech platforms in real time, though the PR materials limit their discussion to its potential in moderating comments sections. A similar initiative is in development at the ADL, which is working with UC-Berkeley to develop an “online hate index” to “better understand the growing amount of hate on social media,” uncovering and identifying trends in “hate speech” across different platforms. The goal is a “community-based” definition of hate speech – but they never say whose community gets to do the defining. Given the ADL’s rabid demonization of anything with a whiff of criticizing Israel as “anti-Semitism,” such a tool in their hands should worry political analysts and anyone who comments on world events.

Jigsaw is already looking beyond “hate speech” to influence real-world behavior. Its Redirect Method began as a beefed-up AdWords aimed at convincing potential ISIS recruits to think twice about joining the US/Israeli-backed terror group; the program is now being positioned as the perfect tool for countering the uniquely American specter of White Hate. Instead of merely pointing the hapless would-be terrorist to YouTube videos debunking ISIS propaganda, Redirect’s successor Moonshot follows up the ideological rebuttals with messages from “undercover social workers” embedded in extremist forums. The infiltrators “discreetly message potential recruits to dissuade them,” an act that takes on sinister implications considering the vast wealth of personally identifying information Google hoards on its users. Given that the program has no way of distinguishing between an individual looking to be radicalized and someone doing research for a film or journalistic piece, the privacy ramifications are – as with everything Google – disturbing. It is one thing to be concern-trolled by an online do-gooder; another entirely when the concern-troll is armed with your home address, your phone number, and your bank account information. A Wired article on the program also suggests that Google readily supplies the incriminating search data to authorities, dispelling any illusion of the tech giant’s concern for the well-being of wannabe extremists.

Lest you believe the Great Deplatforming is really about “hate,” recall that Facebook also removed 32 pages it suspected of “inauthentic behavior” last weekend, pages devoted to the counter-protest against the Unite the Right 2 rally, pages populated mostly by anti-racist groups planning a big show of opposition to the white nationalist gathering that was supposed to be the very embodiment of “hate.” Why? They were suspected of having been created by Russian trolls. This is the Atlantic Council, after all – if you aren’t losing sleep over the possibility of Russian “meddling” in the midterm elections, they’re not doing their job. Israel’s Knesset just passed the first draft of a bill that would empower courts to order the removal of social media posts for “safety” reasons – not merely hide the posts from Israeli users, but remove them globally. This is a country that regularly arrests people based on their social media content, having criminalized such violations as “glorifying Palestinian martyrs” or “disclosing Israeli crimes.” Don’t think the deplatforming will stop with the perpetrators of “hate.”

“Freedom” Isn’t Free, and Other Lessons from Orwell

Led by the Boston Globe, 300 newspapers have colluded in Sinclair-media-esque fashion to publish editorials in defense of a “free press,” as if Trump’s disparaging remarks about “fake news” represent the most significant threat to their ossified business model. The Globe published a poll indicating 48% of Republicans believe “the news media is the enemy of the American people” – but this is a situation for which the establishment media has only itself to blame. Decades of biased pro-corporate warmongering have taken their toll, and the average American has had their fill of lies. The best journalism has long since migrated online and away from the big legacy names, and social media platforms have assumed the role once held by the television. Meanwhile, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg has threatened the entire old-media establishment with economic death if they do not work with his platform to “revitalize journalism.” It is difficult to tell whether establishment media or Big Tech poses a greater threat to press freedom – both are chillingly effective tools of control wielded by the ruling class against the people, and Zuckerberg’s idea of a “revitalized” journalism is the stuff of nightmares – but as the online platforms increasingly come to resemble establishment media with their unhealthy appetites for gatekeeping and censorship, it is clear that neither see themselves as friends to independent journalists.

Some have naively called for the government to step in and regulate Big Tech, reasoning that their platforms operate as monopolies and should be treated as such under the law. While it’s tempting to call in Big Brother to clip the wings of Twitter & co., such an act would trigger a slide down yet another slippery slope. Corporations are already the willing partner of the US government in enacting almost-laws that violate our pesky constitution – Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and the other tech platforms have been discussing the banning of Infowars in meetings with congresspeople for months. The Deep State knows it can’t openly strip citizens of their First Amendment rights just yet, so Big Tech is deployed to do their dirty work. Once the government legally has its hands on social media, there is nothing stopping them from exerting even more control over these platforms, bringing full circle the process that began when the Pentagon’s Orwellian “LifeLog” project was scrapped and reanimated in the corporate sector as “the Facebook.” Fascism is characterized by an alliance at the highest level between corporations and the government, and further defined by heavy-handed censorship. This – not a mere figurehead like Trump – is the greatest threat to press freedom today.

*

Helen Buyniski is a journalist and photographer based in New York City. She covers politics, sociology, and other anthropological/cultural phenomena. Helen has a BA in Journalism from New School University and also studied at Columbia University and New York University. Find more of her work at http://www.helenofdestroy.com and http://medium.com/@helen.buyniski. She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above

July was always a politically turbulent month in Iraq. But the violent protests that have swept South Iraq over the past weeks are unseen, both in terms of size and targets. Ports were blocked, airports closed, provincial government buildings besieged and most striking: the local headquarters of Islamic Shiite parties and Allied militias were attacked. In a recent International Crisis Group report, the death toll is estimated at fifty, and hundreds are injured. 

Rebellion of the Shiites

The end of the occupation by the Islamic State (ISIS) of a third of Iraq and the recaptured control by government troops of the entire territory, has not brought peace and stability to Mesopotamia.

The ruling elite of Iraq has survived Kurdish separatism and Sunni jihadism, but the uprising of its own Shiite base could well become the biggest threat. Since July 8, the oil-rich south is in turmoil. In the scorching heat, tens of thousands of Iraqis are protesting against a shortage of jobs, electricity, water, basic services and unbridled corruption. They have set fire to government buildings and political party offices, blocked roads to oil fields, Najaf airport and the oil port of Um Qasr, the main route from Basra to the Persian Gulf, from where almost all oil tankers depart with Iraqi oil. Also, the two most important border crossings in the south, Safwan with Kuwait and Shalamcheh with Iran, were occupied by the demonstrators.

Hundreds of demonstrators tried to block access to major oil-producing facilities, including the West Qurna-1 oil field, operated by Exxon Mobil, the West Qurna-2 oil field, run by the Russian firm Lukoil, and Rumaila, one of the world’s largest oil fields, managed by the Iraqi oil company. The demonstrators also tried to block the main entrance of Siba’s natural gas field in Basra.

Protest in Basra

When the prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, went to Basra to appease the mood with the promise of 10,000 new jobs, demonstrators shouted him away. Since then he has deployed the army and militias against the demonstrators, he has issued a curfew and closed down the internet. More than a dozen people have been killed and more than 700 injured, most of them by bullets from the security forces, according to the mainstream media. But the International Crisis group reported in its Global Overview for July 2018:

“Protests swept across southern Iraq, with demonstrators bemoaning poor services and unemployment and attacking government and party offices. Security forces responded harshly, in some places shooting at protesters, and killing around 50.”

Again the western press has been guilty of serious undercounting.

Such unrest, in the areas of the Islamic Shiite parties that dominate Iraqi politics, does not predict much good. The size and targets of the latest protests indicate displeasure that is much deeper than just simple frustration about a lack of services and jobs. The demonstrators are angry about the failures of the Iraqi political system after 2003 and the lack of competent leadership. So the current crisis is the most serious existential challenge that the Iraqi political elite has to face since the US invasion.

Signs of popular annoyance have been visible for a long time. Increasing dissatisfaction with the pitiful state of local services and bad governance has led to periodic demonstrations throughout the country – including the southern Shiite areas – in recent years. Protests in Basra spread rapidly to other southern provinces in 2015 and culminated in massive demonstrations in Baghdad, where Muqtada al-Sadr and his supporters stormed the Green Zone. Since then there have been smaller demonstrations in the South, which have increased in the past few months. 

Another sign of the Iraqi disillusionment in the political system was the low turnout at the 12 May elections: officially more than 55 percent of voters boycotted the election, but the real figure will have been considerably higher because many Iraqi have become cynical and voiced their dissatisfaction by voting with their … .. feet.

The causes of the alienation with politics are easy to interpret. Years of maladministration, corruption, malfunctioning public facilities, including education and health care, a non-existent rule of law, sectarianism, return to a feudal state, such as the erosion of women’s rights, have undermined confidence in the political elite and their inability to solve the problems of the country. In practice, ‘government of all’ means ‘government for the few’, led by a green zone elite that is no longer trusted by the public.

Generational change also contributes to the schism. For the increasingly young population of Iraq, of which nearly 75 percent are younger than 35 years and 60% younger than 24 years, the memories of the Saddam era and the repression are vague. Their political awareness has evolved since 2003 and since then they have been assessing their leaders on government performance. Because the political Islam of the Shiites has lost much of its prestige and influence, not identity, but solid administration has become of the utmost importance for this electorate.

The government is watching and doing nothing. The politicians think that in September the popular anger will decrease if the temperatures drop. Behind the walls of the vast green zone of Baghdad, business continues as usual, in air-conditioned palaces. Leaders of Shiite factions quibble about the results of the controversial elections in May and demand a recount. The party bosses meanwhile negotiate about the most lucrative ministries.

The Shiite middle class awakens

The story of the uprisings began, simply explained, as a spontaneous uprising in the Shiite militia controlled provinces in the South of Iraq, similar to the Arab Spring of 2011, with the difference that the social layers that have been silent or even benefited from the political preferential treatment of the Shiites over the past 15 years, have now also come into action. The fuse was mainly put to the fire by the middle class and unemployed graduates. Their anger was mainly directed against the ruling Shiite parties in the provinces, because the country does not have a properly functioning central authority. Lawyers, doctors and academics and officials in Najaf and Nasiriyah, for example, participated in the demonstrations.

On 8 June there was a demonstration in Basra after a long power outage and a shortage of potable water in a heat wave that reached 50 degrees celsius. The protests escalated when the official authorities ignored the demonstrators, which was seen as an insult to the dignity of the people (especially the notables among them). some government members accused the demonstrators of being Da’ish (IS) supporters and Baathists. Some people then launched an attack on the buildings and party offices of those politicians. The protests quickly spread to 12 of the 18 Iraqi provinces, including Baghdad.

This intifada does not appear to have a uniform or clear leadership or slogans, even at the local level. It really looks like an explosion of anger where different currents act together and compete with each other. The governing faction at national level is fragmented within each province, within each institution, within the security forces and militias.

The regime has not been able to control the events so far. Rapid reform measures are not possible to help the Shia middle class professionals get to work and provide a prospect of a better life. There seems to have been a new phase in which no one can intervene outside the local communities and the situation in every province varies enormously.

Income from the oil does not benefit the population

Basra is located on a gigantic oilfield, the largest in the world, with large gas reserves. Basra produces an average of 3.2 million barrels per day and Iraq exports an estimated 4.6 million barrels per day via the southern port. The Rumaila field in itself, one of the largest fields in Basra (with 340 oil wells), contains the best oil in the world. Despite the high oil yield in the south of Iraq (in the provinces of Basra, Dhi Qar, Maysan, Muthanna and Wasit), the population has seen little of this wealth.

The news agency Reuters reacted rather panicky:

“Local officials said demonstrations would not affect the production and transportation of oil in Basra, which accounts for more than 95 percent of Iraq’s state revenue, and any disruption could have serious consequences for the waning economy of the country. the country and global oil prices may increase. “ 

But the news agency Bloomberg hastened to reassure the oil farmers and the stock markets:

“Iraq pumps oil at normal levels, even now the protests spread across the southern region, from which the second largest producer of OPEC exports the largest part of its crude oil, according to a government spokesman. “

Political parties in Iraq are calling on the government to break free from OPEC and go for unlimited daily production.” The country needs money because it has invested hundreds of billions in fighting and defeating IS, and there is not much left to meet the most basic needs of the population.

Shiites have to choose between Iraqi nationalism and loyalty to Iran

The leader of the Shiite clergy in Iraq, great Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, expressed his sympathy with the demonstrators during the Friday prayer in Karbala, the holy city of the Shiites. Basra was one of the “most miserable areas in Iraq”, his representative told the press. The people of Basra “suffer from a lack of public services”, adding that al-Sistani urged the “federal and local authorities to take the demands of the citizens seriously and to find solutions urgently.”

However, in an ominous warning some Shiite media channels associated with Iran denounced the demonstrators as “infiltrators”, mirroring the Tehran regime’s labeling of popular protests about the bad economic situation in Iran at the beginning of this year.

There may be some links between Iranian protests and the protests that are now raging in Iraq. Only a week before the protests in Basra began, there were violent clashes between police and demonstrators in the cities of Abadan and Khorramshahr, less than two hours driving east across the border between Iraq and Iran, about the same problems. Four people were shot by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on 30 June in Khorramshahr.

Demonstrators have accused Abadi of being unable to control the violence of the police, military and paramilitary units, including Iranian Shiite militants supported by Iran in the popular mobilization units (PMF) – a militant group that is now formally part of the Iraqi armed forces. The PMF or Hashd al-Shaabi and its constituent militias often follow only the orders of their own local commanders, or Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), and completely undermine the role of the prime minister as commander-in-chief.

PMF militants, including the notorious sectarian Asa’ib Ahl ul-Haq militia, the Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba group and Kata’ib Hezbollah, all participated in the violent suppression of the protests. This happened after the offices of the authoritative Dawa party and those of the IRGC-affiliated militias had been set on fire by demonstrators in the first week of the protests.

Shiite demonstrators cursed various political parties and militant groups as “Iranians” and not as Iraqis, and called them “Safavids”, a reference to the Shiite Persian empire that for centuries fought against the Ottoman Turks for control of Iraq. The use of the term ‘Safavid’ is more associated with Sunni groups that remain critical of the former Persian Empire because of their sectarian pogroms in Baghdad and other cities. The use of this term by Shiite Iraqis is indicative of the extent of the anger against Iranian interventionism in Iraq.

A misjudgment of Iran?

Uday al-Zaidy from the province of Dhi Qar, veteran of the 2011 demonstrations, tortured, convicted, imprisoned and laureate of the BRussells Tribunal prize for resistance in 2010, has on 22 July explained the unusual trajectory of the current uprising in the southern provinces. In his usual enthusiastic way, he said that the start was inspired by Iran because of the American embargo against Iranian oil and meant to paralyze Iraq’s oil production. Activists have used the momentum and turned it into an Iraqi nationalist anti-sectarian struggle and the current Intifada is the result. 

Several observers seem to confirm this. They point out that Iran is responsible not only for reducing electricity and water in the south, but also for inciting the inhabitants of Basra to revolt against the oil companies that recruit too few Iraqi workers. After all, although the Iraqi oil sector accounts for 99 percent of the country’s exports, it represents only 1 percent of jobs in Iraq, and the vast majority of jobs are held by foreigners. Those same observers say that Iran is playing a “dirty game” because the country has promised to create chaos in the region to disrupt oil production and exports in the Gulf as a reaction to Trump”s embargo.

No electricity

South Iraq, despite its wealth of oil and gas, has a major lack of electricity. Basra and other provinces buy electricity from Iran. Iraq has suffered from a shortage of electricity since 1990. Many Iraqis regularly experience power outages – households only get a few hours of electricity a day – despite the fact that billions of dollars have been spent since the US invasion in 2003. Because of mismanagement, corruption and wasting 40 billion dollar to rebuild the electricity grid, Iraq is to date still unable to be self-sufficient. 

The Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi fired his minister of electricity on 29 July. The demonstrators had demanded his departure. It is the umpteenth minister who is being fired. At least two previous ministers of electricity have been accused of corruption, including the signing of many fake contracts for billions of dollars. This resignation will again probably not change anything. With a cosmetic embellishment operation the endemic problem of corrupt politicians is not resolved.

Mohamed Fathi, the spokesperson for the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity, announced on 8 July that Iran would cut off its electricity supply to Iraq as a result of Baghdad’s default of more than $ 2 billion in debt to Iran.

It is not the first time that Iran has cut off the electricity supply to Iraq. At the beginning of 2017, Iran had already closed its electricity supply to Iraq for not paying debts. In July 2016, debt accrual also led Iran to cut off its electricity supply to Iraq for two months. The power supply was only resumed after Iraq paid part of that debt.

Another reason for shutting down the electricity supply is that Iran also suffers from electricity shortages in the capital and some southern cities as a result of the increased electricity consumption in the summer.

Saudi Arabia agreed to build a solar power plant and sell the electricity to Iraq at a steep discount to supplies the war-torn country previously bought from the kingdom’s regional arch-rival Iran. The deal, which hasn’t been approved yet by Iraqi authorities, includes building a 3,000-megawatt plant in Saudi Arabia within a year of the signing of the agreement, Iraq’s Ministry of Electricity spokesman Mussab Serri said by phone. Iraq will buy the electricity for $21 per megawatt-hour, or a quarter of what it paid Iran for the imports, Serri said.

The question arises why Iraq does not build a solar power plant in its own country? 

No water

The hostility towards Iran was also caused by the diversion and damming of rivers that originated in Iran.

Rice farmers in the areas of Salahiya, Mhanawiya and al-Shamiya in the province of Diwaniyah held protests on June 25, to express their dissatisfaction about their difficult situation, caused by the drought.

The farmers’ protests were directed against the decision of the Minister of Agriculture on 17 June to ban the cultivation of eight summer crops: rice, white and yellow corn, sesame, cotton, millet, sunflower seeds and mung beans. According to the ministry, this was due to the reduced water levels of the rivers Tigris and Euphrates.

A government decision was also issued on 12 June to suspend rice cultivation in Diwaniyah province. Water can only be used for drinking and garden purposes. In the southern province of Dhi Qar, the Ministry of Agriculture already reduced the area for rice cultivation to half in 2017. Before the invasion by the US, Iraq had abundant water supplies. Not anymore.

The neighboring countries, Turkey and ally Iran, started large projects that create serious water scarcity in Iraq through various projects on the two main rivers, the Euphrates and Tigris and their tributaries.

“There is no agreement between the countries about sharing the water resources of the two rivers,” said Fadel Al Zubi, Iraqi FAO responsible (the UN Food Organization). “Every neighboring country, whether it is Turkey, Iran or Syria, controls the flow of water to Iraq on the basis of its interests, needs and circumstances, without considering any quota, and in the end the person who pays the price is always the land where the river ends – in this case Iraq, “he said.

The water crisis is expected to increase when Turkey starts work on the Ilisu dam on the Tigris. Turkey says that its decades-long project to build 22 dams will be completed by the end of next year.

The actions of Iran are also of particular concern for Iraq, according to the Iraqi Deputy Minister of Water Resources Mahdi Rasheed. In total, according to experts, Iran carried out some 14 projects on all tributaries of the Sirwan River. The Sirwan flows into the Tigris. Tehran has also carried out projects on the tributaries that feed the Dukan dam in northern Iraq. 

The Tigris and the Euphrates contain the most important water resources in Iraq. After having defeated ISIS this year militarily, maintaining peace depends mainly on providing a better future for the Iraqi population. Water is a crucial issue in that effect: more than 80 percent of Iraq’s water goes to agriculture, which feeds more than a third of the population of 37 million people.

On 16 July protesters in Basra burned photos of Khomeini and stormed the political offices of the Islamic, Iran-backed Dawa party, Badr organization and the National Wisdom Movement. They demonstrated against Iranian drainage of the Shatt al-Arab stream (the merger of Tigris and Euphrates) that causes salinization of the water in southern Iraq. The total length of Shatt Al Arab is 192 km, and there are Iranian projects on several tributaries that flow into the Shatt al Arab, especially the Karkheh and the Karun.

A failing legal system

“On three days at the end of May, the president of the counter-terrorism court in Baghdad handled on average 12-13 cases a day and sentenced to death at least ten suspects accused of being members of IS”, according to the news agency Associated Press.

The legal system of Iraq remains a joke. Trials only take a few minutes. Few defendants have adequate defense. Evidence is not required for a conviction. Women whose ‘crime’ consists of being married to a member of IS or someone who is suspected of being a member of IS can be locked up and sentenced to death.

IS processes are often based on personal resentment and not on actual events. The whole system is a mess. AP reports: “Any allegation that someone has taken up arms for IS can be sentenced to death, even if the evidence is paper thin. The strong dependence on informants is particularly striking, given that some allegations are motivated by personal resentment. Informants never appear before the court Their claims are passed on to the judges in written reports from intelligence services without any form of investigation.

Thousands of defendants are quickly dragged through the court, with court cases lasting 10 to 15 minutes, and a third of the cases end with the death penalty. Witnesses are rarely heard and no forensic evidence is presented, which is likely to sent many innocent people to their death.

Where are the Sunnis?

The demonstrations have spread to many provinces, as well as the capital Baghdad. But there have been no comparable protests in the provinces with a majority of Sunni Muslims – and that despite the fact that living conditions are not better in central and northern Iraq, on the contrary. So why are there no protests?

“We share the concerns of our people in the south,” Abdul Rahman al-Fahdawi, one of the Sunni community leaders from Ramadi in Anbar, told NIQASH. “Our living conditions are not better than those in Basra or Dhi Qar, probably even worse, our homes have been destroyed and there is no infrastructure because of the military operations against ISIS, but we can not participate in the demonstrations because we will be accused accused of being terrorists and Baathists who want to destroy the government. “

When people in Sunni areas started anti-government protests end of 2012, they were peaceful, al-Fahdawi added.

“But the government has never responded to our legitimate demands, more than a year,” he says, ultimately enabling the rise of the extremist Islamic State, or ISIS, which base their ideology on a particularly extreme and perverse interpretation of Sunni Islam.

ISIS responded to the dissatisfaction of the Sunnis with the Iraqi government, which was then led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose government shot the demonstrators.

After the Iraqi army brutally suppressed the protests and peaceful sit-ins, the IS group offered itself as a protector of the Sunnis against the threat of the Shiite-led government. The locals only later discovered the brutal level of extremism practiced by the IS group.

“The Iraqi government made the mistake of not listening to the demonstrators before,” says Al-Fahdawi. “This means that extremists, anarchists, or even politicians can join the demonstrations, so demonstrators’ motivations are considered not pure, so today we can only watch the demonstrators from a distance and wish them good luck and security. The government should listen to their very legitimate demands. ”

“Our living conditions are not different from theirs,” says Iman al-Qaysi, a civil society activist from Mosul who wrote a comment to support the protests on Facebook. “We only get a few hours of water a day and the water is not pure because of the destruction of water purification plants, we only get about three hours of electricity per day and the garbage from the city piles up in the streets because there are no municipal collection services.”, he says.

There are also no jobs, al-Qaysi adds, and the people here need work urgently because they need money to rebuild their homes.

But he and his neighbors also know that if they dare to protest, they will be greeted with usual insults and threats: terrorists, Baath supporters, extremists.

“I was so disappointed with the answers to my comment,” says al-Qaysi. “People said things like:” why would you protest? “” You should thank God the Iraqi army saved you. “It seems like you would like IS to return to your region.”

The situation is not so different in other parts of the Sunni provinces. In the province of Salahaddin, the local population has seen the demonstrations in the south, but for the same reasons they have not organized their own protests. They are afraid of the consequences, says Hussam al-Jibouri, a Tikrit resident.

“People here still have bad memories of their own anti-government protests from 2013,” he says, “after which the IS group arrived. Any form of chaos can bring the extremists back. People are worried. Moreover, the security forces will just call us Baathists, “explains Al-Jibouri.” Because Saddam Hussein originally came from Tikrit. “

And the Kurds?

The inhabitants of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region have not joined the protests so far. But the region has already seen violently protests at the end of last year because of the same grievances: 

at least six people were killed and more than 70 injured on Tuesday, December 19, 2017. They were killed during demonstrations about unpaid civil service salaries, the increasing tensions with Baghdad, for better electricity and water distribution and other public services, in the Kurdish cities of Rania, Sulaymaniyah and Halabja.

Government buildings and political party offices were the target and were set on fire and plundered, resulting in injuries and material damage.

Videos on social media showed how demonstrators government buildings were burning, as well as party buildings of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and the Kurdish Democratic Party of Iraq (KDP) in Sulaymaniyah, Kuya and Taktak. Tires and cars were also ablaze. Some videos showed cheering crowds as demonstrators burned posters of former Kurdish president Masoud Barzani. 

The uncertain fate of Prime Minister Haider al Abadi

And as if the situation is not bad enough: the rivalry between Iraq and the US has also increased. The current Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is no longer the favorite candidate of Iran, but he remains the best choice for the US and their regional partners in the Middle East. The big question is then: whose candidate will be the winner, the one of Iran or the one of the USA? Both are determined not to lose and use all available means to promote their own candidate.

US ambassadors in the Middle East and the US Special Envoy in Iraq, Brett McGurk, are doing their best to convince the Gulf States of the need to support Haider al-Abadi and Moqtada al-Sadr and to promote them, so they would come to power in the new government, in direct opposition to Iran and its allies in Iraq. The US is asking neighboring countries of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to provide electricity to Iraq so that the Iranian economy would not benefit from it.

“US envoy Brett McGurk visited us in Baghdad and asked us to support Moqtada and Abadi in one coalition to re-elect the current Prime Minister, telling him that Moqtada al-Sadr is unpredictable and can not be considered as reliable. ) policy in Iraq has never been successful and your choices are not in our interest,” said the top two Sunni political authorities in Iraq who were visited by the American envoy.

Ambassador McGurk apparently did not like this unexpected answer: if the Iraqi leaders do not stick to the ‘recommendations’ of the US, he threatens with reprisals.

The reply of the Sunni leaders was short:

“We told Ambassador Brett that if he threatens us, he will not receive any cooperation from us and will create a negative outcome for everyone”.

The Sunnis are not the only ones who refuse to support Moqtada and Abadi. The American envoy visited Kurdistan and received similar answers from the Kurdish leaders.

The US also calls on Shiite party leaders to cooperate, but only Sayyed Ammar al-Hakim, the most docile of all those who have been contacted, is very willing to do so.

Iraq must remain weak and divided

It seems that the chances of Haidar Abadi to extend his mandate for another four years are decreasing by the minute. Iran and its allies, or rather the anti-American parties in Iraq among the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, still have the upper hand. There was a time when both Iran and the US agreed on the same candidate. Today the US has declared an economic war against Iran, with disastrous consequences for the Iranian people and the local currency. The embargo will start in early August and will be tightened in November.

Therefore, Iran can not accept a hostile government in Baghdad, and the US finds it difficult to leave Iraq under Iranian influence, especially as this will negatively affect the outcome of their unilaterally declared embargo. After all, Iraq can help sell Iran’s oil and expand trade with Tehran, eroding Donald Trump’s plan to force the “Islamic Republic” into submission.

In addition, the US feels very uncomfortable with the Iraqi militias, the Hashd al-Shaabi, who were set up in 2014 to fight IS, following the appeal of the Great Ayatollah Sistani. These irregular troops are – rightly or wrongly – accused of being under the command of Iran. They took positions along the border between Iraq and Syria and on June 18, Israeli jet fighters bombed and destroyed the headquarters of that Hasd al-Shaabi at the borders with Syria. 

In any case, there is a strong suspicion that the politicians of the US, Iran and Saudi Arabia have agreed to keep Iraq weak and politically divided. After all, a stable Iraq could become a power again in the region, which neither of these countries wants.

After all, a strong Iraq could be a threat to Israel and neighboring countries in the Middle East, mainly Saudi Arabia. Iraq can not – in the eyes of the Saudis – become strong again while it is in the grip of the Shiites and under the influence of Iran. It is therefore more desirable to have a divided Iraq, so that a coalition of Iraq with Iran and Syria against the Saudis in the region is less powerful.

Iran is also afraid of Iraqi politicians who are enthusiastic buyers of American weaponry. After all, these weapons could turn against Iran. After all, American troops, mercenaries and observers are still numerous. So Iran supports some of the strong militias within the Popular Mobilisation Units, who can defend Iraq against American hegemony.

Iraq threatens to get a shaky and divided government. The parliament is already under the control of the militias in most key positions, a scenario that most foreign players involved (US, Iran, Saudi Arabia) like, because each of these countries now has strong allies in the Iraqi political forum, allies who can drink each other’s blood.

Conclusion

The Iraqi people remain at the mercy of the interests of geopolitical forces, the hunger for profit of the oil companies and corrupt politicians in an occupied country. Iraqis continue to bear the full burden of 28 years of sanctions, wars, misery, death, destruction, chaos and extreme neoliberalism. However, the population remains alert, stands up again and again against the inhumane situation in which it was forced and wants a fairer redistribution of the available resources. The demonstrators also repeatedly resisted the division of the country, against the sectarianism imposed from above and against foreign interference. The peace movement and all progressives have the duty to support the legitimate aspirations of the Iraqi people in resistance, even though the situation in Iraq is presented as “complicated” in the media. The claim for reparations remains necessary and any support for the corrupt Iraqi regime by Western governments must be rejected.

David Romano argues,

“These people’s frustrations, if not addressed, could turn into a more potent enemy of the regime in Baghdad than even ISIS. Just like when it comes to Sunni Arab areas newly liberated from ISIS and in Kurdish areas recently coerced away from any moves towards independence, the government in Baghdad has a limited window of opportunity to address problems. If Baghdad fails to give Sunnis and Kurds their promised shares of governing power and wealth, if it goes on pumping oil from places like Basra and Kirkuk while the people there continue to live in poverty, the next big Iraqi crisis will not be long in coming. The past week’s protests in the south are simply a warning that people’s patience – whether they be Shia, Sunni, Kurdish or other – has limits.” 

And he’s probably right.

*

Dirk Adriaensens is a member of the executive committee of the BRussells Tribunal. Between 1992 and 2003 he led several delegations to Iraq to observe the devastating effects of the UN sanctions. He was a member of the International Organising Committee of the World Tribunal on Iraq (2003-2005). He is also co-coordinator of the Global Campaign Against the Assassination of Iraqi Academics. He is co-author of Rendez-Vous in Baghdad, EPO (1994), Cultural Cleansing in Iraq, Pluto Press, London (2010), Beyond Educide, Academia Press, Ghent (2012), Global Research’s Online Interactive I-Book ‘The Iraq War Reader, Global Research (2012), Het Midden Oosten, The Times They are a-changin ‘, EPO (2013) and is a frequent contributor to Global Research, Truthout, Al Araby, The International Journal of Contemporary Iraqi Studies and other media.

Sources

https://www.iraqinews.com/features/observatory-mass-protests-in-iraq-left-831-people-killed-wounded/

http://www.niqash.org/en/articles/politics/5957/Haunted-By-History-Iraq%E2%80%99s-Sunni-Muslims-Won%E2%80%99t-Join-Shiite-Led-Protests.htm

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/7/24/iraqi-forces-fire-on-and-beat-up-peaceful-protesters

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/7/22/fresh-protests-in-iraq-as-death-toll-rises

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20180724-iraqs-southern-rebellion-defies-defeat-in-the-face-of-state-violence/#.W1dP6c0emdM.facebook

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/Protests-continue-rock-Iraq-rights-groups-report-beatings-killings-2008778061

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/07/iraq-security-forces-deliberately-attack-peaceful-protesters-while-internet-is-disabled/

http://www.gicj.org/positions-opinons/gicj-positions-and-opinions/1439-demonstrations-in-iraq-july-2018

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mec/2018/07/18/iraqs-humpty-dump ty-challenge-who-can-put-the-country-together-again/

https://musingsoniraq.blogspot.com/2018/07/government-crackdown-shuts-down-many.html?m=1

https://www.iraqinews.com/features/iraqi-expert-expects-sweeping-protests-says-government-untrusted/

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/indepth/2018/7/12/the-iraq-report-mosul-a-dystopian-wasteland-after-is

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/indepth/2018/7/19/the-iraq-report-basras-fury-spreads-to-baghdad

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20180718-iraqs-southern-uprising-could-ignite-the-largest-revolt-the-country-has-witnessed-in-recent-memory/#.W08-VzgE0FU.facebook

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/iraq-protests-bad-government-roads-weather-people-haider-abadi-sadr-oil-a8451736.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/18/protests-spread-through-cities-in-iraqs-oil-rich-shia-south?CMP=share_btn_fb

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/protests-in-southern-iraq-to-demand-better-services-jobs/2018/07/15/8e3be8a4-87ff-11e8-9e 06-4db52ac42e05_story.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-15/iraq-says-oil-safe-as-government-cuts-social-media-amid-protests

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-5953697/Two-killed-southern-Iraq-protests-spread.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/widespread-unrest-erupts-in-southern-iraq-amid-acute-shortages-of-water-electricity/2018/07/14/b9077b90-86c2-11e8-9e06-4db52ac42e05_story.html

https://www.axios.com/protestors-storm-provincial-iraqi-government-building-in-kerbala-543e01f0-e22c-46ee-8904-d4bada075e97.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-protests-port/iraq-protests-spread-to-najaf-in-fifth-day-of-unrest-over-services-corruption-idUSKBN1K31OP

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/07/iraq-basra-oilfield-protests.html

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/07/iraq-protests-south-demands-abadi-government.html

https://www.dw.com/en/iraqs-protests-what-you-need-to-know/a-44779555

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-us-is-in-cons tant-arm-wrestling-with-iran-over-iraq-and-syria/5648568 

https://www.globalresearch.ca/a-weak-and-divided-iraq-is-stumbling-towards-an-unbalanced-future/5643777 

https://www.ft.com/content/82ca2e3c-6369-11e8-90c2-9563a0613e56 

https://www.dw.com/en/iraqs-electricity-minister-fired-after-weeks-of-protests/a-44867913 

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/analysis-news/analysis-iraq-demonstrations-from-basra-to-baghdad/1207386

https://thearabweekly.com/unrest-grows-iraq-south-health-system-broken-northern-city-mosul

https://www.democracynow.org/2018/7/17/headlines

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/07/17/iraq-j17.html

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-07/18/c_137331375.htm

http://www.rudaw.net/english/opinion/17072018

https://thearabweekly.com/deadly-iraq-protests-put-social-problems-spotlight

https://gulfnews.com/news/mena/iraq/iraq-protests-continue-for-the-sixth-day-1.2251775

https://www.thenational.ae/world/mena/iraq-protests-spread-fuelled-by-anger-and-hopelessness-1.750922

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-29/iraq-says-saudis-to-sell-it-power-at-a-fraction-of-iran-s-price 

https://www.crisisgroup.org/crisiswatch (Global Overview of July 2018)

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/08/10/on-the-iraqi-protests-now-in-their-second-month/ (Mundher al Adhami)

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

After the liberation of the provinces of Daraa and Quneitra, the Syrian civil war entered a new phase.  The available land that was up for grabs by any new liberator — without the need for negotiations with outside actors — was shrinking (one section of the desert under ISIL control does not count – it will soon be cleared out).  Only Idlib is left, which is controlled (albeit only in spots and to a limited extent) by Turkey, as well as the environs of al-Tanf and the Kurdish regions located within the American protectorate.  And their liberation must be preceded by diplomatic agreements with the protector states.

Decentralization without the Kurds

Negotiations with Turkey took place in Sochi at the very end of July.  Those were conducted by Russia and Iran, because Damascus and Ankara have officially severed their diplomatic ties.  The Syrian authorities emphasize that the territory of Idlib will eventually be returned to Damascus’s jurisdiction.

No one’s arguing with that. Turkey is not planning on an eternal occupation of Syrian territory, because any benefits from that would be completely outweighed by the financial, PR, and potential military costs Ankara would incur.  At some point, the Turkish troops will be forced to quit Syria.  But Erdogan has no desire to pull out for free and is demanding a number of conditions be met in return.

These conditions are obvious yet at the same time contradictory. On one hand, Ankara wants to maintain its leverage over post-war Syria, so it is pressing for the local communities (some of which in northwestern and western Syria hold pro-Turkish sentiments) to be granted more rights and powers.  On the other hand, the Turks do not want those rights and powers to be extended to the Syrian Kurds, whom Erdogan currently views as one of the biggest threats to Turkey’s national security.

At present it is not possible to meet Turkey’s demands – the constitutional committee is just now getting down to work, and no one understands how to exclude the Kurdsfrom the decentralization process anyway.  And ultimately the Iranians are not particularly eager to yield any zones of influence to the Turks — it is clear to everyone that for the foreseeable future, Tehran and Ankara will very likely be competing for the upper hand in the Middle East.  In turn, the Turkish authorities are threatening that if Moscow and Tehran give Damascus the green light to conduct a military operation in Idlib without taking Ankara’s interests into account, then Turkey will abandon its attempts to find a resolution under the auspices of the Astana negotiations and could potentially resume military and political assistance to the militants, which might even include sending aid in the form of the Turkish army.

The weak link

As a result, a compromise was apparently reached in Sochi.  Damascus, Tehran, and Moscow agreed to temporarily postpone the offensive in Idlib and give Turkey some latitude to handle the threats posed by certain terrorist groups in the region (for example, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, which is the latest reincarnation of the al-Nusra Front).  In order to do battle against them, the Turks have already established a coalition of militants under Ankara’s control.

However, this compromise is not likely to last long.  First of all, because Turkey has thus far been conspicuously unable to cope with the situation (as can be seen, for example, in the regular drone attacks on the Hmeimim air base that originate in Idlib), and there is no guarantee that the situation will change.  Second, Damascus is already engaged in a dialog with the Kurds (who have finally become firmly convinced that the Americans will continue to sell them out to the Turks) over the idea of reconciling in exchange for the promise of decentralization.  In this, the interests of Damascus and Ankara are partially aligned – the Kurds will not be granted any broad autonomy – but the Syrian authorities are prepared to concede some extremely limited autonomy. And if the Turks object, then – faced with the choice between compromising with the Kurds vs. satisfying the Turks, the Syrians are likely to choose the Kurds.

The Kurds will be chosen because — and this is the third reason — Turkey is the weakest link in the Syrian “triumvirate.”  The end of the civil war is not far off, and if Iran and Russia are seeing their own positions strengthening as that day draws nearer, Turkey, on the other hand, is growing weaker.  This is being expedited by the rapidly unraveling relationship between Erdogan and the West, as a result of which the Turkish president has been left in a state of semi-isolation, and he cannot afford to damage his relations with Moscow and Tehran as well.  Therefore, it is possible that once the desert enclave and the concentration of troops near Idlib have been cleared out in the autumn, the Syrian army will find some pretext for an offensive in the rebel province, and Turkey will remain on the sidelines.  The best Ankara can hope for is to have some minor concessions granted.

Syria without Iran?

As for the US — it played no role in the talks in Sochi.

“We are sorry that our American colleagues chose to absent themselves from the work aimed at achieving a long-term political settlement in Syria,” noted Alexander Lavrentiev, Russia’s special envoy to Syria.  “We remain confident that mutually acceptable solutions can only be worked out through an open dialog.”

However those can also be worked out through a “closed” dialog, which is something that is held regularly (including during the meeting between Putin and Trump).  Washington’s position is easy to understand.  Donald Trump is ready to pull American troops out of the environs of al-Tanf (in southern Syria), because now that Syrian troops have liberated Deir ez-Zor and the province of Daraa, that base of operations is no longer needed.  Trump is also prepared to entertain the possibility of abandoning support for the Syrian Kurds, because they are ill-suited for their role as a force to hold Iran in check and are also creating a host of problems with the Turks.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif meet with diplomatic representatives of Iran, in Tehran, on July 22, 2018

The only question is — what does Washington want in return? Some media outlets have been circulating the idea that the US and its partner Israel are demanding Iran’s complete withdrawal from Syria.  But everyone is well aware that this is unrealistic — the losers cannot order the winner to admit defeat.  So it will most likely be an issue of the Iranians having to accept responsibility for pulling their troops and military bases out of the area near the Golan Heights, and Russia having to be responsible for ensuring that Tehran abides by this condition.

So far the negotiations seem to be in their early stages, and one of the key obstacles is the uncertainty of the US and Israel that the Russians will be able to shoulder the responsibility for Iran’s compliance with its obligations once the US troops have been gone from Syria for one, two, or three years.  The West believes that Russia’s continued presence in Syria will be on shaky ground, since Iran regards the country as its own domain and will push for outside forces to leave, even friendly ones.

Moscow partially shares this concern (despite being on friendly terms with Tehran), and that is precisely why it is trying to do all it can to use diplomacy to resolve the issue with the Turks themselves, while also pulling Europe into the process of returning the Syrian refugees and restoring the country’s infrastructure.  After all, the more outside actors there are in Syria, the less chance that the Iranian leaders in that country will become an undesirable dominating force (which would inevitably happen otherwise).  And it makes it even more likely that the process of national reconciliation — which will take more than just a year or two — will culminate in not just an end to the civil confrontation, but also in the long-term peaceful coexistence of the varied peoples and religious sects within Syria.

*

All images in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

Have you ever considered the possibility that almost everything that you have been told about the world by the Western mass media is a lie and fabrication?

I am sure you have, at least lately, when the insanity of Western propaganda is becoming very clear and obvious. But what about the extent of indoctrination you were subjected to?

If you live in Europe or North America, how poisoned are you by the lies about Cuba and Venezuela, Russia and China, North Korea and yes – about Iran? Are you beyond recovery? If you see the truth, if you were confronted by reality, would you still be able to recognize it, or would you perceive it as propaganda and lies?

I have just left Tehran, a city with a tremendous history and culture, overflowing with museums, theatres, wonderfully kept parks dotted with modern art sculptures. It is a city with modern and fully subsidized public transportation, consisting of high-tech metro, ecological bus ways, as well as suburban trains. A city of tall trees, and quiet squares, of elegant cafes, and extremely educated and kind people.

A city that could easily be part of the ‘top ten’ cities on Earth, were it not the capital of a country that the West is trying to ruin, first with unjust and draconian sanctions, and then, who knows, even by a militarily invasion.

What do most Westerners know about Iran; what were they told? I think the image the mass media outlets want to project is of “Iran – a radical Muslim country, some sort of Shia Saudi Arabia”, or perhaps worse. Much worse, as Saudi Arabia, the closest Arab ally of London and Washington, cannot be touched in the West, no matter what barbarity and terror it spreads all around the world.

Those who know both Jeddah and Teheran would laugh at such a comparison. Saudi Arabia, and its semi-colony Bahrain, despite their wealth from oil, are some of the most compassionless societies on the planet, misery rubbing shoulders with repulsively vulgar and extreme showing off of wealth.

Iran is in its essence a socialist country. It is internationalist, in full solidarity with many oppressed and struggling nations on our planet. No, I am not talking about Syria, Yemen or Palestine only; I am talking about Cuba and Venezuela, among many others. You did not know? It is not surprising: you are not supposed to know!

You are also expected to remain ignorant about Iran’s social system, clearly socialist. Free education and medical care, greatly subsidized public transportation and culture, huge public spaces and to some extent, strong government and at least partially, central planning.

Local traditional dancers

Despite those absolutely unjust, terrible sanctions imposed, with some interruptions, from Washington and its allies, Iran is standing tall, trying as much as it can to take care of its people. And despite the terrible ordeal Iranian people are being put through, they do not cheat and do not steal. The exchange rate collapsed after Washington imposed another round of bizarre sanctions, triggering frustration, even protests. But the majority of Iranians understands who the real culprit is. And it is no secret that the so-called opposition is often financed from the West.

Most visitors do not understand anything about the local currency or exchange rates. I am no exception. I simply give taxi drivers or waiters my wallet, and they only take what is due. I checked with my Iranian colleagues: and the amount that is being taken is always fair. 

Iranians do not display ‘arrogant pride’; they only show the determined, decent and patriotic pride of a nation with thousands of years of great culture which knows perfectly well that it is on the right side of history.

Young filmmakers working on the streets of Tehran

You were told ‘how religious Iran is’; I am sure you were. But unlike in Saudi Arabia or Indonesia, religion is not ‘being thrown into your face’ here; it is not waved as a flag. In Iran, religion is something internal, deep, which is expressed humbly and without noise. While the mosques of Jakarta broadcast, for hours a day and using powerful loudspeakers, entire sermons, while people are now being thrown into jail for even criticizing this brutal imposition of religion on the general public, in Tehran I could hardly even detect Adhan (call for prayer). Most of the local female Teheran city-dwellers only cover their hair symbolically – one third or even just a quarter, keeping most of their hair exposed.

But the West would never inflict sanctions on Indonesia or antagonize it in any other way, no matter how brutal it is to its own people: Washington, London and Canberra already ruined its socialist direction after the US-orchestrated coup of 1965. Jakarta is now an obedient, turbo capitalist, anti-Communist, West-junk-food-and-crap-entertainment-loving society. It has nothing public left. The elites have fully robbed the country on behalf of the West. Religions in Indonesia are used to uphold the pro-Western fascist regime.

Iran is totally the opposite: its interpretation of religion is ‘traditional’, as it used to be before the West managed to derail its essence in so many parts of the world. It is socialist, compassionate, spiritual and yes – internationalist. 

Unlike in places like Jeddah or Jakarta, where going out to eat is now the height of cultural life (and often the only option of how to ‘enjoy the city’), Tehran offers high quality art cinemas (Iranian films are some of the greatest and most intellectual in the world), world-class museums and galleries, vast public spaces, as well as a great number of sport and amusement public facilities, including beautifully maintained parks.

You want to hang from a rope and fly over a valley, near one of the tallest TV towers on Earth – you can do it easily in Teheran. You want to see a series of the latest Chinese art films –you can, at the magnificent palace called the Cinema Museum. Or maybe Chekhov or a Tennessee Williams theatre play, if you understand some Farsi? Why not?

Of course you can sit in a horrendous traffic jam, if you are in love with your car, as you would in Riyadh or Jakarta, but you can also zip through the city in comfort and cheaply, on board the super modern metro system. You can walk on beautiful sidewalks, under tall trees, some of which grow from the clean creaks that separate driveways from pedestrian areas.

What else were you told; that you cannot look into a woman’s eyes or you will be stoned to death? Couples are holding hands everywhere in Tehran, and annoyed girls are slapping the faces of their men, teasingly and sometimes even seriously.

But would you believe it, if you saw it? Or is it too late; have you reached the point of no return?

One day, a driver who was taking me from my hotel to the Press TV television studio, exclaimed in desperation:

“Europeans who come here, even for the first time: they don’t want to learn. Even if they come to Iran for the first time, they land at the airport, get into my car, and begin preaching; teaching me about my own country! They all come with the same story, with the same criticism of Iran. There is no diversity! How can they call themselves democratic countries, if they are all thinking the same way?”

In Teheran, the diversity of thought is absolutely striking. With my colleagues and comrades, we discuss everything from the war in Yugoslavia, to Latin America and of course, Iran itself. They want to know about Russia and China. I love what I see and what I hear – when people are curious and respectful of other cultures, it is always a great start!

Iran is bleeding, suffering, but it is strong. Not everyone agrees with government policies here (although most of them do support their government), but everybody is determined to fight and defend his or her country, if it is attacked militarily or by other means. 

Whenever I come here, I have this impolite urge – I want to shout at my readers: Come here and learn something! Iran is not perfect, but this is real – here, life is real and so are the people. Thanks to their culture and history, they somehow know how to separate precious stones from junk, pure thoughts from propaganda, cheap and deadly capitalism from the great strive for a much better world. If you don’t believe me, just watch their films; one masterpiece after another.

Perhaps that is why the West wants to first ruin, and then to totally destroy this country. For the West, Iran is ‘dangerous’. Iran is dangerous, even deadly, for the imperialist arrangement of the world, as China is dangerous, as Russia is, as Cuba, Venezuela, Syria and Bolivia are.

To ruin Iran will not be easy, I would even say: it could prove impossible. Its people are too smart and determined and strong. Iran is not alone; it has many friends and comrades. And even Iran’s neighbors – Turkey and Pakistan – are now quickly changing direction, away from the West.

Don’t take my word for all this. Just come and see. But do no preach: ask questions, and then, please sit, listen and learn! This country has more than 7,000 years of tremendous history. Instead of bombing it, read its poets, watch its films, and learn from its internationalist stand! And then, only then, decide, whether Iran is really your enemy, or a dear comrade and friend.

*

This article was originally published on New Eastern Outlook.

Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his latest books are Revolutionary Optimism, Western Nihilism, a revolutionary novel “Aurora” and a bestselling work of political non-fiction: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire”. View his other books here. Watch Rwanda Gambit, his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo and his film/dialogue with Noam Chomsky “On Western Terrorism”. Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website and his Twitter.

All images in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Sanctions left and sanctions right. Financial mostly, taxes, tariffs, visas, travel bans – confiscation of foreign assets, import and export prohibitions and limitations; and also punishing those who do not respect sanctions dished out by Trump, alias the US of A, against friends of their enemies. The absurdity seems endless and escalating – exponentially, as if there was a deadline to collapse the world. Looks like a last-ditch effort to bring down international trade in favor of — what? – Make America Great Again? – Prepare for US mid-term elections? – Rally the people behind an illusion? – Or what?

All looks arbitrary and destructive. All is of course totally illegal by any international law or, forget law, which is not respected anyway by the empire and its vassals, but not even by human moral standards. Sanctions are destructive. They are interfering in other countries sovereignty. They are made to punish countries, nations, that refuse to bend to a world dictatorship.

Looks like everybody accepts this new economic warfare as the new normal. Nobody objects. And the United Nations, the body created to maintain Peace, to protect our globe from other wars, to uphold human rights – this very body is silent – out of fear? Out of fear that it might be ‘sanctioned’ into oblivion by the dying empire? – Why cannot the vast majority of countries – often it is a ratio of 191 to 2 (Israel and the US) – reign-in the criminals?

Imagine Turkey – sudden massive tariffs on aluminum (20%) and steel (50%) imposed by Trump, plus central bank currency interference had the Turkish Lira drop by 40%, and that ‘only’ because Erdogan is not freeing US pastor Andrew Brunson, who faces in Turkey a jail sentence of 35 years for “terror and espionage”. An Izmir court has just turned down another US request for clemency, however, converting his jail sentence to house arrest for health reason. It is widely believed that Mr. Brunson’s alleged 23 years of ‘missionary work’ is but a smoke screen for spying.

President Erdogan has just declared he would look out for new friends, including new trading partners in the east – Russia, China, Iran, Ukraine, even the unviable EU, and that his country is planning issuing Yuan-denominated bonds to diversify Turkey’s economy, foremost the country’s reserves and gradually moving away from the dollar hegemony.

Looking out for new friends, may also include new military alliances. Is Turkey planning to exit NATO? Would turkey be ‘allowed’ to exit NATO – given its strategic maritime and land position between east and west? – Turkey knows that having military allies that dish out punishments for acting sovereignly in internal affair – spells disaster for the future. Why continue offering your country to NATO, whose only objective it is to destroy the east – the very east which is not only Turkey’s but the world’s future? Turkey is already approaching the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) and may actually accede to it within the foreseeable future. That might be the end of Turkey’s NATO alliance.

What if Iran, Venezuela, Russia, China – and many more countries not ready to bow to the empire, would jail all those spies embedded in the US Embassies or camouflaged in these countries’ national (financial) institutions, acting as Fifth Columns, undermining their host countries’ national and economic policies? – Entire cities of new jails would have to be built to accommodate the empire’s army of criminals.

Imagine Russia – more sanctions were just imposed for alleged and totally unproven (to the contrary: disproven) Russian poisoning of four UK citizens with the deadly nerve agent, Novichok – and for not admitting it. This is a total farce, a flagrant lie, that has become so ridiculous, most thinking people, even in the UK, just laugh about it. Yet, Trump and his minions in Europe and many parts of the world succumb to this lie – and out of fear of being sanctioned, they also sanction Russia. What has the world become? – Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, would be proud for having taught the important lesson to the liars of the universe: “Let me control the media, and I will turn any nation into a herd of Pigs”. That’s what we have become – a herd of pigs.

Fortunately, Russia too has moved away so far already from the western dollar-controlled economy that such sanctions do no longer hurt. They serve Trump and his cronies as mere propaganda tools – show-offs, “we are still the greatest!”.

Venezuela is being sanctioned into the ground, literally, by from-abroad (Miami and Bogota) Twitter-induced manipulations of her national currency, the Bolívar, causing astronomical inflation – constant ups and downs of the value of the local currency, bringing the national economy to a virtual halt. Imported food, pharmaceuticals and other goods are being deviated at the borders and other entry points, so they will never end up on supermarket shelves, but become smuggle ware in Colombia, where these goods are being sold at manipulated dollar-exchange rates to better-off Venezuelan and Columbian citizens. These mafia type gangs are being funded by NED and other similar nefarious State Department financed “NGOs”, trained by US secret services, either within or outside Venezuela. Once infiltrated into Venezuela – overtly or covertly – they tend to boycott the local economy from within, spread violence and become part of the Fifth Column, primarily sabotaging the financial system.

Venezuela is struggling to get out of this dilemma which has people suffering, by de-dollarizing her economy, partly through a newly created cryptocurrency, the Petro, based on Venezuela’s huge oil reserves and also through a new Bolivar – in the hope of putting the brakes on the spiraling bursts of inflation. This scenario reminds so much of Chile in 1973, when Henry Kissinger was Foreign Secretary (1973-1977), and inspired the CIA coup, by “disappearing” food and other goods from Chilean markets, killing legitimately elected President Allende, bringing Augusto Pinochet, a horrendous murderer and despot, to power. The military dictatorship brought the death and disappearance of tens of thousands of people and lasted until 1990. Subjugating Venezuela might, however, not be so easy. After all, Venezuela has 19 years of revolutionary Chavista experience – and a solid sense of resistance.

Iran – is being plunged into a similar fate. For no reason at all, Trump reneged on the five-plus-one pronged so-called Nuclear Deal, signed in Vienna on 14 July 2015, after almost ten years of negotiations. Now – of course driven by the star-Zionist Netanyahu – new and ‘the most severe ever’ sanctions are being imposed on Iran, also decimating the value of their local currency, the Rial. Iran, under the Ayatollah, has already embarked on a course of “Resistance Economy”, meaning de-dollarization of their economy and moving towards food and industrial self-sufficiency, as well as increased trading with eastern countries, China, Russia, the SCO and other friendly and culturally aligned nations, like Pakistan. However, Iran too has a strong Fifth Column, engrained in the financial sector, that does not let go of forcing and propagating trading with the enemy, i.e. the west, the European Union, whose euro-monetary system is part of the dollar hegemony, hence posing similar vulnerability of sanctions as does the dollar.

China – the stellar prize of the Big Chess Game – is being ‘sanctioned’ with tariffs no end, for having become the world’s strongest economy, surpassing in real output and measured by people’s purchasing power, by far the United States of America. China also has a solid economy and gold-based currency, the Yuan – which is on a fast track to overtake the US-dollar as the number one world reserve currency. China retaliates, of course, with similar ‘sanctions’, but by and large, her dominance of Asian markets and growing economic influence in Europe, Africa and Latin America, is such that Trump’s tariff war means hardly more for China than a drop on a hot stone.

North Korea – the much-touted Trump-Kim mid-June Singapore summit – has long since become a tiny spot in the past. Alleged agreements reached then are being breached by the US, as could have been expected. All under the false and purely invented pretext of DPRK not adhering to her disarmament commitment; a reason to impose new strangulating sanctions. The world looks on. Its normal. Nobody dares questioning the self-styled Masters of the Universe. Misery keeps being dished out left and right – accepted by the brainwashed to-the-core masses around the globe. War is peace and peace is war. Literally. The west is living in a “peaceful” comfort zone. Why disturb it? – If people die from starvation or bombs – it happens far away and allows us to live in peace. Why bother? – Especially since we are continuously, drip-by-steady drip being told its right.

In a recent interview with PressTV I was asked, why does the US not adhere to any of their internationally or bilaterally concluded treaties or agreements? – Good question. – Washington is breaking all the rules, agreements, accords, treaties, is not adhering to any international law or even moral standard, simply because following such standards would mean giving up world supremacy. Being on equal keel is not in Washington’s or Tel Aviv’s interest. Yes, this symbiotic and sick relationship between the US and Zionist Israel is becoming progressively more visible; the alliance of the brute military force and the slick and treacherous financial dominion – together striving for world hegemony, for full spectrum dominance.  This trend is accelerating under Trump and those who give him orders, simply because “they can”. Nobody objects. This tends to portray an image of peerless power, instilling fear and is expected to incite obedience. Will it?

What is really transpiring is that Washington is isolating itself, that the one-polar world is moving towards a multipolar world, one that increasingly disregards and disrespects the United States, despises her bullying and warmongering – killing and shedding misery over hundreds of millions of people, most of them defenseless children, women and elderly, by direct military force or by proxy-led conflicts – Yemen is just one recent examples, causing endless human suffering to people who have never done any harm to their neighbors, let alone to Americans. Who could have any respect left for such a nation, called the United States of America, for the people behind such lying monsters?

This behavior by the dying empire is driving allies and friends into the opposite camp – to the east, where the future lays, away from a globalized One-World-Order, towards a healthy and more equal multi-polar world. – It would be good, if our world body, the members of the United Nations, created in the name of Peace, would finally gather the courage and stand up against the two destroyer nations for the good of humanity, of the globe, and of Mother Earth.

*

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; RT; Sputnik; PressTV; The 21^st Century; TeleSUR; The Vineyard of The Saker Blog; and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

The President of Bosnia’s Republika Srpska recently signaled his support for Vucic’s plan to partition Kosovo, but while he may try to clothe his arguments in pragmatism, Dodik is really only concerned with promoting his own interests.

The name Milodrad Dodik is one that usually inspires a sense of pride in many Serbs, seeing as how he’s generally regarded as their most patriotic representative anywhere in the region, but it could soon lead to an empty feeling of disappointment if people take the time to reflect on the self-interested reasons behind his support for Vucic’s Kosovo partition plan. The President of Bosnia’s Republika Srpska originally entered into office as a somewhat Western-friendly politician but soon adroitly shed this image in response to changing political circumstances, eventually emerging as an anti-imperial champion in the Balkans. His rhetoric and actions were all the more attractive to Serbs because he never shied away from calling things out for what they were and therefore seemed to be unrestrained by the chains of “political correctness” that exposed their own leaders as American quislings.

His reputation is hard-earned and deserves to be respected, but sadly Dodik is at risk of losing the goodwill that he engendered among all patriotic Serbs after some of his latest comments on Kosovo.

In response to Vucic’s partition plan, he declared that

“If we come to a position to talk about it, I am ready to gather all the state and national factors of the Serbs, including us from the Republika Srpska, and to seriously put that topic on the agenda. All points of view should be put forward for and against, without emotions and calculations. After all, there are not even permanent borders here.”

On the surface, this seems to be linked to his other statement to have Republika Srpska seek the same UN status as Kosovo if the latter ever obtains universal recognition, which is being portrayed by some as a pragmatic position to take to what might be Belgrade’s inevitable surrender of its historic territory. There might be more to it than just that, however, and dwelling upon it might change how people view Dodik.

In connection with this, the reader should be made aware of one of Dodik’s other recent statements on the matter, which hypocritically embodies the emotional viewpoint that he previously denounced. He fear mongered about a reunified Serbia by telling Serbs that “In order to obtain international recognition of your government , you would have to give Albanians 30 percent of the seats in Parliament, the position of the prime minister, parliament speaker or president. You would have to introduce their language in the parliament. If anyone thinks we can do that, let’s push for it.” His disturbing insinuation is that Serbs and Albanians cannot peacefully coexist with one another, thus suggesting an endless cycle of partitions within Serbia proper to cede territory from the state’s eponymous majority ethnicity to any growing population of minority groups within its borders and specifically residing near an international frontier.

Some Kosovo Serbs responded to Dodik’s doomy scenario by rhetorically asking why a much smaller percentage of Serbs in Bosnia can thrive but those in a reunited Serbia apparently wouldn’t be able to.

It’s clear that Dodik is a political opportunistic and will stop at nothing to support the people who he’s been entrusted to rule over, which is commendable but needs to be contextualized because this is only the population of Republika Srpska and not all Serbs like some may have thought. Were it the latter, then he could never reconcile himself with signaling any level of support for Vucic’s partition plan, especially because of the high risk that it entails for catalyzing a chain reaction of border changes in the Balkans, especially in Bosnia and the Republic of Macedonia. The first-mentioned might temporarily be advantageous for Dodik – or at least the optics of him flirting with it could be – but dangerously backfire if Croatia leads the so-called “international (NATO-backed) community” in “restoring Bosnia’s territorial integrity”, while the latter would pave the way for the formalization of “Greater Albania”.

Both of these outcomes are detrimental to Serbian interests and can’t be challenged without sparking another regional war, which is why Dodik’s support of the Kosovo partition plot is far from “pragmatic”.

Even in the so-called “best-case” scenario where these disastrous eventualities don’t come to pass (or at least not immediately), there’s a chance that Serbia proper might eventually fragment into “decentralized” regions as a result of the centrifugal processes that would once again be unleashed in the Balkans, which could thus encourage the long-term (key word) development of a “clannish” mentality among the Serbs that wouldn’t be out of place in Albania. This might be personally desirable for Dodik, however, because he could project himself as the most powerful “(war?)lord” of the most stable Serbian “fiefdom” in his people’s remaining transnational cultural space. Relatedly, this formerly Western-friendly politician might have even been swayed by assurances from his “old (former?) friends” that the US wouldn’t object to the eventual integration of this Serbian-populated areas of the Balkans as part of Timothy Less’ “master plan” for the region.

It’s highly unlikely that the US would ever keep its word in this regard if it did indeed use this as a carrot for convincing Dodik to back Vucic’s partition plans, but that might have been lost on this leader who looks to be following in the 1990s footsteps of Belarus’ Lukashenko. This post-Soviet politician believed that he could rule a forthcoming “union state” with Russia if the two parties successfully merged because of how utterly inept Yeltsin was. It’s not a coincidence, then, that Lukashenko effectively halted all progress in this direction since Putin’s entrance into office because he realized that his dreams were now unattainable. Dodik, however, thinks that his own might still be within reach, though unlike Lukashenko, he’s being tempted with the chance (but crucially, no guarantee) of this happening so long as he lends his support to Vucic’s partition plan.

Should this be the case, then that would be an epic error of judgement if there ever was one because Dodik is sacrificing his respectable reputation in pursuit of an unachievable and self-interested dream.

*

This article was originally published on Eurasia Future.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

The U.S. wants to sabotage the inter-Korean dialogue. The U.S. is waging a war against peace. These are few of the highlights in the presentation shared by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky on “U.S. Aggression and Militarization in Korea and Pacific” on March 6, 2018 at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) in Manila.

The “Forum on Militarism and War in Asia and the Pacific” was sponsored by the Philippines Chapter of the International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS-Phils), the Philippines-Korea Solidarity Committee, the PUP Office of Academic Affairs, College of Political Science and Public Administration, College of Social Science and Development, and also attended by students from the University of the Philippines in Manila.

More than 400 students packed the Manila Room of the PUP Hasmin campus.

Watch a short segment of the presentation below. (4′.58″)

)

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

For almost seventeen years, Global Research, together with partner independent media organizations, has sought Truth in Media with a view to eventually “disarming” the corporate media’s disinformation crusade.

To reverse the tide, we call upon our readers to participate in an important endeavor.

Global Research has over 50,000 subscribers to our Newsletter.

Our objective is to recruit one thousand committed “volunteers” among our 50,000 Newsletter subscribers to support the distribution of Global Research articles (email lists, social media, crossposts). 

Do not send us money. Under Plan A, we call upon our readers to donate 5 minutes a day to Global Research.

Global Research Volunteer Members can contact us at [email protected] for consultations and guidelines.

If, however, you are pressed for time in the course of a busy day, consider Plan B, Consider Making a Donation and/or becoming a Global Research Member. 

*     *     *

It Was Called “Protective Edge”: Israel Absolves Itself of August 2014 Black Friday Gaza Massacre

By Stephen Lendman, August 16, 2018

Three times since December 2008, IDF forces waged preemptive naked aggression on Gaza, falsely claiming the Strip was attacked in self-defense.

America the Punitive

By Philip Giraldi, August 16, 2018

Turkey is also feeling America’s wrath over the continued detention of an American Protestant Pastor Andrew Brunson by Ankara over charges that he was connected to the coup plotters of 2016, which were allegedly directed by Fetullah Gulen, a Muslim religious leader, who now resides in Pennsylvania. Donald Trump has made the detention the centerpiece of his Turkish policy, introducing sanctions and tariffs that have led in part to a collapse of the Turkish lira and a run on the banking system which could easily lead to default and grave damage to European banks that hold a large party of the country’s debt.

Israel Again Tests Chemical Weapons on Gaza Protesters

By Ariyana Love, August 16, 2018

The Israeli Occupation is once again testing a strange new and unknown weapons on civilians protesting the illegal siege on Gaza, at the separation barrier fence last Friday.

UN Report Finds ISIS Given “Breathing Space” in US-Occupied Areas of Syria

By Whitney Webb, August 16, 2018

By maintaining an ISIS pocket in the territory it occupies, the U.S. can continue to justify its illegal presence in the country for the long-term, ultimately substituting Iran for ISIS as its new regional boogeyman.

Trump to Netanyahu: Palestinians Must be Completely Conquered

By Eric Zuesse, August 16, 2018

The Washington correspondent of Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, Amir Tibon, headlined on the night of Tuesday, August 14, “Trump Administration Wants to See a Gaza Cease-fire ‘With or Without the Palestinian Authority’,” and he reported that, “The Trump administration wants to see a long-term cease-fire in Gaza, with or without the support of the Palestinian Authority, a spokesperson for the White House’s National Security Council told Haaretz on Monday.”

The Search for an Elusive Peace in the Horn of Africa

By Abayomi Azikiwe, August 16, 2018

This is a region of East Africa which has been deeply fractured due to the legacy of colonialism and neo-colonialism since the 19^th century. The area has been a focal point for interventions by the United States along with other NATO governments.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

On August 16, militant groups operating in western Syria declared the villages of Banes, Birnah, al-Ottomania, Hwair al-Eis, Tell Bajir, Judiydah, Zummar and Jizrea in southwestern Aleppo part of a “military zone” and ordered civilians to leave the area within 48 hours.

Additionally, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda) and the Turkistan Islamic party had sent reinforcements to southwestern Aleppo.

Local sources link these developments to the ongoing preparations of militant groups to fend off a possible advance of the Syrian Arab Army on their areas in western Syria.

Meanwhile, four units of the Russian-backed 5th Assault Corps – the Assad Shield, the Mahardah Forces, the ISIS Hunters and the Ba’ath battalions – were deployed in the northern countryside of Hama. Earlier, at least four convoys of the Tiger Forces, including battle tanks and artillery pieces, arrived in the same area.

Pro-militant sources also reported that the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and its allies have continued striking positions of the opposition in northern Hama and southern Idlib.

While Turkey is actively working to prevent a possible SAA advance in the area, the situation on the ground is clearly leading to a military escalation.

In the desert area at the administrative border between al-Suwayda and Rif Dimashq, the SAA further advanced on positions of the ISIS cells in the al-Safa area. Government troops captured a few positions southwest of Ardh Safa and advanced on Ardh al-Banat, Durs and Shir Tur al-Hawiyah.

On August 16, the Iraqi Air Force announced that its F-16 warplanes had carried out another airstrike on ISIS in Syria. According to the statement, the airstrike targeted an ISIS operations room killing and injuring ISIS fighters and spies, who were preparing to carry out terrorist attacks inside Iraq.

*

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: [email protected] or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront, 

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

John Lennon was a prolific songwriter, along with his compatriots The Beatles. His wonderful metaphor, from their great ‘Happiness is a Warm Gun’ (1968 White Album), still resonates today in this crazy violence infected US empire:

When I hold you in my arms

and feel my finger on your trigger

I know nobody can do me no harm

because ‘Happiness is a warm gun’

Bang Bang shoot shoot!’

Many listeners, this writer included, originally felt it was purely a sexual reference. Now, years later, I can see the metaphor of mixing the sexual with the symbolism of gun violence. Regardless of what John Lennon intended to express, as Ed Norton from the Honeymooners episode stated: “Maybe the phrase fits Ralph?” Too many of our fellow citizens are ‘Packing guns’, mostly legally.

How in the hell many of them get these ‘Concealed Weapon’ permits is beyond me. In most instances, like the one in Clearwater, Florida recently, the shooter, 48 year old white male Michael Drejka, was in no way involved in any sort of self defense mode for fear of robbery… as is the reason why so many get these permits, as business protections. Drejka, who was known to act like a throwback to the famous Seinfeld ‘Soup Nazi’ character, in this case was behaving as the ‘Handicapped Parking Nazi’.

The Afro – American  lady sitting in the illegally parked car in a handicap space with her five year old son was waiting for her boyfriend to return to the car. Drejka came upon her and got into an argument with her about their car being parked in the space. Her boyfriend, 28 year old Afro- American Markeis McGlockton, saw the scene unfolding, and did what most physically fit younger men would do.

That is he ‘got into the face’ of the other guy. Yelling ensued and McGlockton pushed Drejka to the ground, who then  pulled out his gun and killed him. It took the authorities too long in this writer’s opinion to finally  charge the shooter with manslaughter. Here’s my point: If the ‘Handicapped Parking Nazi’ did not have a gun, maybe there wouldn’t have been much of a scene at all.

Is this the George Zimmerman case all over? Zimmerman, for those who forgot, in February 2012 was acting as a ‘Neighborhood Watch’ volunteer. He told the cops that a ‘suspicious’ black kid (17 year old Trayvon Martin) was walking around his development. The cops instructed Zimmerman to not pursue… and he did anyway. When the kid noticed that he was being followed by Zimmerman, he confronted him. Who knows what was said etc, but the ‘out of shape’ Zimmerman found himself on the ground with the kid on top of him, something that has been happening with fist fights for centuries. Zimmerman was carrying, and the next thing was that he shot the kid dead. Zimmerman got off. What if? What if he did not have that ‘Concealed Weapon’ permit? How about this? What if Zimmerman had to do time, and not just a year or two? Just maybe that Clearwater shooter would not be so quick to pull that trigger?

As far as police officers go, one cannot make any sort of generalization. However, to this writer there really are just two categories of police officers. There are those who do their job, and truly believe they are there to ‘Protect and Serve’, and have no ‘Psycho – Sexual’ feelings about the GUN. They know how dangerous and deadly a gun can be, and they don’t see it as an extension of their penis! These officers never get hung up with the ‘Power trip’ of being a cop.

Sadly, the other category of officers is 180 degrees off from that mindset. These cops are the ones who do the heinous deeds to the many unarmed civilians. There are only a few ways to counteract that deviancy, and it is just that, deviancy. First off, justice should come down ‘fair and hard’ on cops who shoot too quickly with deadly force. When cops nationwide read and hear of harsh consequences levied out, the deterrent card will be played. Secondly, ALL police officers should be four year college graduates, needing at least a minor in Sociology or Psychology. Period!

Mr. Trump wishes to have his Military parade in November. Let me elaborate: We are not at war since WW2! All the remainder of our ‘foreign excursions’ have been this Military Industrial Empire firing its Big Weapons on the rest of the Third World. Enough already!

Cut this drastic military spending (over half of your tax dollars), get most of our foreign bases closed, send our boys and girls in uniform home and fix our economy! This ‘warm gun’ mentality is literally killing us… and the rest of the world!

*

Philip A Farruggio is a son and grandson of Brooklyn, NYC longshoremen. He has been a free lance columnist since 2001, with over 400 of his work posted on sites like Global Research, Greanville Post, Off Guardian, Consortium News, Information Clearing House, Nation of Change, World News Trust, Op Ed News, Dissident Voice, Activist Post, Sleuth Journal, Truthout and many others. His blog can be read in full on World News Trust, whereupon he writes a great deal on the need to cut military spending drastically and send the savings back to save our cities. Philip has a internet interview show, ‘It’s the Empire… Stupid’ with producer Chuck Gregory, and can be reached at [email protected].

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Sunni Muslim Arabs have occupied the territory previously known as Palestine, as the majority of the region’s inhabitants, since the seventh-century, together with a sizeable Christian minority.  Indeed, at the start of the 19th century the Jewish population was only about 3%.  To imply otherwise would be a distortion of historical fact.  Jews were only a minority in the land of Palestine ever since about 700 BC until 1948 – with the forcible establishment of the state of Israel –  i.e. for approximately 1200 years.  That is documented and verifiable history.

For hundreds of years prior to the British Mandate, Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire and was divided into provinces in which there were only very few recorded Jewish inhabitants.

However, that there was a Hebrew sect, with its own temple, in and around Jerusalem in ancient times i.e. during and before the life of Christ, is not in dispute.  But the only people to have a valid claim on the region that runs between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan, as the continuous indigenous people of the region were, and are, the Muslim Arab.

Nevertheless, during the 1880s, a Jewish nationalist movement by the name of ‘Zionism’ evolved among persecuted Jews fleeing from anti-Semitic pogroms in Europe, using the slogan: “a land without a people for a people without a land”.  This was, of course, demonstrably false as the land of Palestine was already occupied by predominantly Muslim communities and had been for over a thousand years!

The British government, however, was ‘playing with politics’ when, in 1917,  its then foreign secretary, A J Balfour, sent a deliberately ambiguous statement of British intent to pro-Zionist, Lord Rothschild, on 2 November which was subsequently published in The Times.  It did not promise a Jewish state in Palestine but vaguely expressed the sentiment that HM Government viewed with favour the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine whilst recognising that there was an existing Muslim population long settled in the region.

The Balfour Declaration far from being written to help Jews fleeing from persecution, was in fact designed to help boost American support for Britain’s then war effort from an America with a significantly influential Jewish population, even then. This is substantiated, historical narrative.

Fortunately, Mr Netanyahu cannot erase history no matter how influential, powerful or flush-with-casino-gambling-profits is the AIPAC Israel lobby in Washington or its associated paid political persuaders in Westminster, Strasbourg, the Bundestag or the Élysée Palace.

In the final analysis, truth will eventually always win over propaganda, and those who disseminate it.

*

Hans Stehling (pen name) is an analyst based in the UK. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

“Just stick with us, don’t believe the crap you see from these people [journalists], the fake news…Just remember, what you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” 

Donald Trump (1946- ), American President, (in remarks made during a campaign rally with Veterans of Foreign Wars, in Kansas City, July 24, 2018)

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair) (1903-1950), English novelist, essayist, and social critic, (in ‘1984’, Ch. 7, 1949)

“This is a White House where everybody lies.” Omarosa Manigault Newman (1974- ), former White House aide to President Donald Trump, (on Sunday August 12, 2018, while releasing tapes recording conversations with Donald Trump.)

“I am a mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power.” Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790), American inventor and US Founding Father, (in ‘Words of the Founding Fathers’, 2012).

***

In this day and age, with instant information, how does a politician succeed in double-talking, in bragging, in scapegoating and in shamefully distorting the truth, most of the time, without being unmasked as a charlatan and discredited? Why? That is the mysterious and enigmatic question that one may ask about U. S. President Donald Trump, as a politician.

The most obvious answer is the fact that Trump’s one-issue and cult-like followers do not care what he does or says and whether or not he has declared a war on truth and reality, provided he delivers the political and financial benefits they demand of him, based on their ideological or pecuniary interests. These groups of voters live in their own reality and only their personal interests count.

1-   Four groups of one-issue voters behind Trump

There are four groups of one-issue voters to whom President Donald Trump has delivered the goodies:

• Christian religious right voters, whose main political issue is to fill the U. S. Supreme Court with ultra conservative judges. On that score, Donald Trump has been true to them by naming one such judge and in nominating a second one.

• Super rich Zionists and the Pro-Israel Lobby, whose obsession is the state of Israel. Again, on that score, President Donald Trump has fulfilled his promise to them and he has unilaterally moved the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, in addition to attacking the Palestinians and tearing up the ‘Iran Deal’.

• The one-percent Income earners and some corporate owners, whose main demand to Trump was substantial tax cuts and deregulation. Once again, President Trump has fulfilled this group’s wishes with huge tax cuts, mainly financed with future public debt increases, which are going to be paid for by all taxpayers.

• The NRA and the Pro-Gun Lobby, whose main obsession is to have the right to arm themselves to the teeth, including with military assault weapons, with as few strings attached as possible. Here again President Donald Trump has sided with them and against students who are increasingly in the line of fire in American schools.

With the strong support of these four monolithic lobbies—his electoral base—politician Donald Trump can count on the indefectible support of between 35 percent and 40 percent of the American electorate. It is ironic that some of Trump’s other policies, like reducing health care coverage and the raising of import taxes, will hurt the poor and the middle class, even though some of Trump’s victims can be considered members of the above lobbies.

Moreover, some of Trump’s supporters regularly rely on hypocrisy and on excuses to exonerate their favorite but flawed politician of choice. If any other politician from a different party were to say and do half of what Donald Trump does and says, they would be asking for his impeachment.

There are three other reasons why Trump’s rants, his record-breaking lies, his untruths, his deceptions and his dictatorial-style attempts to control information, in the eyes of his fanatical supporters, at least, are like water on the back of a duck. (— For the record, according to the Washington Post, as of early August, President Trump has made some 4,229 false claims, which amount to 7.6 a day, since his inauguration.)

a- The first reason can be found in Trump’s view that politics and even government business are first and foremost another form of entertainment, i.e. a sort of TV reality show, which must be scripted and acted upon. Trump thinks that is OK to lie and to ask his assistants to lie. In this new immoral world, the Trump phenomenon could be seen a sign of post-democracy.

b- The second one can be found in Trump’s artful and cunning tactics to unbalance and manipulate the media to increase his visibility to the general public and to turn them into his own tools of propaganda. When Trump attacks the media, he is in fact coaxing them to give him free coverage to spread his insults, his fake accusations, his provocations, his constant threats, his denials or reversals, his convenient changes of subject or his political spins. Indeed, with his outrageous statements, his gratuitous accusations and his attacks ‘ad hominem’, and by constantly bullying and insulting adversaries at home and foreign heads of states abroad, and by issuing threats in repetition, right and left, Trump has forced the media to talk and journalists to write about him constantly, on a daily basis, 24/7.

That suits him perfectly well because he likes to be the center of attention. That is how he can change the political rhetoric when any negative issue gets too close to him. In the coming weeks and months, as the Special prosecutor Robert Mueller’s report is likely to be released, Donald Trump is not above resorting to some sort of “Wag the Dog” political trickery, to change the topic and to possibly push the damaging report off the headlines.

In such a circumstance, it is not impossible that launching an illegal war of choice, say against Iran (a pet project of Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton), could then look very convenient to a crafty politician like Donald Trump and to his warmonger advisors. Therefore, observers should be on the lookout to spot any development of the sort in the coming weeks.

That one man and his entourage could whimsically consider launching a war of aggression is a throwback to ancient times and is a sure indication of the level of depravity to which current politics has fallen. This should be a justified and clear case for impeachment.

c- Finally, some far-right media outlets, such as Fox News and Sinclair Broadcasting, have taken it upon themselves to systematically present Trump’s lies and misrepresentations as some ‘alternative’ truths and facts.

Indeed, ever since 1987, when the Reagan administration abolished the Fairness Doctrine for licensing public radio and TV waves, and since a Republican dominated Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which allowed for the mass conglomeration of local broadcasting in the United States, extreme conservative news outlets, such as the Fox and Sinclair networks, have sprung up. They are well financed, and they have essentially become powerful political propaganda machines, erasing the line between facts and fiction, and regularly presenting fictitious alternative facts as the truth.

In so doing, they have pushed public debates in the United States away from facts, reason and logic, at least for those listeners and viewers for whom such outlets are the only source of information. It is not surprising that such far-right media have also made Donald Trump the champion of their cause, maliciously branding anything inconvenient as ‘fake’ news, as Trump has done in his own anti-media campaign and his sustained assault on the free press.

2-   Show Politics and public affairs as a form of entertainment

Donald Trump does not seem to take politics and public affairs very seriously, at least when his own personal interests are involved. Therefore, when things go bad, he never volunteers to take personal responsibility, contrary to what a true leader would do, and he conveniently shifts the blame on somebody else. This is a sign of immaturity or cowardice. Paraphrasing President Harry Truman, “the buck never stops at his desk.“

Donald Trump essentially has the traits of a typical showman diva, behaving in politics just as he did when he was the host of a TV show. Indeed, if one considers politics and public affairs as no more than a reality show, this means that they are really entertainment, and politicians are first and foremost entertainers or comedians.

3- Trump VS the media and the journalists

Donald Trump is the first U.S. president who rarely holds scheduled press conferences. Why would he, since he considers journalists to be his “enemies”! It doesn’t seem to matter to him that freedom of the press is guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution by the First Amendment. He prefers to rely on one-directional so-called ‘tweets’ to express unfiltered personal ideas and emotions (as if he were a private person), and to use them as his main public relations channel of communication.

The ABC News network has calculated that, as of last July, Trump has tweeted more than 3,500 times, slightly more than seven tweets a day. How could he have time left to do anything productive! Coincidently, Donald Trump’s number of tweets is not far away from the number of outright lies and misleading claims that he has told and made since his inauguration. The Washington Post has counted no less than 3,251 lies or misleading claims of his, through the end of May of this year, —an average of 6.5 such misstatements per day of his presidency. Fun fact: Trump seems to accelerate the pace of his lies. Last year, he told 5.5 lies per day, on average. Is it possible to have a more cynical view of politics!

The media in general, (and not only American ones), then serve more or less voluntarily as so many resonance boxes for his daily ‘tweets’, most of which are often devoid of any thought and logic.

Such a practice has the consequence of demeaning the public discourse in the pursuit of the common good and the general welfare of the people to the level of a frivolous private enterprise, where expertise, research and competence can easily be replaced by improvisation, whimsical arbitrariness and charlatanry. In such a climate, only the short run counts, at the expense of planning for the long run.

Conclusion

All this leads to this conclusion: Trump’s approach is not the way to run an efficient government. Notwithstanding the U.S. Constitution and what it says about the need to have “checks and balances” among different government branches, President Donald Trump has de factopushed aside the U.S. Congress and the civil servants in important government Departments, even his own Cabinet, whose formal meetings under Trump have been little more than photo-up happenings, to grab the central political stage for himself. If such a development does not represent an ominous threat to American democracy, what does?

The centralization of power in the hands of one man is bound to have serious political consequences, both for the current administration and for future ones.

*

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site: rodriguetremblay100.blogspot.com.

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book “The Code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles”, and of “The New American Empire”.

Please visit Dr. Tremblay’s sites:

http://rodriguetremblay100.blogspot.com/

http://rodriguetremblay.blogspot.com/

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

William Binney, the U.S. National Security Agency’s former technical director for global analysis, has, for the past year, been globe-trotting to investigate the actual evidence regarding the official Russiagate investigations, and he finds that the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, who is prosecuting Russia’s Government, can only accuse Russian officials, not convict any of them on at least the important charges, because conclusive evidence exists and has already been made public online, making clear that the important accusations against those officials are false. However, Binney can’t get any of the U.S. major ‘news’media’s interest in this fact, nor even into openly discussing it with them. Apparently, they don’t want to know. Binney is knocking on their doors, and they refuse to answer.

Patrick Lawrence, at the non-mainstream U.S. newsmedium Consortium News, headlined on Monday August 13th, “‘Too Big to Fail’: Russia-gate One Year After VIPS Showed a Leak, Not a Hack” and he reported what Binney has found and has been trying to get the major U.S. ‘news’media to present to the American public.

The “VIPS” there is Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and they are 17 whistleblowing former high officials of the CIA, NSA, State Department, and other U.S. officials with top secret national-security clearances, who jointly signed and published on 24 July 2017, their report, which likewise was at Consortium News, “Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence”, in which they confirmed the validity of a 9 July 2017 report that had been published by Elizabeth Vos of Disobedient Media.com, which was titled “New Research Shows Guccifer 2.0 Files Were Copied Locally, Not Hacked” and which I then reported in more ordinary language seven days later under the headline “Russiagate Exposed: It’s a Fraud”. I quoted there the analysis’s basic finding “that the DNC computer network which the media tells us and the DNC tells us was hacked by the Russians, … was physically accessed by someone within close proximity of the DNC” and not outside the United States (Russia or anywhere else). The original research-report had been done by an anonymous person who called himself “the forensicator,” and he had sent it to Adam Carter, another highly technically knowledgeable person, who happened to be at Disobedient Media, and who then worked with Vos to prepae her article on it.

Binney, as the nation’s now-retired top NSA expert in the analysis of such matters, then followed up, during the past year, in order to probe more deeply, by contacting various individuals who had been involved behind the scenes; and Patrick Lawrence’s article was a report of what Binney had found. It’s this:

The forensic scientists working with VIPS continued their research and experiments after VIPS50 was published. So have key members of the VIPS group, notably William Binney, the National Security Agency’s former technical director for global analysis and designer of programs the agency still uses to monitor internet traffic. Such work continues as we speak, indeed. This was always the intent: “Evidence to date” was the premise of VIPS50. Over the past year there have been confirmations of the original thesis and some surprises that alter secondary aspects of it. Let us look at the most significant of these findings.

At the time I reported on the findings of VIPS and associated forensic scientists, that the most fundamental evidence that the events of summer 2016 constituted a leak, not a hack, was the transfer rate—the speed at which data was copied. The speed proven then was an average of 22.7 megabytes per second. …

The fastest internet transfer speed achieved, during the New Jersey–to–Britain test, was 12.0 megabytes of data per second. Since this time it has emerged from G-2.0’s metadata that the detected average speed—the 22.7 megabytes per second—included peak speeds that ran as high as 49.1 megabytes per second, impossible over the internet. “You’d need a dedicated, leased, 400–megabit line all the way to Russia to achieve that result,” Binney said in a recent interview. … That remains the bedrock evidence of the case VIPS and others advance without qualification. “No one—including the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA—has come out against this finding,” Binney said Monday. …

The identity of Guccifer 2.0, who claimed to be a Romanian hacker but which the latest Mueller indictment claims is a construct of the GRU, Russian military intelligence, has never been proven. The question is what G–2.0 did with or to the data in question. It turns out that both more, and less, is known about G–2.0 than was thought to have been previously demonstrated. This work has been completed only recently. It was done by Binney in collaboration with Duncan Campbell, a British journalist who has followed the Russia-gate question closely.

Peak Speed Established

Binney visited Campbell in Brighton, England, early this past spring. They examined all the metadata associated with the files G–2.0 has made public. They looked at the number of files, the size of each, and the time stamps at the end of each. It was at this time that Binney and Campbell established the peak transfer rate at 49.1 megabytes per second. … “Now you need to prove everything you might think about him,” Binney told me. “We have no way of knowing anything about him or what he has done, apart from manipulating the files. …

The conclusions initially drawn on time and location in VIPS50 are now subject to these recent discoveries. “In retrospect, giving ‘equal importance’ status to data pertaining to the locale was mistaken,” Ray McGovern, a prominent VIPS member, wrote in a recent note. “The key finding on transfer speed always dwarfed it in importance.” … 

How credible are those indictments in view of what is now known about G–2.0?

Binney told me: “Once we proved G–2.0 is a fabrication and a manipulator, the timing and location questions couldn’t be answered but really didn’t matter. I don’t right now see a way of absolutely proving either time or location. But this doesn’t change anything. We know what we know: The intrusion into the Democratic National Committee mail was a local download—wherever ‘local’ is.” That doesn’t change. As to Rosenstein, he’ll have a lot to prove.”

However, yet another technically knowledgeable analyst of the available evidence, George Eliason, claims that to assert that there were only “leaks” and not also “hacks” would clearly be wrong, because there were both. On August 14th, he bannered at Washington’s Blog, “Beyond The DNC Leak: Hacks and Treason” and he wrote:

There were multiple DNC hacks. There is also clear proof supporting the download to a USB stick and subsequent information exchange (leak) to Wikileaks. All are separate events.

Here’s what’s different in the information I’ve compiled.

The group I previously identified as Fancy Bear was given access to request password privileges at the DNC. And it looks like the DNC provided them with it.

I’ll show why the Podesta email hack looks like a revenge hack.

The reason Republican opposition research files were stolen can be put into context now because we know who the hackers are and what motivates them.

At the same time this story developed, it overshadowed the Hillary Clinton email scandal. It is a matter of public record that Team Clinton provided the DNC hackers with passwords to State Department servers on at least 2 occasions, one wittingly and one not. I have already clearly shown the Fancy Bear hackers are Ukrainian Intelligence Operators.

This gives some credence to the Seth Rich leak (DNC leak story) as an act of patriotism. If the leak came through Seth Rich, it may have been because he saw foreign Intel operatives given this access from the presumed winners of the 2016 US presidential election. No political operative is going to argue with the presumed president-elect over foreign policy. The leaker may have been trying to do something about it. I’m curious what information Wikileaks might have.

Eliason’s analysis doesn’t support Robert Mueller’s indictments any more than the others do. All are essentially incompatible with the accusations (including ones which now have become also indictments) from Mueller. Moreover, as Patrick Lawrence noted, “Indictments are not evidence and do not need to contain evidence. That is supposed to come out at trial, which is very unlikely to ever happen. Nevertheless, the corporate media has treated the indictments as convictions.” Maybe that’s the biggest crime of all.

*

This article was originally published on The Saker.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Ecological economists, such as Herman E. Daly,  stress that as the external costs of pollution and resource exhaustion are not included in Gross Domestic Product, we do not know whether an increase in GDP is a gain or a loss.  

External costs are huge and growing larger. Historically, manufacturing and industrial corporations, corporate farming, city sewer systems, and other culprits have passed the costs of their activities onto the environment and third parties.  Recently, there has been a spate of reports with many centering on Monsanto’s Roundup, whose principle ingredient, glyphosate, is believed to be a carcinogen.

A public health organization, the Environmental Working Group, recently reported that its tests found glyphosate in all but 2 of 45 children’s breakfast foods including granola, oats and snack bars made by Quaker, Kellogg and General Mills.  (See this) 

In Brazil tests have discovered that 83% of mothers’ breast milk contains glyphosate. (See this) 

The Munich Environmental Institute reported that 14 of the most widely selling German beers contain glyphosate. (See this) 

Glyphosate has been found in Mexican farmers’ urine and in Mexican ground water. (See this) 

Scientific American has reported that even Roundup’s “inert ingredients can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells.” 

A German toxicologist has accused the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and the European Food Safety Authority of scientific fraud for accepting a Monsanto-led glyphosate Task Force conclusion that glyphosate is not a carcinogen. (See this) 

Controversy about these findings comes from the fact that industry-funded scientists report no link between glyphosate and cancer, whereas independent scientists do.  This is hardly surprising as an industry-funded scientist has no independence and is unlikely to conclude the opposite of what he is hired to conclude.  

There is also controversy about what level of contamination is necessary for products adulterated with glyphosate to be classified as dangerous.  It does seem to be the case that the concentrations rise with use and time. Sooner or later the concentration becomes sufficient to do the damage.

For this article, the point is that if glyphosate is carcinogenic, the cost of the lost lives and medical expenses are not borne by Monsanto/Bayer.  If these costs were not external to Monsanto, that is, if the corporation had to bear these costs, the cost of the product would not be economical to use. Its advantages would be out-weighed by the costs.

It is very difficult to find the truth, because politicians and regulatory authorities are susceptible to bribes and to doing favors for their business friends.  In Brazil, lawmakers are actually trying to deregulate pesticide use and to ban the sale of organic food in supermarkets.  (See this) 

In the case of glyphosate, the tide might be turning against Monsanto/Bayer.  The California Supreme Court upheld the state’s authority to add the herbicide glyphosate to its Proposition 65 list of carcinogens. (See this) 

Last week in San Francisco jurors awarded a former school groundkeeper $289 million in damages for cancer caused by Roundup.  Little doubt that Monsanto will appeal and the case will be tied up in court until the groundkeeper is dead.  But it is a precedent and indicates that jurors are beginning to distrust hired science.  There are approximately 1,000 similar cases pending.  (See this) 

What is important to keep in mind is that if Roundup is a carcinogen, it is just one product of one company.  This provides an idea of how extensive external costs can be.  Indeed, glyphosate’s deletarious effects go far beyond those covered in this article. (See this) 

GMO feeds are also taking a toll on livestock. (Listen to this) 

Now consider the adverse effects on air, water, and land resources of chemical agriculture.  Florida is suffering algae blooms from chemical fertilizer runoff from farmland, and the sugar industry has done a good job of destroying Lake Okeechobee. (See this) 

Fertilizer runoffs cause blue-green algae blooms that kill marine life and are hazzardous to humans. Currently the water in Florida’s St. Lucie River is 10 times too toxic to touch.  (See this) 

Red tides can occur naturally, but fertilizer runoffs fuel their growth and their persistance. Moreover, pollution’s contributions to higher temperatures also contribute to red tides, as does draining wetlands for real estate development, which results in water moving quickly without natural filtration.  (See this and this) 

As water conditions deteriorated and algae blooms proliferated, Florida’s response was to cutback its water monitoring program: See this. 

When we consider these extensive external costs of corporate farming, clearly the values attributed to sugar and farm products in the Gross Domestic Product are excessive. The prices paid by consumers are much too low and the profits enjoyed by corporate agriculture are far too high, because they do not include the costs of the massive marine deaths, the lost tourist business, and the human illnesses caused by the algae tides that depend on chemical fertilizer runoff.

In this article I have barely scratched the surface of the problem of external costs.  Michigan has learned that its tap water is not safe. Chemicals used for decades on military bases and in the manufacture of thousands of consumer items are in the water supply.  (See this) 

As an exercise, pick any business and think about the external costs of that business.  Take, for example, the US corporations that offshored Americans’ jobs to Asia.  The corporatons’ profits rose, but the federal, state, and local tax bases declined. The payroll tax base for Social Security and Medicaid declined, putting these important foundations of US social and political stability into danger. The tax base for school teachers’ and other government employees’ pensions declined. If the corporations that moved the jobs abroad had to absorb these costs, they would have no profits. In other words, a few people gained by shoving enormous costs on everyone else.

Or consider something simple like a pet store.  All the pet store owners and customers who sold and purchased colorful 18 to 24 inch pythons, boa constrictors, and anacondas gave no thought to the massive size these snakes would be, and neither did the regulatory agencies that permitted their import.  Faced with a creature capable of devouring the family pet and children and suffocating the life out of large strong adults, the snakes were dumped into the Everglades where they have devastated the natural fauna and now are too numerous to be controlled. The external costs easily exceed many times the total price of all such snakes sold by pet stores.  

Ecological economists stress that capitalism works in an “empty economy,” where the pressure of humans on natural resources is slight.  But capitalism doesn’t work in a “full economy” where natural resources are on the point of exhaustion.  The external costs associated with economic growth as measured by GDP can be more costly than the value of the output.

A strong case can be made that this is the situation we currently face.  The disappearance of species, the appearance of toxins in food, beverages, water, mothers’ breast milk, air, land, desperate attempts to secure energy from fracking which destroys groundwater and causes earthquakes, and so forth are signs of a hard-pressed planet.  When we get right down to it, all of the profits that capitalism has generated over the centuries are probably due to capitalists not having to cover the full cost of their production.  They passed the cost on to the environment and to third parties and pocketed the savings as profit.

*

Update: Herman Daly notes that last year the British medical journal, Lancet, estimated the annual cost of pollution was about 6 % of the global economy whereas the annual global economic growth rate was about 2 percent, with the difference being about a 4% annual decline in wellbeing, not a 2 percent rise.  In other words, we could already be in the situation where economic growth is uneconomical. See this.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site: Paul Craig Roberts Institute for Political Economy.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

Every day you log on, you ask yourself how much dirtier the campaign to unseat Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party is going to get, how much lower his enemies are going to sink. And each day they surpass themselves in the race to the gutter of British politics.

Last week, Britain’s three Jewish newspapers, who usually feud with each other, joined forces to post a joint editorial declaring that a Corbyn-led government would pose “an existential threat” to British Jews.

The campaign’s real purpose

On Saturday, the Daily Mail claimed that Corbyn had laid a wreath at the grave of two Palestinians who had allegedly organised the Munich Olympic massacre. Today the mass circulation tabloid, The Sun, ran two pieces in the same edition. One was a “letter’s special” declaring that Boris Johnson was “bang on” when he said that women who wear burqas resemble letter boxes or bank robbers: “Boris must be allowed to speak honestly, he has nothing to apologise for.”

Just imagine what would have happened if Corbyn had mocked the Kippah, overtly and brazenly, in a national newspaper.

The other was an editorial saying that Corbyn was unfit to be Labour leader and “cannot be allowed near government”.  At least – at last- we are arriving at the purpose of this campaign. It is clear now it has nothing to do with the actual and verifiable state of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, or Corbyn turning up at cemeteries in Tunis in 2014 for Palestinian refugees.

It is crystal clear that its purpose is to take out the leader of the opposition by using the tactics of fascists – smearing, libelling, intimidating.

Unable to put up a candidate capable of defeating him by democratic means, at the ballot box, unable to attack him on his polices for which there is majority support in the country, Corbyn’s detractors have methodically and consistently set about the task of character assassination.

And, of course, it works.

Feeding the crocodile

Corbyn is facing the biggest threat to his leadership since the “coup” organised by his parliamentary party. He is also increasingly isolated among his own supporters. John McDonnell, Corbyn’s closest ally, who shuns foreign policy, thinks this is not Labour’s fight. Emily Thornberry, his shadow foreign secretary, has not said a word.

Ed Milliband, the former Labour leader under whose tenure anti-Semitism was historically greater than during Corbyn’s reign, has offered little support. Union leaders are pealing away. Muslim groups do not want to know. Corbyn is alone.

And the result is that Corbyn feels he is left with no option but to back down, apologise, accept the contentious “working examples”of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-semitism one by one, in a slow, painful retreat.

This is a disastrous miscalculation. Corbyn’s “apologies” for crimes of which he is innocent, only feed the crocodile. As the Georgians say: “Once you run out of chickens to throw to the crocodile, it will have your arm.” Whether Corbyn survives this onslaught or not, everyone who is taking part, either wittingly or unwittingly, in this campaign should beware of getting what they want.

Whatever happens to Corbyn, there are three victims of this dirty episode.

The victims

The first is the truth: Almost every time you take a specific allegation and examine it, the evidence crumbles like sand in your hands. Let’s take the latest: that Corbyn laid a wreath at the graves of two Palestinian terrorists. It turns out he didn’t lay a wreath at that grave, which was 15 yards away, but was present when a wreath was laid. The wreath was for everyone at the cemetery: Palestinians who died under bombardment, those who were assassinated, and those who had simply died in exile. So Corbyn honoured the Palestinian dead 22 years after Oslo.

And who were these two terrorists, anyway? Both were PLO men, the Palestinian faction that went on to negotiate Oslo and recognise Israel. One was Salah Khalaf, who met with the US ambassador in Tunis as part of the dialogue with the PLO authorised by the then US Secretary of State James Baker. Does this make Baker guilty of the same crime Corbyn has just committed?

Khalaf was identified by the Americans as a pragmatist who was shifting PLO policy. The second one was Atef Bseiso, the PLO’s liaison officer with the CIA. Israel accused him of involvement in the Munich massacre, although it is a matter of historical dispute as to how many of those assassinated were directly linked to Munich. French intelligence traced his assassination in Paris to Abu Nidal, and the PLO accused the Mossad. Are we saying that two PLO men who created backchannels that would lead to the Madrid Conference and thence to Oslo should now be considered terrorists decades after the State department had got over that hurdle?

Yitzak Shamir was a member of Lehi, or the notorious Stern Gang, who assassinated Lord Moyne, the British resident minister in the Middle East. Both Begin and Shamir are celebrated as freedom fighters in Israel.

McCarthyism at work

The second victim of this campaign are the Palestinians. The aim is to terrify all politicians, be they Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat , or SNP from having any contact with Palestinian organisations, which could be used to discredit them in the future . Everyone is now put on guard for what records exist of the contacts and conferences which took place long ago.  The IHRA’s anti-Semitism definition, which is not legally binding, will be used as a retro-active weapon.

If this sounds like the tactics US Senator Joseph McCarthy used in the early 1950s against suspected communist – “reds under the bed” – at the height of the cold war, it is because it is. From now on, any past contact, any event, any platform shared with Palestinian groups, supporters, activists, and any photograph which emerges from the bowels of Israel’s psych-ops servers could be used to destroy a British politician’s reputation as effectively as Corbyn’s has been. Whether he survives or not, Corbyn’s international reputation has been tarnished. If you are an aspiring Democrat in the US, would you now meet with him?

It is every British party’s policy to back – the now moribund – two state solution. Every political party backs the establishment of an independent, viable Palestinian State. For this very reason,  this campaign effectively paralyses any communication between Palestinian activists, of whatever hue,  and British politicians.

I am addressing this point specifically to Corbyn’s enemies on the right of the party and to the Parliamentary Party. Do you seriously want the same tactics you have used, or colluded with, against Corbyn, to be used against you? Do you really think British democracy is the winner as a result?

If anyone  thinks that having taken out Corbyn, this campaign will stop there, they are deluding themselves.

Everyone’s fight

The third victim of this campaign is anyone, be they Palestinian or Israeli, Muslim, Christian, or Jewish, who is identified  and targeted by Israel as a dissenter.

Let’s just record what happened to Jewish American journalist Peter Beinart at Ben Gurion Airport. Beinart, who has publicly expressed his support for boycotting products manufactured in the settlements in the occupied West Bank, was interrogated for an hour about his political writings and activities .

“The session ended when my interrogator asked me, point blank, if I was planning to attend another protest,” Beinart wrote. “I answered truthfully: No. With that I was sent back to the holding room.” Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu immediately rowed back and claimed Beinart’s interrogation had been an “administrative mistake”.

For US Jews and indeed British ones, this is the real canary in the coal mine. This is the path upon which Israel is headed, and  the path Israel is dragging the Jewish diaspora along. Speak up now and resist it before it is too late. Corbyn’s fight for his own integrity, reputation and honesty is everyone’s fight.

If you don’t, if you stand aside, if you stay silent, if you grin knowingly and do nothing, you could be next.

*

David Hearst is editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He was chief foreign leader writer of The Guardian, former Associate Foreign Editor, European Editor, Moscow Bureau Chief, European Correspondent, and Ireland Correspondent. He joined The Guardian from The Scotsman, where he was education correspondent.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Western news fabricators would have us believe that Russia is a threat.  Russia is not a threat.  NATO is  the threat. Western politicians are fronts for self-serving, bailed-out, public-looting monopolies that create unreasonable fear for profit.  Arms manufacturers are a prime example.  These are the policymakers. They are war profiteers.

In 2016, General Petr Pavel, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, admitted that,

“it is not the aim of NATO to create a military barrier against broad-scale Russian aggression, because such aggression is not on the agenda and no intelligence assessment suggests such a thing.“ 

Decoded, Russia was not a threat to the West.

More recently, the Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg admitted that,

“we don’t see any imminent threat against any NATO ally.”  

Decoded, Russia is still not a threat.

But war profiteers benefit from war preparations, lucrative government contracts, scare-mongering, and the demonization of foreign leaders, in this case, President Putin. All of it is based on lies and deceptions.

The lies and deceptions generate plenty of money from increasingly thirdworldized tax payers.  The 2018 U.S. military budget is a staggering 700 billion dollars. 

It isn’t about jobs either. According to a U.S. study (“The Page That Counts” Yes! Magazine) a billion dollars spent on the military yields 8,555 jobs, while the same amount spent on health care yields 10,770 jobs, the same amount on education yields 17,687 jobs, and the same amount on mass transit yields 19,795 jobs.

The Military Industrial Complex is a hallmark of publicly-funded “neoliberal” monopoly capitalism.  Socialism for the rich, death and/or poverty for everyone else.

The oligarch classes need to propagandize us all, otherwise the bi-partisan, toxic system would not garner public consent. Hence monopoly news fabricators are all about spreading false narratives to generate fear, hatred, war, and war preparations.

The North American public is being “colonized” by the same monopolies that we are so eager to support.

*

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017.

Notes

1. Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, “ ’War is Good for Business’: Insider Trading, Secret Information and the US-led Attack against Syria.” Global Research. 21 April, 2018.(https://www.globalresearch.ca/war-is-good-for-business-insider-trading-secret-information-and-the-us-led-attack-against-syria/5637056) Accessed 15 August, 2018. 

2. Mark Taliano, “Engineered Fears: The Fake ‘ Russian Threat ‘, The Fake ‘ Terrorist Threat ‘. “ Mondialisation.ca, 16 juillet 2016. (https://www.mondialisation.ca/engineered-fears-the-fake-russian-threat-the-fake-terrorist-threat/5536117) Accessed 15 August, 2018.

3. “NATO Secretary General previews Brussels Summit at symposium.” 11 Jul. 2018 (https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_156834.htm” Accessed 15 August, 2018.

4. Greg Myre, “How The Pentagon Plans To Spend That Extra $61 Billion.” 26 March, 2018. National Public Radio. (https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/03/26/596129462/how-the-pentagon-plans-to-spend-that-extra-61-billion) Accessed 15 August, 2018.

5. Mark Taliano, “Niagarians Join Thousands In Giant London, Ontario Rally Against Corporate Greed.” Niagara At Large. 22 January, 2012. (https://niagaraatlarge.com/2012/01/22/niagarians-join-thousands-in-giant-london-ontario-rally-against-corporate-greed/) Accessed 15 August, 2018.

Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes  the mainstream media narratives on Syria. 

Voices from Syria 

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-1-6

Author: Mark Taliano

Year: 2017

Pages: 128 (Expanded edition: 1 new chapter)

List Price: $17.95

Special Price: $9.95 

Click to order

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Featured image: Jordanian soldiers just a few meters from River Jordan and Israeli controlled POT

Where precisely, is Jordan now? Is it with the West, or with the Arab world? How independent is it, really, and what future lies ahead?

Recently, in the middle of the capital city – Amman – several sleek 5-star hotel towers grew towards the sky, including the trendy “W” and Rotana. Dressed to kill women from the Gulf, wearing high heels and suggestive make up, are now sipping cappuccinos in various cafes at the posh new pedestrian area called The Boulevard. Saudi men can be seen downing pints of beer and carafes of wine. It is a scene not unlike that commonly observed in Bahrain. The Gulf now comes to Amman to escape strict regulations, to play, to be careless, to enjoy life. Some people travel here for medical treatment, staying in overpriced private hospitals which resemble 4-star hotels more than medical facilities.

Built with money from the Gulf

But predominately, here in Amman, it is all about fashion, about food and drinks, about showing off and being seen – the entire area doesn’t have one single decent bookstore (there is only a tiny kiosk at the entrance to the Abdali Mall), art cinema or a concert hall.

Unlike Beirut, with its vibrant international art scene and thirst for knowledge, Amman’s affluent residents and visitors are obsessed with consumerism. With half-closed eyes, The Boulevard could be located in some smaller city of Texas or Georgia.

By the Dead Sea – for very rich and tourists

*

Just a few kilometers away, at Al-Basheer Hospital (the biggest public medical facility in the country), doctors are on strike. They are exhausted, underpaid and depressed. Only emergency cases get treated. Blood is on the floor, patients look resigned.

I get pushed away as the Health Minister makes his visit with his entourage.

Ambulances keep howling, bringing casualties.

“Quality of public medical services in this country is appalling,” I am told by one of the patients.

Eerie dilapidated public hospital

I talk to two Syrian ladies who are waiting here with a sick boy. One of them laments:

“We had to travel here all the way from Al-Azraq. We are not insured in this country, and even UNHCR does not help us, when we are facing medical emergencies. We went to a private clinic where a simple series of tests cost us 300 JD (US$428). We are here now. It is uncertain whether we will be treated at all. We are totally desperate.”

Soon after, a plain-clothed cop begins interrogating me. “Do I have a permit to ask questions at the hospital?” I don’t. After I leave, two police officers try to intercept me. Pretending that I don’t understand, I smile like an idiot and they let me go.

*

In Jordan, people are afraid to talk. To be precise, they do talk inside their homes and cars, or in the backrooms of their offices, but not in public. They hardly ever give their full names. 

In 2018, Jordan ‘exploded’ on various occasions. In February, riots broke in the city of Al-Salt, over the proposed 60% price hike of bread, but also over the increase of electricity and fuel prices as well as the cutting of subsidies for basic goods and services.

The infamous and brutal IMF structural adjustment had been gradually implemented in Jordan, which was suffering from a stagnating economy and bizarre misappropriation of funds. In 2017, Jordan’s recorded government debt stood at $32 billion, equivalent to 95.6% of the country’s GDP.

In June, massive protests shook the capital, Amman. Protesters were demanding the change of the government. They were outraged by planned tax hikes and the rapidly declining standard of living. They also called for the end of endemic corruption among government officials.

Scores of people were arrested.

In July, the government resigned, and King Abdullah asked Omar al-Razzaz, a former World Bank economist, to form a new government.

People dispersed. They were told that they had won, but almost nothing changed.

“Let me explain: before they were, for instance, threatening to introduce a 15% tax on cars,” my driver in Amman explained. “Now what they will do is introduce a tax hike of 5% this year and 10% in 2019. Everything is the same.”

In a desperate settlement, Kufrain Village, near the River Jordan and Dead Sea, a baker at Alihsan Bakery was much more outspoken:

“We don’t trust the government: new or old. They are all the same bullshitters.

The riots? Change of government? Don’t make me laugh: so-called ‘riots’ were organized and led by intelligence officers and by the government itself. They manipulated people. This government does precisely the same things as the previous one, but with the new alphabetic order.”

A day earlier, I had heard precisely the same lament from an upper-class Jordanian lady whom I met on the bank of the Jordan River, while visiting the Bethany Beyond Jordan Site (great opportunity to photograph fortified border with Israeli occupied Palestine (OPT).

She explained, cynically and in perfect English:

“Jordanian people had enough; this time they were ready to overthrow the regime in Amman. The elites knew it. They organized riots, made them look real but relatively orderly, then changed a few political players at the top, while saving the system. People felt that they won, but in fact, nothing changed, whatsoever”.

Jordan is a staunch ally of the West. Its ‘Elites’ are unconditionally pro-US.

The country has been, for decades, betting on collaboration with NATO.

Azraq refugee camp

It hosts several deadly military and air force bases of various Wester countries, the most lethal being Al-Azraq, where part of the war planes that were previously situated at the Turkish airbase Incerlik, have recently been re-located.

British and US Special Forces have been, for years, invading the Syrian state, from Jordanian territory.

Functioning as a service station of the West, has been securing the main income of the country and to its ‘elites’, but not necessarily to its people. Very little or nothing has been invested into science, research or production. It is all about the military bases, malls for the expats, medical tourism for the rich Gulf citizens, few maquiladoras, and of course the main privately own component of the local economy – tourism (some 14% of the GDP and growing).

Tourism primarily benefits the big Western hotel chains and is consistently ruining the fragile ecosystem of the Dead Sea and lately, the Gulf of Aqaba. At the same time, the Al-Azraq air force base is destroying and draining the precious water reserves of the desert oases.

Official unemployment in Jordan now stands around 18% but is in reality much higher.

The border with Syria remains closed, so cheap goods cannot come in (relatively poor Jordan is periodically ranked as the most expensive country to live in the Arab world).

Here there are no cappuccinos

The country is presently ‘hosting’ 670,000 Syrian refugees, although some are now determined to return home. The refugees (many of them live in despicable conditions and face various types of discrimination) are yet another source of foreign funding for Jordan, but on the streets of Amman, people keep complaining that ‘Syrians take jobs from the local people’. That does not prevent Jordanians from importing cheap labor from poor countries like the Philippines and Kenya. No matter how stretched and impoverished, Jordanians are not ready to do ‘dirty jobs’.

*

I spoke to a curator at the modest Jordan National Gallery of Fine Arts. There, a surreal and post-modernist installation called “Factory” was trying to shock by avant-garde forms and, it appeared to me, by very little substance.

The National Gallery was desperately empty; people were most likely somewhere else, in cafes, malls or pubs.

I asked the curator whether she was planning to show some artwork depicting the recent riots, or to get to the core of what triggered the recent wave of desperation.

She looked at me, horrified:

“No, why? Of course not!”

I asked whether there is at least one gallery in Amman, that is reacting to the events?

“No,” she almost shouted at me. She was very angry. I was trying to understand, why? 

It never pays to be a Western colony, in the Arab world or anywhere else. Some individuals or a group of people may get filthy rich, but the rest of the population will struggle. It will become ‘irrelevant’.

While neighboring Syria is winning its epic battle against the terrorists implanted there by the West and its allies, Jordan is living the sad reality of some Central American semi-colony of the United States.

Here, almost all ideology had been neutralized. Not even dreams of pan-Arab socialist unity that had been shaping, for decades, both Syria and Iraq, could be traced here.

Nobody in Jordan appears to be happy. Some complain, some don’t, but there are no concrete proposals on how to change the pro-Western regime.

In the meantime, the posh Boulevard area is ‘protected’ by metal detectors and guards, uniformed and plain-clothed. Hotels are turning into fortresses. Now even to enter some cafes at the Boulevard, one has to go through a second stage of security, including robust metal detectors. Amman is an extremely safe city. I wonder:

“Is it in order to stop terrorism? Or, perhaps, is it to prevent poor and desperate people from entering and seeing with their own eyes that the foreign interests and local collaborators are robbing them of their own country?”

Slums at the outskirts of Amman

I ask aloud. My local friend does not reply. In Jordan, there are some questions that should never be asked.

*

This article was originally published on New Eastern Outlook.

Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his latest books are his tribute to “The Great October Socialist Revolution” a revolutionary novel “Aurora” and a bestselling work of political non-fiction: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire”. View his other books here. Watch Rwanda Gambit, his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo and his film/dialogue with Noam Chomsky “On Western Terrorism”. Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website and his Twitter.

All images in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

The known carcinogen and infamous weed killing chemical glyphosate has just been found in breakfast foods marketed for children. A new study has discovered trace amounts of the most widely used herbicide in the country in oats, granolas, and snack bars.

Concern over glyphosate has continued to grow in the United States in recent years.  Although the chemical may be safe in some amounts to spray on weeds if certain safety precautions are taken, it is probably a lot more dangerous if it’s ingested by a child. Most disturbing, however, is the fact that thirty-one out of 45 tested products had levels of glyphosate that were higher than what many scientists consider safe for children.

The study, which was conducted by the non-profit Environmental Working Group (EWG) found that many of the breakfast foods marketed to children contain glyphosate.

“I was shocked,” said Dr. Jennifer Lowry, who heads the Council on Environmental Health for the American Academy of Pediatrics. Although not much is known about the effects of the chemical on children, parents and doctors are concerned. “We don’t know a lot about the effects of glyphosate on children,” Lowry said. “And essentially we’re just throwing it at them.”

“We’re very concerned that consumers are eating more glyphosate than they know,” said Scott Faber, vice president of government affairs at EWG, according to CBS News. Faber has been working to improve food safety standards for more than a decade. He said he and his team at EWG conducted the study which included a lab test involving “45 samples of products made with conventionally grown oats.”

The researchers found glyphosate, which is the active ingredient in the Monsanto weed-killer Roundup, in all but two of the products.

EWG used it’s own very stringent standards of safe levels of glyphosate when testing the products, which should also be noted. Because of that, in response to EWG’s study, Monsanto said, “even at the highest level reported… an adult would have to eat 118 pounds of the food item every day for the rest of their life in order to reach the EPA’s limit” for glyphosate residues. Just last week, in fact, a jury in California ordered Monsanto to pay one man $289 million in damages after his lawsuit claimed the company’s weedkillers caused his cancer. EWG’s Faber is skeptical of EPA’s glyphosate limits.

The World Health Organization says glyphosate is a “probable carcinogen,” and California lists it as a chemical “known to the state to cause cancer.” Monsanto continues to dispute the claim that the chemical is carcinogenic, saying in a statement, “glyphosate does not cause cancer” and “has a more than 40-year history of safe use.”

As the debate over glyphosate’s safety continues, it isn’t likely to see tests on the stuff cease anytime soon. And Faber isn’t the only person concerned over its possible carcinogenic effects.

“It is time now for them to step up and do their jobs to ban glyphosate,” said Zen Honeycutt, who heads Moms Across America, a group formed to raise awareness about toxic exposures. “We want to trust that what is in the grocery store is safe and the shocking reality is that in many cases it’s not,” Honeycutt said.

*

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

When you think that they have already done enough damage, that they have seen the light, and maybe they have repented and disappeared to enjoy the wealth they have amassed thanks to an insane capitalist system, they surface again like a cancer that no surgery or radiation has been able to remove. 

I’m reacting to a news report by Telesur [1] and reprinted by MintPress News [2] saying that Steve Bannon will be advising far-right presidential candidate in Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro in the upcoming elections in October. What could someone with racist views contribute positively to a country like Brazil where 51% of the population is black or mixed? 

This is the same Steve Bannon who helped “Trump ascend to the U.S. presidency” and served in his administration for one year after being dumped. Bannon is also the former executive chairman of the far-right syndicated Breitbart News Network. Any association with Breitbart News, even if “former” association, does not reflect well on Mr. Bannon. The network is widely considered to be ideologically driven, with a reputation of publishing misleading stories and “news” with racist and xenophobic overtones.

Having burned off his bridges in the U.S., Mr. Bannon resurfaces to go international presumably with his quest for a worldview that we hoped was long gone. His view has a “white-economic-nationalist agenda.” The last time we confronted a similar agenda, it came from Nazi ideology with all the consequences we know. But we also know that in the 21^st century there is a revival of white supremacist ideology popping up from the US to Ukraine via Israel.

As if it wasn’t enough that Brazil had a coup that installed unelected president Michel Temer to replace elected president Dilma Rousseff, we may live to see a surge of white supremacy in Brazil, of all places. In the history of Latin America this would be going 500 years back in time during European colonial rule.

According to the Telesur report, Bannon is an admirer of Brazil’s presidential candidate Jair Bolsonaro. That explains the reason to be his political advisor.  Also according to Telesur, “Bannon said that Bolsonaro’s mission in Brazil” will be more “arduous” than Trump’s presidential campaign. That in turn might explain his personal interest in choosing the challenge.

Bolsonaro is running for the Partido Social Liberal (Social Liberal Party – PSL). Despite the name this is a very rightwing party. He is running on a platform of privatization of public enterprises, reducing government and privatizing basic and higher education. 

Bolsonaro is infamous for stating that Brazil’s dictatorship of the 1970s “prevented Brazil from falling under the sway of the Soviet Union.” That was the dictatorship that imprisoned and tortured a young leftist Dilma Rousseff for three years. He also said that Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet “should have killed more people.”

But other disturbing statements are attributed to him:

“Women should earn less because they get pregnant;” that the inhabitants of Afro-Brazilian communities that resisted slavery are “not even good for breeding anymore;” and that he would be “incapable of loving a homosexual son.” [3] 

Certainly for some of those reasons Jair Bolsonaro is considered in Brazil a controversial figure who has been described as “a caricature of (U.S. President Donald) Trump.” 

There is a general consensus that the statistical advantage of Bolsonaro in the polls is because the leading popular candidate, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of the Workers’ Party (PT), is still in prison since last April with trumped up charges. 

A large proportion of Brazilians want Lula to be freed, which will surely see him as the winning presidential candidate for the Workers’ Party (PT). Obviously Bolsonaro strongly opposes Lula’s freedom and candidacy, and he has mockingly stated that he favours a free Lula but “in 2030”.

Brazilians know very well who they want as president if they are given the freedom to choose. With someone like Steve Bannon joining in friendship to an unwelcome candidate, they are reminded of the old adage, tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are.

*

Nino Pagliccia is an activist and writer based in Vancouver, Canada. He is a Venezuelan-Canadian who writes about international relations with a focus on the Americas. He is editor of the book “Cuba Solidarity in Canada – Five Decades of People-to-People Foreign Relations” http://www.cubasolidarityincanada.ca. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes

[1] https://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Brazil-Steve-Bannon-to-Advise-Bolsonaro-Presidential-Campaign-20180815-0003.html 

[2] https://www.mintpressnews.com/steve-bannon-advise-brazils-far-right-presidential-candidate/247781/ 

[3] https://www.telesurtv.net/english/analysis/Profiled-Brazils-Main-Presidential-Election-Candidates-20180811-0008.html 

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

On the August 15 – 19 anniversary of the CIA coup against democratically elected Iranian PM Mohammad Mosaddegh, the Trump regime’s neocon extremist Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the creation of a so-called “Iran Action Group” – for regime change he failed to explain, saying:

It’ll “be responsible for directing, reviewing, and coordinating all aspects of the State Department’s Iran-related activity, and it will report directly to me.”

A litany of Big Lies followed, saying:

“For nearly 40 years, (Iran) has been responsible for a torrent of violent and destabilizing behavior against the United States, our allies, our partners, and indeed the Iranian people themselves” – a US/NATO/Israeli/Saudi speciality, not how the Islamic Republic operates.

Trump “withdrew from the flawed Iran nuclear deal, which failed to restrain Iran’s nuclear progress or its campaigns of violence abroad” – bald-faced lies.

The Islamic Republic abhors nuclear weapons, wanting them eliminated. Nuclear armed and dangerous America and Israel risk WW III with nukes, the ultimate nightmare scenario.

The world community strongly supports the JCPOA. Unanimously affirmed by Security Council members, it’s international law the Trump regime flagrantly breached by its illegal pullout.

Trump “instituted a campaign of pressure, deterrence, and solidarity with the long-suffering Iranian people,” Pompeo roared.

The Trump regime is in “solidarity” with dark forces at war on humanity at home and abroad alone, disdainful of ordinary people everywhere.

“(C)hanging…Iranian…behavior” Pompeo called for is code language for regime change, wanting Islamic Republic sovereign independence replaced by unacceptable pro-Western puppet rule.

The “Iranian threat” he claimed doesn’t exist – other than its government standing in the way of US control of the country, its valued oil and gas reserves, as well as its people Washington wants exploited the same way it mistreats populations elsewhere abroad as well as at home.

Trump regime State Department policy planning director Brian Hook heads the Iran Action Group, serving as US special representative for the Islamic Republic, in charge of its regime change initiative.

Trump sent Iran mixed messages. In July, he warned Iranian President Hassan Rouhani by tweeting:

“NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE” – in response Rouhani saying:

“Do not play with the lion’s tail or else you will regret it…Peace with Iran would be the mother of all peace and war with Iran would be the mother of all wars.”

Separately, Trump said he’s willing to meet with his Iranian counterpart without preconditions – a hollow gesture.

His  JCPOA pullout, reimposition of nuclear and other sanctions, stiffer ones to follow in November, formation of the Iran Action Group, along with other policies aimed at destabilizing and toppling the Islamic Republic show his regime’s real intentions.

Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei dismissed the idea of negotiating with the Trump regime, citing the following reasons:

Trump’s political and economic war on Iran, notably his JCPOA pullout, reimposition of sanctions, and orchestration of destabilizing activities leave no room for dialogue.

It’s only possible if his regime acknowledges nearly 40 years of US hostility toward the Islamic Republic.

Trump repeatedly proved he and his regime can never be trusted. The same goes for Obama when in power, responsible for breaching the JCPOA multiple times – proving undemocratic Dems are as untrustworthy as Republicans.

US dirty hands are behind efforts to destabilize Iran by orchestrating unrest in the country, aiming to topple its government by color revolution – what was tried before and failed, unlikely to succeed this time.

The Iran Action group aims to stoke internal unrest more intensively than earlier Trump regime efforts – US war on the Islamic Republic perhaps to follow if coup d’etat actions fail.

Khamenei, Rouhani, and other Iranian officials justifiably believe negotiating with a nation bent on achieving dominion over planet earth can accomplish nothing.

*

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

The Globalization of War: America’s “Long War” against Humanity

Michel Chossudovsky

The “globalization of war” is a hegemonic project. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The U.S. military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign states.

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-6-0

Year: 2015

Pages: 240 Pages

List Price: $22.95

Special Price: $15.00

Click here to order.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

When I was in Iran earlier this year, the government there blocked Twitter, deciding for a whole nation what they can not see. In America, Twitter purges users, deciding for a whole nation what they can not see. It matters little whose hand is on the switch, the end result is the same. This is the America I always feared I’d see.

Speech in America is an unalienable right, and goes as deep into the concept of a free society as any idea can. Thomas Jefferson wrote of the right flowing from his notion of a Creator, not from government. Jefferson’s 18th century invocation is understood now as less that free speech is heaven-sent and more that it is something existing above government. And so the argument the First Amendment applies only to government and not to all public speaking (including private platforms like Twitter) is thus both true and irrelevant, and the latter is more important.

The government remains a terrifying threat to free speech. An Espionage Act prosecution against Wikileaks’ Julian Assange will create precedent for use against any mainstream journalist. The war on whistleblowers which started under Obama continues under Trump. Media are forced to register as propaganda agents. Universities restrict controversial speakers. The Trump administration no doubt will break the record (77%) for redacting or denying access to government files under the Freedom of Information Act.

But there is another threat to freedom of speech now, corporate censorship. It is often dressed up with NewSpeak terms like deplatforming, restricting hate speech, or simply applying Terms of Service. Corporations always did what they wanted with speech. Our protection against corporate overreach used to rely on an idea Americans once held dear, enshrined as “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend your right to say it.” The concept was core to a democracy: everyone supports the right of others to throw ideas into the marketplace independent. An informed people would sort through it all, and bad ideas would be pushed away by better ones. That system more or less worked for 240 years.

For lack of a more precise starting point, the election of Donald Trump did away with near-universal agreement on defending the right to speak without defending the content, driven by a belief too much free speech helped Trump get elected. Large numbers of Americans began not just to tolerate, but to demand censorship. They wanted universities to deplatform speakers they did not agree with, giggling over the fact the old-timey 1A didn’t apply and there was nothing “conservatives” could do. They expressed themselves in violence, demanding censorship by “punching Nazis.” Such brownshirt-like violence was endorsed by The Nation, once America’s clearest voice for freedom. The most startling change came within the American Civil Liberties Union, who enshrined the “defend the right, not the speech” concept in the 1970s when it defended the free speech rights of Nazis, and went on to defend the speech rights of white supremacists in Charlottesville.

Not so much anymore. The ACLU now applies a test to the free speech cases it will defend, weighing their impact on other rights (for example, the right to say the N-word versus the rights of POC.) The ACLU in 2018 is siding with those who believe speech can be secondary to other political goals. Censorship has a place, says the ACLU, when it serves what they believe is a greater good.

A growing segment of public opinion isn’t just in favor of this, it demands it. So when years-old tweets clash with 2018 definitions of racism and sexism, companies fire employees. Under public pressure, Amazon removed “Nazi paraphernalia and other far-right junk” from its online store. It was actually just some nasty Halloween gear and Confederate flag merch, but the issue is not the value of the products — that’s part of any free speech debate — it’s corporate censorship being used to stifle debate by literally in this case pulling things out of the marketplace.

Alex Jones’ InfoWars was deplatformed off download sites where it has been available for years, including Apple, YouTube (owned by Google), Spotify, and Amazon, for promoting “hate speech.” Huffington Post wondered why more platforms, such as Instagram, haven’t done away with Jones and his hate speech.

That term, hate speech, clearly not prohibited by the Supreme Court, is an umbrella word now used by censorship advocates for, well, basically anything they don’t want others to be able to listen to or watch. It is very flexible and thus very dangerous. As during the McCarthy-era in the 1950s when one needed only to label something “Communist” to have it banned, so it is today with the new mark of “hate speech.” The parallels are chilling — it was in the McCarthy-era Hollywood created its infamous blacklists, actors and writers who could not work because of their political beliefs.

Twitter is perhaps the most infamous platform to censor its content. The site bans advertising from Russian media outlets RT and Sputnik. Twitter suspends the accounts of those who promote (what it defines as) hate and violence, “shadow bans” others to limit their audience, and tweaks its trending topics to push certain political ideas and downplay others. It regularly purges users and bans “hateful symbols.” There are near-daily demands by increasingly organized groups calling on Twitter to censor specific users, with Trump at the top of that list. The point is always the same: to limit what ideas you can be exposed to and narrow debate.

Part of the 2018 problem is the trust people place in “good companies” like Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter. Anthropomorphizing them as Jeff, and Zuck, and @jack is popular, along with a focus on their “values.” It seems to make sense, especially now when many of the people making decisions on corporate censorship are the same age and hold the same political views as those demanding they do it.

Of course people age, values shift, what seems good to block today might change. But the main problem is companies exist to make money and will do what they need to do to make money. You can’t count on them past that. Handing over free speech rights to an entity whose core purpose has nothing to do with free speech means they will quash ideas when they conflict with what they are really about. People who gleefully celebrate the fact that @jack who runs Twitter is not held back by the 1A and can censor at will seem to believe he will always yield his power in the way they want him to.

Google has a slogan reading “do no evil.” Yet in China Google will soon deploy Dragonfly, a version of its search engine that will meet Beijing’s demands for censorship by blocking websites on command. Of course in China they don’t call it hate speech, they call it anti-societal speech, and the propaganda Google will block isn’t from Russian bots but from respected global media. In the U.S. Google blocks users from their own documents saved in Drive if the service feels the documents are “abusive.” Backin China Apple removes apps from its store on command of the government in return for market access. Amazon, who agreed to remove hateful merch from its store in the U.S., the same week confirmed it is “unwaveringly committed to the U.S. government and the governments we work with around the world” using its AI and facial recognition technology to spy on their own people. Faced with the loss of billions of dollars, as was the case for Google and Apple in China, what will corporations do in America?

Once upon a time an easy solution to corporate censorship was to take one’s business elsewhere. The 2018 problem is with the scale of platforms like Amazon, near global monopolies all. Pretending Amazon, which owns the Washington Post, and with the reach to influence elections, is just another company that sells things is to pretend the role of unfettered debate in a free society is outdated. Yeah, you can for now still go through hoops to download stuff outside the Apple store or Google Play, but those platforms more realistically control access to your device. Censored on Twitter? No problem big guy, go try Myspace, and maybe Bing will notice you. Technology and market dominance changed the nature of censorship so free speech is as much about finding an audience as it is about finding a place to speak. Corporate censorship is at the cutting edge of a reality targeting both speakers (Twitter suspends someone) and listeners (Apple won’t post that person’s videos made off-platform). Ideas need to be discoverable to enter the debate; in 1776 you went to the town square. In 2018 it’s Twitter.

In the run up to the midterm elections, Senator Chris Murphy, ironically in a tweet, demanded social media censor more aggressively for the “survival of our democracy,” implying those companies can act as proxies for those still held back by the First Amendment. We already know the companies involved can censor. The debate is over what happens when they do.

A PERSONAL NOTE: Some readers are aware I have been permanently suspended from Twitter as @wemeantwell. This followed exchanges with several mainstream journalists over their support for America’s wars and unwillingness to challenge government lies. Twitter sent an auto-response saying what I wrote “harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence someone else’s voice.” I don’t think I did any of that, and I wish you didn’t have to accept my word on it. I wish instead you could read what I wrote and decide for yourself. But Twitter won’t allow it. Twitter says you cannot read and make up your own mind. They have in fact eliminated all the things I have ever written there over seven years, disappeared me down the Memory Hole. That’s why all censorship is wrong; it takes the power to decide what is right and wrong away from you and gives it to someone else.

I lost my career at the State Department because I spoke out as a whistleblower against the Iraq War. I’ve now been silenced, again, for speaking out, this time by a corporation. I am living in the America I always feared.

*

Featured image is from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Today, hundreds of newspapers, at the initiative of The Boston Globe, are purporting to stand up for a free press against Trump’s rhetoric.

Today also marks exactly one month since I was dragged out of the July 16 Trump-Putin news conference in Helsinki and locked up until the middle of the night.

As laid in my cell, I chuckled at the notion that the city was full of billboards proclaiming Finland was the “land of free press“.

So, I’ve grown an especially high sensitivity to both goonish behavior toward journalists trying to ask tough questions — and to those professing they are defending a free press when they are actually engaging in a marketing exercise.

As some have noted, the editorials today will likely help Trump whip up support among his base against a monolithic media. But, just as clearly, the establishment media can draw attention away from their own failures, corruptions and falsehoods simply by focusing on Trump’s.

Big media outlets need not actually report news that affects your life and point to serious solutions for social ills. They can just bad mouth Trump. And Trump need not deliver on campaign promises that tapped into populist and isolationist tendencies in the U.S. public that have grown in reaction to years of elite rule. He need only deride the major media.

They are at worst frenemies. More likely, at times, Trump and the establishment media log roll with each other. The major media built up Trump. Trump’s attacks effectively elevate a select few media celebrities.

My case is a small but telling one. Major media outlets were more likely to disinform about the manhandling I received in my attempt to ask about U.S., Russian and Israeli nuclear threats to humanity — I’ll soon give a detailed rebuttal to the torrent of falsehoods, some of which I’ve already noted on social media — than to crusade against it.

Other obvious cases: None of the newspaper editorials I’ve seen published today mention the likely prosecution of Wikileaks. If there were solidarity among media, the prospect of Julian Assange being imprisoned for publishing U.S. government documents should be front and center today.

Neither did I see a mention of RT or, as of this week, Al Jazeera, being compelled to register as foreign agents. State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert has openly refused to take questions from reporters working for Russian outlets. Virtual silence — in part because Russia is widely depicted as the great enemy, letting U.S. government policy around the world off the hook.

The above are actual policies that the Trump administration has pursued targeting media — not rhetoric that dominates so much establishment coverage of Trump.

Then there’s the threat of social media.

My day job is with the Institute for Public Accuracy. Yesterday, I put out a news release titled “Following Assassination Attempt, Facebook Pulled Venezuela Content.” Tech giants can decide — possibly in coordination with the U.S. government — to pull the plug on content at a time and manner of their choosing.

You would think newspaper people might be keen to highlight the threat that such massive corporations thus pose, not least of all because they have eaten up their ad revenue.

The sad truth is that this is what much of the media have long done: Counter to the lofty rhetoric of many of today’s editorials, the promise of an independent and truth-seeking press has frequently been subservient to propaganda, pushing for war or narrow economic and other interests.

The other major story of the day — quite related to this — is that of Trump pulling former CIA Director John Brennan’s security clearance. NPR tells me this is an attempt to “silence a critic.” But Brennan has an op-ed in today’s New York Times and is frequently on major media. He oversaw criminal policies during the Obama administration, including drone assassinations. If anything, this has elevated Brennan’s major media status.

Those who have been truly silenced in the “Trump era” are those who were critical of the seemingly perpetual U.S. government war machine since the invasion of Iraq.

Trump attacks on the establishment media — like many media attacks on him — are frequently devoid of substance. But recently one of his rhetorically tweets stated that media “cause wars“. I would say “push for war”, but that’s quibbling.

Trump is technically right on that point, but it’s totally disingenuous coming from him. He’s actually been the beneficiary of the media compulsion he claims to deride. When he exalts U.S. bombing strikes in Yemen, Syria and elsewhere, CNN calls him “presidential“.

Many consider “Russia-gate” critical to scrutinizing the Trump administration, but the two reporters, apparently picked by the White House, during the Helsinki news conference focused on “Russia-gate” — which eventually led to Brennan and others attacking Trump as “treasonous”. Meanwhile, much more meaningful collusion that can be termed Israel-gate is being ignored as the U.S. and Israeli governments attempt to further mold the Mideast.

The need for genuinely free sources of information is greater than ever. It is unclear to me if traditional newspapers can be part of the equation. Quite likely, the institutions desperately needed to carry out that critical mission are yet to be born.

*

This article first appeared on Sam Husseini’s blog, Posthaven.

Sam Husseini is an independent journalist, senior analyst at the Institute for Public Accuracy and founder of VotePact.org. Follow him on twitter: @samhusseini.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

How much does the US government know about you? It’s not a question easily answered. The US government operates the largest and most advanced spying, surveillance, and data collection programs on the planet. It’s made up of multiple law enforcement and intelligence agencies, some of which operate in secret. The federal government, of course, consists more than two dozen major agencies that perform regular record keeping for operational purposes, such as the Internal Revenue Service, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Social Security Administration.

Aside from official government entities, third parties often comply with government requests for information. These include big tech companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Facebook, all of which were shown by Edward Snowden to have cooperated with the NSA’s spying efforts. And while we’re thinking about Edward Snowden, recall that he was a private contractor at the NSA at the time and not a government employee. Contractors and private companies can collect information on behalf of the US government as well.

The amount and accuracy of information that the government varies from one person to the next. Someone who spends a lot of time online, sharing on social media, creating accounts at different services, and/or communicating with friends and relatives overseas will leave a much more clear trail of data than someone who shuns Facebook and takes proactive steps to protect their privacy. Government employees must undergo rigorous background checks, while someone getting paid under the table at a local restaurant can fly under the radar.

Attempting to cover all the information that the US government knows about any one person quickly becomes overwhelming and full of caveats. With all of this in mind, it’s clear we need to narrow down our parameters. To that end, we’ll create three typical archetypes–Alice, Bob, and Chris–who fit the following profiles:

Alice is:

• A naturalized citizen (immigrant)
• Middle aged
• A private sector employee
• A frequent online shopper
• A tenant in a rented apartment
• A college graduate

Bob is:

• A US citizen from birth
• Elderly
• Retired from the public sector
• Not very computer-literate and doesn’t spend much time online
• A homeowner

Chris is:

• A minor
• A public school student
• Active on social media
• Applying for college
• Doesn’t have a job

To narrow our scope a bit further, let’s assume none of these three people has a criminal record. They are all US citizens, either from birth or naturalized. None of them have served in the military or law enforcement. They do not collect welfare such as unemployment checks, food stamps, worker’s compensation, or disability benefits. Finally, we’ll only cover information that the government can legally collect without a court order.

We’ll categorize the types of information based on, in broad strokes, who originally collects it:

• Non-law enforcement government agencies – Mostly routine information that the government needs to operate and is not collected for intelligence or law enforcement purposes
• Intelligence and law enforcement agencies – Information swept up in government spying and surveillance programs
• Non-government companies – Private companies, credit bureaus, public utilities, and other entities not operated by the government but that cooperate with government requests for information

Info collected by non-intelligence agencies

Some information is required for the US government to effectively operate and serve the public. This includes information that’s used collect taxes, dole out welfare, deliver mail, draw boundaries for congressional and school districts, and assess social and economic trends and make policy decisions.

While we say this information is “routine”, once it’s all combined, one could actually formulate a fairly intimate depiction of a person’s life. The US government likely knows the following about all three of our hypothetical characters:

• Name
• Social security number
• Permanent address and/or place of usual residence
• Age, birth date
• Place of birth
• Prior place of residence and duration of residence
• Ethnicity
• Marital status
• Household composition (family members and how they’re all related)

This information can be collected through various means, including tax forms, the postal service, and census data.

The decennial census in particular gathers a large amount of personal information. Individual information is kept private for 72 years; the latest census data available to the public is from 1940.

You might presume that intelligence and law enforcement agencies can access Census records whenever they want, but think again. The US Census Bureau is bound by Title 13 of the United States Code, guaranteeing confidentiality. The FBI and other government entities do not have the legal right to access this information. So the US government technically knows a lot about you through the Census and IRS, but, on paper, that information is locked away and only used in aggregate.

The IRS is a bit different. IRS.gov’s page on disclosure laws notes, “pursuant to court order, return information may be shared with law enforcement agencies for investigation and prosecution of non-tax criminal laws.” That means all the information in your tax return can be used by the FBI and other law enforcement agencies with a court order. The IRS actually uses some of the same surveillance techniques as national intelligence agencies, including deployment of Stingrays to spy on cell phones.

Chris doesn’t have an income yet and thus doesn’t need to file his own taxes, but he is about to apply to college and thus will fill out a FAFSA to apply for federal student aid. He’s also a public school student, so it’s reasonable to assume the government knows the following about him:

• Education level
• What classes he takes
• Where he goes to school
• Parents’ income from their jobs and investments
• Parents’ employment status

Alice holds down a full-time job and files taxes every year. She also participates in the census as required by law. It’s reasonable to assume the US government would know the following information about her:

• Employment status
• Occupation and industry
• Income
• Place of work
• Education level
• Student loan payment status

Bob is retired and own his own home. He earns a modest pension and collects social security. Medicare pays for the majority of his medical expenses. He’s also a bit of a philanthropist who regularly donates to charity. We can assume the government collects the following information about him in a given year:

• Income
• Current medicare and social security benefits, and estimate of future benefits
• Employment status
• Donations claimed on tax forms
• Education level
• Previous occupation and industry
• Medical history, medications
• Doctor(s) and hospital visits
• Property tax and valuation info, including:
  • Value of home and land
  • How the property is used
  • Location
  • Size
  • Improvements and problems
  • Easements
  • Type of access

While we’re on the topic of social security, note that a regulation that required the SSA to to disclose information about certain people with mental illness to the national gun background check system. That regulation was nixed by President Trump in February 2017.

All three fictional characters could conceivably have a driver’s license or passport. Driver’s licenses are administered at the state level, but the data about drivers is presumably accessible by the federal government. These types of official photo IDs contain information like

• Name
• Home address
• Birth date
• Photo
• Sex
• Height
• Weight
• Eye color
• Signature

And don’t forget: a driver’s license means a driver’s record as well, including a record of any past infractions. Bob and Alice own their own vehicles, which are registered with the following information:

• Make
• Model
• Year
• Previous owners
• License plate number

Government-accessible info collected by private companies

In this section, we’ll look at information collected by private entities, some backed by the government and others wholly private. These include internet service providers (ISPs), internet companies, utility companies and credit bureaus.

Info provided by ISPs and internet companies

The FBI and NSA perform their fair share of online surveillance, to be sure. But in many cases they might not be allowed to monitor who they want, when they want due to laws and regulations, particularly those about spying on US citizens. In many cases, however, intelligence and law enforcement agencies don’t even have to conduct their own surveillance. It’s much easier and more efficient to simply use data that private companies already have.

The FBI might ask for information regarding a particular redditor, like Chris, such as the IP address from which they access the site. The NSA might ask for the account names of everyone who typed in a particular search term in a certain period of time, e.g. Bob searching for information about his pain medication. The ATF could ask Amazon to set up an alert every time a customer purchases a specific book, such as if Alice buys a book about Islam. And the DEA could request your ISP hand over the browsing history of suspected drug dealers.

Internet companies earn revenue from the data they collect, so for many of them, more is better. How much they share with law enforcement without a court order depends on the company itself. Check the privacy policy and terms of service of your ISP or a website to see what types of information they collect, with whom they share it, and under what circumstances. Most major companies now state that they don’t hand over customer information without a court order. But when those court orders do come in, they often come paired with a gag order. Some guarantee no such protection and will cooperate with law enforcement, court order or no.

The information that websites and ISPs collect varies depending on the company and what you do online, but here’s a list of possibilities:

• Browsing history
• Search queries
• Device name and unique ID
• IP address and location
• Videos watched, songs listened to
• Purchases
• Downloads
• Social media posts

In 2017, Congress repealed an Obama-era FCC rule that prevented ISPs from sharing browsing data with third parties like advertisers. With that rule out of the way, ISPs that control your access to the internet are expected to start gathering more data than ever on their users. If you don’t want to be tracked by your ISP, we recommend signing up for a reputable VPN.

Library records and ebooks

48 states in the US have laws that protect library records from snoopers, and two have legal directives that serve a similar purpose. To access a person’s library records, a court order is usually necessary.

That’s more protection than you’ll find on Amazon when buying an ebook. Amazon and other ebook sellers usually have privacy policies stating they also only hand over reader’s private information with a court order, but there’s technically no law barring them from doing so. Furthermore, Amazon can keep much better track of what you’re reading and how you read on its Kindle devices and companion apps. Amazon can not only see what you read, but what page you’re on, when you read, highlighted passages, and any notes you’ve scribbled into the ereader.

Only four states have laws about protecting e-reader data in libraries, so you’re best checking out a physical book from your local library for maximum privacy.

Credit reporting agencies

All three of our hypothetical characters have credit reports maintained by one of the three major US credit bureaus: Experian, Equifax, and Transunion. Creditors and government agencies can access your credit report for background checks and other purposes. Credit reporting agencies are overseen by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

A credit report contains the following information:

• Name
• Address
• Social Security number
• Date of birth
• Trade lines (credit accounts)
  • Bank and credit cards
  • Auto loans
  • Mortgages
  • Date you opened each account
  • Credit limit or loan amount
  • Account balance
  • Payment history
• Credit inquiries
  • A list of everyone who accessed your credit report in the last two years, both voluntary and involuntary. The latter occurs when lender order your report to send pre-approved credit offers
• Public records and collections – Information on the public record aggregated from courts and collection agencies, including:
  • Overdue debt
  • Bankruptcies
  • Foreclosures
  • Suits
  • Wage garnishment
  • Liens

Of course, a hard lesson about keeping all of this information with just three companies was learned the hard way when Equifax was breached in 2017, leaking Social Security numbers and other details of more than 145 million Americans.

Other financial info

Most targeted surveillance on finances requires a court order, but that’s not always the case. Human Rights Watch explains:

“In investigations related to international terrorism or espionage, the FBI can also demand bank account statements and credit card histories using a national security letter, which doesn’t require a judge’s approval – and which often comes served with a gag order.”

For most of us, however, the government probably knows about accounts opened in your name, but not necessarily their contents or spending records.

If you invest in the stock market, then your investments are tracked by the Securities Exchange Commission and other official oversight bodies. Each state has its own blue sky law, which requires:

• Registration of all securities offerings and sales
• Stockbrokers
• Brokerage firms

The laws are less clear when it comes to cryptocurrencies like bitcoin. In late 2017, the IRS ordered the country’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, Coinbase, to hand over information about all customers who made a transaction worth $20,000 or more between 2013 and 2015. That information includes:

• Names
• Birth dates
• Addresses
• Tax IDs
• Transaction logs
• Account invoices

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are often thought of as anonymous, but if you have an account with a major exchange, then that exchange most likely requires such identifying information—not to mention a credit card or bank account—to purchase cryptocurrencies with fiat currency. In addition to the blockchain, which tracks transactions of all transactions on a cryptocurrency’s network, following the paper trail is a simple matter.

Public utilities

Public utility companies, excluding telecommunications, require a minimum amount of information in order to deliver their services. Water, gas, and electricity companies can be private or public, but all companies classified as utilities undergo heavy government regulation because they are allowed to operate regional monopolies on the condition they serve the public. Utility companies know more about a household as a whole rather than specific people. The information they collect normally consists of:

• Name
• Address
• Telephone number
• Payment information (bank account and/or credit card number)
• Technical information about equipment on the residence necessary to deliver a service

The adoption of a smart grid that began during the Obama administration aim to allow consumers to use energy resources more efficiently. In particular, the rollout of smart meters allow property owners to better monitor and control their consumption of electricity and gas. However, this also raises concerns about the flow of detailed information not only between customers and energy providers, but also between tenants and their landlords.

A public utility company that installs a smart meter at your household could, even without detailed knowledge of the appliances you own, determine with reasonable certainty when you cook, shower, sleep, and leave the house,among other activities. According to a 2009 report published by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission stated the following:

“A remarkable number of electric appliances can be identified by their load signatures, and with impressive accuracy. Researchers have all but mastered identification of the larger common household appliances such as water heaters, well pumps, furnace blowers, refrigerators, and air conditioners, with recognition accuracies approaching perfection. Ongoing work focuses now on the myriad smaller electric devices around the home such as personal computers, laser printers, and [different types of] light bulbs.”

The software algorithms and the smart meter hardware itself has likely gotten more advanced since then, so you can expect a commensurate increase in accuracy. In response to these concerns, a handful of states passed laws restricting how smart meter data can be used and by whom. These include California, New York, Ohio, and Colorado.

Info collected by law enforcement and intelligence agencies

Mass surveillance and metadata

In 2013, Edward Snowden shocked the world when he revealed a series of mass surveillance programs used to intercept communications of both Americans and non-Americans. The NSA and FBI argue that they do not record the contents of phone calls or emails without a court order and merely collected metadata about those calls.

The NSA, where Snowden worked as a contractor, collected data on millions of people’s phone records from AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon. Phone call metadata includes:

• Phone number of both parties making and receiving the call
• How long the call lasted
• When the call was made

Snowden said the NSA secretly gained direct access to servers at Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Yahoo, among other companies that participated in the PRISM program. Those companies denied the allegations outright, saying they only hand over information on a case-by-case basis with a court order, and not in bulk.

However, The Guardian reported in 2013 that the Bush and Obama administrations collected email metadata on any communication between non-US citizens or communications in which at least one party is outside of the US, even if they are an American citizen. The email metadata does not include the contents of emails, which, like phone calls, would require a court order. Email metadata includes:

• The email addresses of the sender and receiver
• A timestamp of when the email was sent
• An IP address used by people sending emails from inside the US
• Location based on the IP address

In 2012, the Department of Homeland security revealed in a lawsuit that it monitored social networks like Facebook and Twitter by running searches for keywords for at least a year and a half. The information swept up in the surveillance includes the contents of social media posts and comments. Chris’ Facebook and Twitter posts could be swept up in such surveillance.

In short, the US government can legally obtain metadata about calls, messages, and emails, but not their actual contents. For that, a court order is necessary, although the person being investigated probably won’t be notified in such an event.

Most of these programs were conducted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and/or the Patriot Act. Those laws are officially restricted to spying on non-US citizens, but many Americans’ communications get swept up by bulk interception programs. Alice, a naturalized US citizen who has family in another country, would likely have her communications with them closely monitored by US intelligence agencies.

Spying on the contents of electronic communication typically requires a court order. Government agencies can and do collect metadata about emails, text messages, and phone calls, but not their actual content. The FBI or NSA can record the sender and receiver, time sent, call duration, and location of the correspondents without a warrant, but they’ll need a court order to actually listen in or read your messages.

Location

A home and work address is far from the only way the government can track someone’s location. Many of us now have at least one GPS-enabled device within at all times, likely a phone or vehicle with navigation capabilities. But GPS is a navigation system owned by the US government and operated by the US Air Force.

The law hasn’t kept up and isn’t entirely clear on whether law enforcement can use GPS data to track someone without a court order. A 2012 Supreme Court ruling states that law enforcement cannot place a GPS tracker on a suspect’s vehicle without a warrant. However, that ruling doesn’t take into account cars and smartphones with GPS already built in. We can assume that the government can hone in and record someone’s movements using a GPS signal that they voluntarily broadcast into public airspace.

Even if Chris turns the GPS on his phone off, his approximate location can still be tracked by analyzing nearby wifi networks and cell towers that his phone pings whenever its in range. All internet-connected devices also have a unique IP address that’s assigned in accordance with a specific region.

The government can access the flight records of anyone who has flown to or from an airport in the US.

Photos and videos taken from the air above your house and from the street are legal, including satellite and drone imagery.

Biometric information

More avant-garde surveillance focuses on information that can identify a person’s physical characteristics. Biometric analysis can be used to identify people based on a photo, fingerprint, or even a retina scan.

If you have a passport, driver’s license, or any other government-issued photo ID, then you can be identified by the FBI using facial recognition. In 2017, The Guardian reported about half of adult Americans’ photographs are stored in databases accessible to the FBI. About 80 percent of them are non-criminal entries.

The NSA, meanwhile, intercepts tens of thousands of images per day of people’s faces. Those images are swept up by bulk surveillance programs that collect the images from emails, messages, social media, video conferences, and other communications, according to a 2014 New York Times report.

Advanced security cameras can be placed in transportation hubs like airports and train stations in order to spot and track specific people. As with other forms of bulk surveillance in the US, government agencies are limited to intercepting communications with foreigners or US citizens living and traveling overseas. Domestic communications between American citizens within US borders are legally off limits.

Firearms

The Firearm Owners Protection Act prohibits the US government from creating a national gun registry that keeps track of who owns what firearms. However, the ATF does keep some gun-related databases. These include:

• Sales reports of specific firewarms with owner’s name and address
• Guns suspected to be used for criminal purposes but not recovered by law enforcement
• Traced gun records that include the retail purchaser and seller. These include registration records from out-of-business gun stores that incude name, address, make, model, serial number, and caliber
• Guns reported as stolen to the ATF

Bargaining chips

The information age hasn’t really changed the types of information that government wants to get its hands on. It just created more vectors for government agencies to get that information, and the amount of information has increased to an exponential degree.

Recall that we’ve only outlined information that can be accessed without a court order. As you can see, all that info could be coalesced to form a reasonably accurate profile of a US citizen and their behavior. In her article, “A picture of you, in federal data,” Politico‘s Nancy Scola writes:

“Even if the blended data doesn’t contain a name or Social Security number, the image that comes into focus can quickly be so specific to plausibly belong to only one person, or a handful of people.”

But before you start wheezing into a paper bag, know that Big Brother isn’t as smart as he likes people to think. At least, not yet. All of this data is not part of one giant spreadsheet containing every American citizen. It’s messy, fractured, and jealously horded. In 2011, political scientist Alon Peled wrote about a top-down order by President Barack Obama to open up federal information caches to the public. The order floundered because, Peled said,

“Datasets are valuable assets which agencies labor hard to create, and use as bargaining chips in interagency trade, and are therefore reluctant to surrender these prized information assets for free.”

So the US government does know a lot about Alice, Bob, and Chris, but it hasn’t figured out a way to efficiently manage and utilize that information in cooperation with other agencies. At least, not for now. A single inter-agency searchable database could be a reality in the future.

In 1974, Senator Sam Ervin warned future Americans about surveillance overreach:

“When [the] quite natural tendency of government to acquire and keep and share information about citizens is enhanced by computer technology and when it is subjected to the unrestrained motives of countless political administrators,” he said. “The resulting threat to individual privacy makes it necessary for Congress to reaffirm the principle of limited, responsive government on behalf of freedom.”

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Recently, Syrian activists have launched an incredible campaign, called #TimeToBackHome. Users, among them popular bloggers, local politicians, analysts, and experts, are posting the image tagged #TimeToBackHome on their social media accounts.

Those first who supported #TimeToBackHome flash-mob were an independent Australian political economist and writer, internationalist and academic, member of Hands Off Syria, Tim Anderson, Syrian al-Akhbar journalist Basel Dayoub, Iraqi journalist Hasan ash-Shoun, Jordanian political analyst Mohammad Joursi, Syrian businessman Mahir at-Tahan and Inside Syria Media Center.

The flash mob has also been supported through social networks. Numerous pro-Russian groups such as “Hands of Syria”, “The Syrian Revolution”, “The truth about the war in Syria” and even the Yemeni regional branch of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party have joined the campaign on Facebook.

Activists are voicing their support to Anna Le Claire, Wilma Schrover, and Mark Taliano. They also mention Syrians under nicknames @abcxyztea, @paquita_337, @phoenx7, @clubbayern, @good_now4 as well as many others involved.

The campaign has been heavily supported by Middle East Review and Syria-Mena-News Telegram channels. Furthermore, several Middle Eastern and European media, e.g. Al-Kaun News, JP news, al-Bashair, Vedeng or Vietato Parlare, have encouraged their readers to join the flash mob.

As noted by media reports, the campaign’s mission is to appeal to Syrians abroad to return home and build a new life together.

So, if you stand for restoring peace in this amazing Arab country and empathize with its citizens who suffered from war terror, you may express your support to the peace process.

Make a difference. Click “Edit profile” on any of your social platform and change your header/cover/profile photo to the image tagged #TimeToBackHome at least for an hour, then post it and share with your friends.

Don’t forget #TimeToBackHome hashtag. Send screenshots of your changed profile to [email protected]. Show the world your solidarity to the good and justice!

Thank you for your minute of hope.

The mail is open for your thoughts and suggestions on the subject too.

Hundreds of Syrians have already come back home from a refugee camp in the Lebanese town of Arsal, reported al-Mayadeen.

According to Jordanian Interior Minister, Ayman Safadi, tens of thousands of Syrians may return home soon as the situation in Southern Syria stabilizes.

Just for the past week, more than 200 Syrian refugees left Lebanese town of Shebaa to return home to Mazraat Beit Jinn.

Syria is really waiting for its citizens to come back, doing everything possible to that. Syrians want to restore their country together. Let’s support the #TimeToBackHome campaign!

*

Sophie Mangal (pen name) is a special investigative correspondent at Inside Syria Media Center where this article was originally published.

All images in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above

It is estimated that since 2012, 300 Swedish individuals have travelled abroad to join  jihadi-groups. About 80 percent of these foreign fighters are associated with ISIS, and a substantial minorty with Jabhat al-Nusra. Some of the extremists have travelled back and forth between the conflict area and Sweden. Almost all of them have cheated the swedish state so as to access financial support under false pretences while working for ISIS. [I]

According to Swedish law, all of these returnees should be charged for having made preparations to commit crimes, as well as accepting an employment to perform illegal acts. Swedish law prohibits all of this. It also bans giving/receiving of payments to commit crimes. Additionally Swedish law also prohibits facilitating crimes. All of this is spelled out in our penalcode (i.e ”Brottsbalken”) chapter 23, paragraph 2.  This in combination with the swedish ban against terrorism (”Lag (2003:148) om straff för terroristbrott” paragraph 4), which broadens the criteria of guilt to include conspiring to commit terrorism – makes the legal case even more clear cut. [II] In accordance with these laws, all returnees should all be prosecuted for preparations to commit murder, enslavement or terrorism – seeing as these are the main activities pertaining to ISIS. All who joined ISIS must have known that they volunteered to commit, or assisted others in committing terrorism. They have also received a salary for their willingness to perform illegal tasks if commanded to.

Whether one can be proven to have committed an act of terror, the standard applied currently, should not be relevant to the criminal activity of preparing or conspiring  to commit a crime, a preparation that is fulfilled by simply traveling to ISIS-controlled territory and joining their ranks.

As a comparison, in 2016 a man was convicted of planning a murder when he traveled to his ex-partner with a knife and an axe in his car. The women was warned by friends of the man, that he harbored murderous intentions. Another man has been convicted for the act of travelling armed only with a hammer, to a place where he wrongfully believed his potential victim lived. The court decided that the potential victims life was never in danger, but still upheld the law by convicting the man for preparing to commit murder.  Yet another person has been convicted of planning to steal a jacket, in this case for cutting of the alarm attached to it. The swedish high court, our supreme judicial authority, has also convicted a man for planning to travell to a bank with the purpose of robbing it. This latest case has the power of legal precedence, seeing as the case was seatled by the supreme court. The case should be a point of guidance for our legal system, a dissenting judge even noted in this case – that local courts have a high level of freedom to interpret at what stage the  ”planing”-phase of a crime can be said to bave begun.[III] Which means that even if the issue of returnees stod on shaky grounds, the courts would still possess the prerogative to make novel interpretations of the law. All these facts point to one conclusion.

According to CNN, ISIS-members had to fill out ”a kind of job application for the terror group”. With the two employment options of being a ”fighter” or ”suicide attacker”. Having said this, we should take the time to look into what ”conspiring to commit crimes”, mentioned in the Swedish ban against terrorism – is supposed to mean. The swedish prosecution agency defines the term as referring to ”A form of preparation which means that a person in consultation with another person decides to commit a crime, attempts to induce another party to commit a crime or takes it upon themself to commit a crime”. [IV]

Ask yourself, how could signing a contract not be considered an act falling under this description? Isn’t the signing of a contract, for the purpose of agreeing to perform a service for an organisation, to take something upon onself? By travelling to a conflict zone and signing up as fighters for a terror group in the area were they are activly commiting their atrocities, all ISIS-returnees have committed far greater preperations for crimes, than all the swedish legal cases just mentioned. Even if a man joined ISIS, only to do non-violent acts in order to earn his paycheck, let us say he simply repaired cars – these vehicles are still used to transport slaves and travel to hotspots to commit murder. In other words he is still facilitating crimes, which as previously mentioned is outlawed as well. Both the law and legal precident, demand that returnees are charged, but the swedish authorities remain passive on the issue.

One thing should be clarified, the swedish government has instituted a specific ban against travelling to join terrorgroups, but this ban was instituted to late, late enough so that most ISIS-returnees can not be prosecuted under this law. Seeing as they travelled before the prohibition was put into effect. Some ISIS-members are prosecuted, but only if they admitt to or can be proven to be guilt of concrete violations  that they as individuals have committed (by which i mean other violations than that the act of preparing crimes, a transgression that they are all guilty of – by definition).

All the major parties in sweden have special spokespersons on the issue of law and order, I have emailed all of these (I couldn’t find our feminist party FI:s spokesperson personal email, so I sent to their general email). Asking if they could file a policereport against all ISIS-returnees. Similarly to how the socialdemocrats womensgroup filed a policereport against a dating site, a site that promoted sugerdejting, something that the womensgroup thought should fall under the current ban against pimping and prostitution. Despit the law not being crystal clear in favour of their interpretation [V]

This womensgroup did not act in an unusual or unproductive way, laws do not exist in a vacuum but must instead be interpreted. Taking a case to court can radically change how laws are applied and how society functions. To take an American example, Lochner v. New York was one simple case that dramatically changed working life of New Yorkers and started what was called the Lochner era. Other parties have also filled police reports on separate occasions [VI]. This dramatic devolpment from taking a single case to court, is of course possible in Swedens own legal system as well. The Swedish retailer ICA once started selling alchohol, in hopes of having the statemonopoly on alcohol overturned by a judge.

The major parties of sweden would have a world to win by trying to bring a single ISIS-returnee to justice. They could accomplish a lot by simply asking tough questions to the judicial branch of government, or more dramatically by appointing new higher ups to our legal institutions (always acting within the limits set up for the executive branch of course, I am not advocating any form of banana republic:ish actions). For we must remember that the swedish prosecutions agencies passivity on the issue, is not an unavoidable state of affairs. In regards to hate speech, the local Malmö branch of the prosecution agencie stated recently in an official document meant to guide its employees in upholding the law, that: ”the separation between what falls under the realm of freedom of speech, and what falls within the realm of that which is harmfull for vulnerable groups, is a judicial question rather than a question of evidence – and should be settled by the courts through convictions. Instead of being decided upon by attorneys choosing which cases not to prosecute”[VII]

Through applying legitimate pressure, our parties could ensure that new guiding documents and policies were produced to guide attorneys in taking the same proactive approach regarding prosecuting on the issue of preparing to commit crimes.

They could help create a new precident that would bring redress to the victims of ISIS, by starting a chain reaction of having all returnees charged. They would stand nothing to lose. Despite this the major parties all ignore this option, most of them even ignored my emails. Except for two spokesperson, one for the Liberal party and one for the Green party. Take note that liberal in the swedish sense is closer to ”classical liberal” or libertarian (i.e ”small goverment”-advocates), rather than the American meaning of liberal  (as being left of center). The spokesperson for the liberal party responded by asking if a prosecution against the ISIS-returnees was even possible. I recommended that he contact the Swedish security police Säpo (I was referred there myself when I tried to take the issue to court) to find out. I also asked him if the liberal party finds it problematic, if indeed it would turn out to be true that the ISIS-returnees were impossible to file a policereport against. He has not responded to my follow up questions.

The Green Party responded by stating that they did not have any need to file a police report. It is unclear whether their spokesperson understood the reasoning behind the Social democrats women’s group. Their spokesperson also insisted that the constitution was not worth changing in this case (this constitution amendment a last case scenario that will be explained in detail below). I asked if her inaction on the issue did not violate the golden rule (the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated), would not she have wanted all necessary measures to be taken if she were one of the victims of ISIS? Would she have found her own response sufficient, if she imagined herself in such a role? She did not respond to this question.

Upon repeated attempts to contact them, the left party finaly responded. In a similar manner to the green party, they chose not to act.  None of the other parties have responded at all.

Another comparison of applied legal interpretation, is worth bringing up. A 79 year old man has been convicted of hatespeech for writing ”fuck allah”, ”fuck islam” and ”arab swines go home”. [VIII] This case illustrates a thought pattern, most likely a subconscious one, that I think is part of the explanation as to why no prosecution has been attempted. There is at play, a form of eurocentrism (to focus strongly on europe or europeans/excluding non-europeans and their experience), a eurocentrism that trivialises the experiences of the people of the third world. The 79 year old man wrote his slogans in view of swedish muslims and swedes with arabic ethnicity, and the legal system was therefore willing to take the case to court. The victims of ISIS are Iraqi and Syrians, and as such the system doesn’t value their rights as highly. Many westerners have come to view violations against people of the third world as ”natural” or inevitable, thereby rendering legal efforts to protect them irrelevant. With that in mind, take a hard looke at this Swedish ISIS-member:

And when it comes to the ethical problems of Ex post facto-laws, one must remember that something being unethical in general does not mean that there are no particular cases in which it is allowed or even a moral duty to perform. And also that all ethical principles are not created equal, some may under extreme circumstances be necessary to temporarily part from in order to protect even higher ideals. The trial against nazi war criminals after world war II has been criticized for making use of Ex post facto-laws [XII]. Should we have allowed the nazis go free simply to uphold this one principle, and thereby forsake all other principles of providing justice for past victims and protecting potential future victims?

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above 

Today, the largest economic states express their interest in the Arctic. Vast natural resources constitute the reason for their interest. Moreover, the Arctic is one of the few places on the planet that have yet to be delineated, because initially the region was not divided between the countries neighboring it. At least five states are claiming national arctic zones: the United States, Canada, Russia, Norway and Denmark. All these countries have access to the coast of the Arctic Ocean.

It should be noted that for Denmark, a small European country, Greenland is a pass to the Arctic club, and Copenhagen’s sovereignty over this island looks very unusual and somewhat resembles the colonial system that collapsed in the middle of the twentieth century. Territorial ambitions of the states may be backed up by different arguments in the future, but it is clear that the main one is the country’s real readiness to actively develop the North.

The Arctic holds a special place in the Russian economy. Over 11% of the country’s gross domestic product and more than a quarter of the Russian exports are provided by the territories where less than 2% of the Russians live. It is here the main mineral resource deposits of the country are located – gas, oil, coal, non-ferrous metals and huge reserves of clean drinking water – one of the main world treasures of the modern technogenic civilization .

The economy of polar projects is ambiguous. The construction and maintenance of one mile of the railway infrastructure, for example, costs about five times more expensive here than in the southern latitudes. However, the cost of liquefied natural gas production is at least a third lower than in Qatar.

Last year, the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy issued its annual review of the energy sector in Russia, which examined the effectiveness of the sanctions policy towards Moscow and the sanctions impact on the implementation of existing and prospective projects on the Arctic shelf. The review indicates the sanctions played a paradoxical role: they increased attractiveness of the Arctic and shale projects at a certain stage, as the Russian authorities changed the tax and tariff policy that made extraction of natural resources in the Arctic profitable business and as a result attracted foreign investors such as Total, Exxon and others.

Today, more and more experts from Washington-based think tanks begin to understand the ineffectiveness of continuing the current sanctions confrontation. Thus, Daniel Fried, who coordinated sanctions in the Obama administration, noted the sanctions package against Nord Stream-2 could damage relations with Germany and President Trump should apply sanctions measures only after coordination with European partners, since every hasty action could damage the relations between the United States and the European Union. The White House was then called upon to avoid imposing sanctions against Russia’s offshore oil and gas projects on the shelf, as too many US financial institutions are tied up for their financing, and the European partners’ unwillingness to go beyond existing restrictions can create dangerous gap in the joint sanctions policy coordination.

Such fears of the former high-ranking American officials who were at the root of the entire sanctions campaign against Moscow are quite indicative, especially amid the growing discontent of Europeans, who bear the main burden of costs as a result of US geopolitical combinations.

At the same time, the trend of transferring key export flows of Russian fossil raw materials noted by the specialists of the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy indicates that there are rational reasons in Washington for believing that the turn to Asia declared by the Russian leadership has long-term prospects. At the same time, the adoption of new sanctions packages pushes Moscow to move in this direction and does not motivate the Russian leadership to give up protecting the national interests, as the Kremlin sees them.

*

Alex Richardson is a freelance journalist.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

Read Part I here.

The context

A little context is mandatory to perfectly define the message that Rudolf was carrying. The outstanding works of researchers such as Anthony Sutton and Charles Higham are critical in our understanding of the real historical context surrounding the creation of the Nazi war machine. When in 1933 Hitler accessed to the Chancellery in the Reichstag, Germany was in financial limbo. Worst, the nation was in the gutters of limbs. It owed tens of billions in reparations for WW1, and its inability to comply had provoked a gargantuan-scale inflation crisis on the mark in 1923 that cut the currency to 1/500 billionth of its original value. To make matters worse, the country suffered along everyone the world Crash of 1929. So how in the world was Germany able to eradicate unemployment and create the most formidable military machine the world had ever seen in just 6 years? Over achievement is under rated when it comes to explain the German Miracle of the ’30s.

The first tool that is required in our investigator’s toolbox is to admit the very documented fact that the Bank of England, controlled by the Rothschild family, had been involved in the financing of the Nazis. It had become a common procedure for the rich European banking family to fund enemies as well as allies, in order to make profits from both sides of wars since Napoleon. The self-proclaimed French Emperor of the early 19th century had been hired as a proxy by Rothschild who wanted to impose his private central banks in the conquered countries. So, the heirs of the Rothschild family saw in Hitler their next Napoleon, who would submit rival colonial empires like Belgium, the Netherlands and France, as well as destroying the mighty USSR, in order to singlehandedly take the reins of the New World Order, which is simply the economical and political ruling of the whole planet by a handful of bankers. Even though the New World Order sounds like a supercharged conspiracy theory, it’s an indisputable and quite simple concept.

Even if the infamous banking family helped the Führer, the bulk of the money that flooded Germany between 1933 and 1939 didn’t come from England, but mainly from the United States of America. Not the American government per say, but more specifically American bankers and industries. Through white-washing money schemes, through the newly founded Bank of International Settlements and through joint venture investments in Germany with their companies such as Standard Oil, GM, Ford, ITT, General Electric or IBM; Rockefeller, Morgan, Harriman, DuPont, Ford and a few other billionaires were mainly responsible for what is known as the German Miracle, that now looks more like an American Dream. Thanks to British and American investments, Nazi Germany went from the poorest country in Europe to the second world economy. Even though education won’t tell you anything about it, the overwhelming help that Hitler got from the West is never disputed because it was exposed in numerous US inquiries, senatorial committees and court cases based on the Trading with the enemy Act adjusted by President Roosevelt in 1933, but the verdicts always came after the usual “we didn’t know what Hitler was going to do next” explanation. As if Mein Kampf, published in 1925, hadn’t been clear enough on the matter.

The War

Things looked fine for England at the start. Hitler quickly filled the mandate he had on top of his agenda by invading the colonial trio of Netherlands-Belgium-France in a month and a half. The complicity of the British Army is appalling in the lightening speed success of the Wehrmacht. The four “allied” countries had together 149 divisions, or 2 900 000 men, while the Wehrmacht had 2 750 000 men split in 137 divisions. Allied countries had more canons, more tanks, more ammunition, yet France, a country of 70 million people, gave up in one month! History tried to explain this lame defeat by the unstoppable German blitzkrieg, but this blitz was advancing at 15 kms/hour, when it was moving at all. One would think that there was plenty of time to aim at this jogging pace. Russian historian Nikolay Starikov has looked thoroughly over what happened on the ground to find some plausible clues to the quick defeat of France in June 1940, which can be summed up very simply: Churchill betrayed France, as clear as crystal, by purposely failing the French General Weygan’s plan of defense. This grand treason is also circumstantial evidence of what self-proclaimed virtuous nations can do to each other that extends to the destruction of an ally for your own benefit. But Hitler was yet to reward Churchill for his great help in the conquest of France, so he turned a blind eye on the evacuation of the British army in Dunkirk that history explains as a “strategic blunder” from Hitler. Reality does explain rather mysterious events of the war that only find dubious explanations in our books; another unexplainable event was the vicious attack of the British Navy on France’s fleet in July 1940, presumably to avoid that the ships fall in German hands. It turns out that it was another very positive step in order to complete the destruction of the French colonial empire, as were the operations by Rothschild-funded Japan that were ousting the French from Indochina at the same time. From the British point-of-view, the Wehrmacht pit-bull would next leave France and jump at the throat of USSR.

Against Churchill’s expectations, the next few months were devoted to the Battle of Britain that started by a German invasion of the Channel Islands, from where German planes could start bombing England. Churchill was evil, but he wasn’t so stupid as to not understand that Hitler had stopped working for England. Whatever the deal was, the RAF defense definitely slowed down any advantage that the Luftwaffe could gain over the British skies and after the horrendous mutual bombings of London and Berlin, Germany decided on October 12th 1940 to postpone its operation Sea Lion designed to invade England with ground troops. It looked like Germany and England were in a stalemate by the winter of 1940-1941.

If you’re acquainted with the official history, you would think that Hitler’s attack on great American allies such as France and England would have motivated the USA to enter the war at once, but no. Not at all. President Roosevelt even declared on October 30th 1940 that “his boys wouldn’t go to war”. This policy would extend until the spring of 1941, and not a single move, decision or sanction was undertaken by the US government that really looked like it had decided to never get involved in WW2.

The theater of war moved into North Africa and the Middle East for the winter, where people could kill and maim each other under more pleasant and milder climate. With the melting of ice and snow in the spring of 1941, Hitler was facing two options: launch Sea Lion and invade England, or leave the West in peace and launch Barberossa against the Soviet Union. Both were major operations that couldn’t be sustained by Germany at once, and Hitler had to make a choice. He also knew that the invasion of England would’ve mortally crippled the Rothschild family’s influence on the planet and paved the way for Wall Street to rule the world at will.

Well folks, that’s precisely when Rudolf Hess was parachuted in England on May 10th 1941. Without any form of speculation, it now appears very clearly that Hitler didn’t want to take this mighty decision alone, and that he didn’t want the rest of the world to know about his dilemma.

The Proposal

According to an article published in May 1943 by the magazine American Mercury, here’s what the Führer proposed to England through Rudolf Hess:

Hitler offered total cessation of the war in the West. Germany would evacuate all of France except Alsace and Lorraine, which would remain German. It would evacuate Holland and Belgium, retaining Luxembourg. It would evacuate Norway and Denmark. In short, Hitler offered to withdraw from Western Europe, except for the two French provinces and Luxembourg [Luxembourg was never a French province, but an independent state of ethnically German origin], in return for which Great Britain would agree to assume an attitude of benevolent neutrality towards Germany as it unfolded its plans in Eastern Europe. In addition, the Führer was ready to withdraw from Yugoslavia and Greece. German troops would be evacuated from the Mediterranean generally and Hitler would use his good offices to arrange a settlement of the Mediterranean conflict between Britain and Italy. No belligerent or neutral country would be entitled to demand reparations from any other country, he specified.

Basically, Hitler wanted to be a partner in a British-led New World Order by taking care of Eastern Europe. He even spoke in front of the Reichstag about the option of peace with England. The American Mercury article concluded that these very likely terms offered by Hitler to be implemented on the spot were swiftly rejected by Churchill since none of the conditions ever happened, but in reality, they were terms to be applied after the war, after the destruction of the USSR by Germany. But the Red Army had other future plans, of course.

There is no doubt that we are now deep into speculation about whatever proposal Hess made to England, but in reality, this wasn’t the main point of his mission. And independently of the exact terms that were discussed, what was to happen next dissipates any cloud of mystery, be it thin or thick.

To be continued.

*

Working both as a TV documentary director and journalist for 25 years, Sylvain Laforest published in 2016 La Déprogr@mmation (in french only) about media disinformation, and his second book Wars and Lies will come out in 2018 with the Progressive Press label.

All images, except the featured, in this article are from the author.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above  

I lost my flight.. On purpose.. I was pretty sure I would though, when I left for Palestine. To be honest, I don’t think its gonne make it easier to leave later. The more I know, the more people I know – the more involved I get. And how, I wonder, am I going be able to get on a plane and leave, when my new friends aren’t even able to leave the West Bank. They can’t leave and they can’t live. Are some of my new friends gonne be arrested when I’m gone? Will I lose some? It does not bear thinking about..

Yesterday I came home from the northern Jordan Valley, knackered.. Stayed one night, sleeping under the stars next to a guava grove. Almost a full moon, nice breeze. Accompanied by my Icelandic friend and fellow volunteer Anna, and a very nice new Palestinian friend, Rasheed. Sounds lovely right? To the right we could see the lights from Jordan, separating us was the Jordan river and to the left, the so called holy land.. Still sounds pretty nice? Well, reason for being there was to wait for the Israeli soldiers who had announced that they would arrive the next morning to tear down the green houses of local farmers – claiming they have been stealing water. A.k.a – the water Israel is `legally`taking from the farmers.

The local farmers do not have access to the water under their farms, there literally are Israeli waterpipes under their land, going to illegal settlement – and they themselves – do not have access. They are at the mercy of the Israelis who charge them the some of the highest water prices in the world.

The day before Israelis soldiers, heavily armed, had come to the village to inspect the pipes.. To see if anyone was stealing their stolen water. In the neighbouring village the soldiers welded shut two connections, and broke a pipe. Cutting farmers off from their water supply. In the past two months this has been happening aggressively. Israelis breaking pipes, Palestinians desperately trying to get water back.

This is farmland. The bread basket of Palestine it was known as – due to the immense underground water reserves. 4 times a year they could harvest. But, already the Palestinian population is down from 320.000 to 56.000. The ones left live in refugee camps, in caves (!!), many in tents (they are not allowed to build – one man has had his home demolished 34 times.. So I guess living in a tent is just practical for obvious reasons) – and some still remain on their farms… To exist is to resist … I saw this written on many walls.. To exist is to resist… Who is the terrorist?

Thankfully the soldiers did not wake us up.. I had one scare, when there was a commotion in the bushes not far from my make shift bed… Rasheed was up like a flash and checking with his flash light…in The end he excitedly called me over to reveal a pig.. I never actually saw it though, so I’m not sure if it was a language thing or if it was a pig on the loose… Anyway… Thankfully soldiers did not arrive.. But that’s not to say they wouldnt  arrive today, or tomorrow… Not so thankfully we discovered that the water pressure that supplied the Guava field we were next to had been cut off.. Its a communal field. So Rasheed rushed off, us in tow, trying to find the problem… As they only get 2 hours of water for this field.. In the end they gave up… The 2 hours were up anyway… And if the Israelis stop the water, well then they stop the water... I asked, and apologised for asking, if there ever is a possibility of calling the Israelis to see if there is a problem that can be solved with the water they are actually allowed to take… I’m sure you can imagine the answer.

Before heading back to Ramallah. Our friend took us on a drive. It was depressing… And beautiful, good conversation, good music, for a bit it almost felt quite normal, pleasant.. But mostly depressing. The Jordan river behind a security fence, Israel having declared it a security zone. Illegal of course, but its Israel… River beds have run dry. Quite often we would drive past green oasis, and lush fields – illegal settlement, to where the water is diverted… At one point an illegal settlement was right opposite the refugee camp. The water lines for the settlements, goes under the camp. In the camp they have water tanks and they have to pay to have them filled.. I’m not making this shit up!! Its unbelievable!! I don’t why anyone would want to live like this – and I’m talking about the illegal settlers. Apparently many are poor people from Russian and Eastern Europe – enticed to come here where they get land and water.. – and live like kings, behind barbed wires … Staring at refugee camps where the ethnic population lives…. And should they wish, they also have the opportunity to shoot some people with out consequences (no joke)…

For the animal lovers.. Of course this is also affects the wild life.. I did not even consider this.. But the gazelles, the dears….we saw 3 gazelles… They are cut off from the water too… Israel is killing the holy land, if it ever was. But for sure there are legends born and legends dying in Palestine every day. How they manage to continue living, not to give up, to find solutions when Israel finds a new way to oppress… Its just… I don’t know… I’m witnessing the most extreme human greatness… The capacity to make a life in the most difficult of circumstance… When Palestine is free, which I hope will be soon.. We can all come here for holiday, and how I would love to bump in to Palestinians on holiday abroad, not as refugees, but as holiday makers.. If they are this great under occupation, I cant imagine what they will be like when they have their freedom.

*

Featured image is from the author.