Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

“The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster is a Serious Crime”

April 20th, 2016 by Koide Hiroaki

Interview by Katsuya Hirano and Hirotaka Kasai

Translation by Robert Stolz

Transcription by Akiko Anson

Introduction

Koide Hiroaki (66) has emerged as an influential voice and a central figure in the anti-nuclear movement since the nuclear meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi of March 11, 2011. He spent his entire career as a nuclear engineer working towards the abolition of nuclear power plants. His powerful critique of the “nuclear village” and active involvement in anti-nuclear movements “earned him an honorable form of purgatory as a permanent assistant professor at Kyoto University.”1 Koide retired from Kyoto University in the spring of 2015, but continues to write and act as an important voice of conscience for many who share his vision of the future free from nuclear energy and weapons. He has authored 20 books on the subject. Professor Kasai Hirotaka and I visited his office at Kyoto University’s Research Reactor Institute in Kumatori, Osaka, on December 26th, 2014 for this interview. We believe that the contents of the interview, which offer new information about the degree of radioactive contamination and invaluable insight into Koide’s ethical and political stance as a scientist, remain crucial for our critical reflection on ecological destruction, the violation of human rights, and individual responsibility. Professor Robert Stolz, the translator of this interview and the author of Bad Water (Duke University Press, 2015), provides a historical perspective on the interview in a separate article. KH

Interview

I The Fukushima Disaster and Government and Corporate Response

Hirano: How does the Fukushima accident compare with the bombing of Hiroshima or Chernobyl in its scale? What are the possible effects of this yet unknown exposure?

Koide: Let’s start with the scale of the accident: It was a core meltdown involving the release of various kinds of radioactive material. Radioactive noble gas isotopes were also released, as were iodine, cesium, strontium, and other radioactive material. The noble gas isotopes have a short half-life and so at this stage they are all gone. Iodine, too, is gone. So now four years since the accident the materials that are still a problem are cesium-137, strontium-90, and tritium; really, it’s these three.2

Now, as for the scale of the accident, I think it would be best to compare these three radionuclides. Today the main contamination of Japanese soil is the radionuclide cesium-137 [Cs-137 or 137Cs]. The ocean is largely contaminated with strontium-90 [Sr-90 or 90Sr] and tritium [T or 3H]. Right now the main culprit adding to the exposure of the people in Japan is Cs-137, so I think it’s best to use Cs-137 as a standard for measuring the scale of the accident.

But we simply don’t know with any precision how much Cs-137 was released. That’s because all the measuring equipment was destroyed at the time of the accident. How much Cs-137 was released into the air? How much was spilled in the sea? We just don’t know.

Still, the Japanese government has reported estimates to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency]. According to those estimated levels, reactors 1, 2, and 3 had been in operation on March 11, 2011, and all three suffered meltdowns. Those three reactors released 1.5×1016 Becquerels of Cs-137, which would make it a release of 168 times more radioactive material than the Hiroshima bombing. And this is only material released into the atmosphere-at least according to Japanese government estimates.

But I myself think the government’s numbers are an underestimate. Various experts and institutes from around the world have offered several of their own estimates. There are those that are lower than the Japanese government’s numbers and those that are higher, some two or three times higher than the government’s numbers. According to these other estimates I think that the release of Cs-137 into the atmosphere could be around 500 times the Hiroshima bombing.

Now for what has been washed into the sea. That number is likely not much different from the levels released into the atmosphere. Even today we are unable to prevent this release. And so if we combine the amount of Cs-137 released in the air and the ocean together, we get an estimate several hundred times the Hiroshima levels. And some estimates suggest the Fukushima accident could be as much as one-thousand Hiroshimas.

Now to compare this with other accidents: The amount released into the atmosphere from the explosion during the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant was 800 to 1000 times the Hiroshima levels. Put simply, these estimates place Fukushima on par with Chernobyl.

Worse than any of these, however, is atmospheric testing. From the 1950s to the 1960s atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons had already released Cs-137 into the air more than sixty times the numbers released even by the Japanese government for Fukushima. Of course Fukushima is an incredible tragedy, but considered from the earth as a whole it is a rather small accident.

Hirano: I want to ask in more detail about the effect of Cs-137 on the human body and the environment.

Koide: Cesium is an alkaline metal. From the human body’s perspective, cesium closely resembles potassium. The body contains enormous amounts of potassium. It is essential for humans. It’s everywhere in our bodies. Especially our flesh and muscles are full of potassium. And because of this, when cesium is released into the environment, the body deals with cesium as it does with the alkaline metal potassium, which is to say that it is taken into the body and accumulates there.

Strontium is an earth metal. The body treats it like calcium. As you know calcium is a human body building block that accumulates in our bones. Strontium, too, is taken into and collects in the bones. Just as cesium is taken in and is transported to the flesh and muscle.

Hirano: Comparing the releases from nuclear tests by the US and the USSR during the Cold War period, you said that the Fukushima accident was small. So in what way should we think about Fukushima: is it best to consider it a Japanese problem, or to consider it from a global perspective?

Koide: The amount of products of nuclear fission released during atmospheric testing was enormous, and these particles continue to expose humans to radiation. I’m a bit older than you and I recall in my childhood being told not to let the rain fall on me at the time of the testing. In this way everyone on earth has been exposed (hibaku/被曝). And because of this testing, historically speaking, cancer rates have slowly risen; I believe this increase in cancer is due to the exposure suffered during the atmospheric testing. Now the radioactive material released from Fukushima has been dispersed across the globe and so once again everyone on earth has been exposed to additional radiation. I think we can expect cancer rates to rise once again.

Atmospheric nuclear testing released all of the radioactive material in the explosions, which entered the stratosphere. Between the stratosphere and the troposphere there is the tropopause, and every year come spring all that material dispersed in the stratosphere breaks through the tropopause and falls to earth. So that material, though initially dispersed in the stratosphere, eventually falls to earth evenly, everywhere. Actually, it might not be accurate to say that it falls evenly on the earth. The majority of the testing was done in the temperate regions of the northern hemisphere, such as Nevada and the Semipalatinsk test site [in Kazakhstan], so that the northern hemisphere-as the site of most of the testing-is heavily contaminated, and within that the temperate region is heavily contaminated. Still, I can say the atmospheric testing overall has caused global contamination.

My focus now is to figure out how to deal with the acute and heavy contamination from Fukushima. I know something needs to be done right there in that specific place. That contamination will disperse and be diffused across the globe. Once dispersed, the amount of radioactive material from Fukushima will be small when compared with the atmospheric testing. Which is not to say it is not harmful. An increase in cancer will be the result. I mention that for humanity as a whole; the atmospheric tests were worse.

Now, strontium-90 [Sr-90] has been leaking from Fukushima into the ocean, so it will eventually reach the United States, especially the west coast. This much we are sure of. But to answer your question, the amount of dispersed cesium and strontium released by the atmospheric tests is tens of times greater than the Fukushima levels. Because the west coast of the US is already contaminated from the atmospheric testing, though the dispersed contamination from Fukushima will reach US shores, for people living on the US west coast, the Fukushima accident―and this is perhaps awful to say―contamination from Fukushima is hardly worth considering. Historically a much greater event has already taken place.

Hirano: To put that another way, the current Fukushima accident gives us a chance to reconsider the enormity of the past contamination from US and Soviet atmospheric tests, which has not been openly discussed.

Koide: Yes, that’s exactly right. In fact, it is the masses of people who need to realize the impact of the contamination on them. In the case of the Fukushima disaster, for example, they need to be aware that some radioactive material is reaching the North American coast, and the prevailing westerly winds will carry anything released into the atmosphere to the US. Those earlier numbers from the Japanese government indicate that the levels for Cs-137 in the atmosphere are 168 times those of the Hiroshima bombing. I’ve been told that level is 1.5 x 1016 Becquerels [Bq]. These exponents can be a pain to process, so if we think of it in peta-units-which is 1015-we get essentially 15 petabecquerels [PBq].

That said, while we are not really sure this is the number, we do know that a portion of this material will ride the prevailing winds across the Pacific Ocean. On the other hand, closer to the ground, the winds will be east, south, and north, and therefore this other portion will fall on Japan―and we can investigate the actual levels here: how much fell on this town, on this prefecture? Adding these up, it seems to be only 2.4 PBq. Which is to say of the total fifteen PBq, 2.4, or roughly only 16%, fell on Japanese soil. If the totals are higher, still a smaller share of the total contamination will have fallen on Japan compared with the Pacific, with the largest portion falling on the west coast of the United States.

So why don’t we hear complaints from the US? Why are there no calls for compensation? Whenever someone asks me this, I simply say that there just aren’t any such complaints. Why is this so? Well the levels released by the US during the atmospheric testing were tens of times greater than Fukushima. They are the criminals, so they cannot ask for compensation from Japan. The U.S. government does not want to have to reflect on its own past, and I think they are eager to completely avoid bringing up anything like that conversation. That is why I believe it is so important that those who have been exposed to radioactive contamination realize what atmospheric testing has done to them.

Kasai: I’d like to get back to the moment of the accident in some detail. On March 11, 2011 we had the East Japan Disaster (meaning the earthquake and tsunami off Tohoku). You’ve already talked about the string of accidents at the nuclear plant. At the moment the accident was taking place, you were following the response by the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) in real time. What did you see in those initial moments?

Koide: It was truly a disastrous response. On the 11th I was in the laboratory in Kyoto as March was my month to work in the radiation-controlled area.3 It was normal workday hours and various tasks kept me busy working within the controlled area. Of course there is no TV or anything like that in the work space. That night there was a meeting so I came out to attend and that’s when I saw the images of the Sendai airport being swept away by the tsunami. The report said that there had been a devastating earthquake and tsunami. Then I wondered about the safety of the nuclear plants.

Right then, there really was no more information. We had scheduled a nuclear safety issues seminar for the 18th. I’ve participated in hundreds of these seminars. Participants from the Ukraine had just arrived on the 11th. We promised to go out drinking after they arrived and so that night I went out. There was no more TV, and while there was a vague unease among us, that’s how we spent the time.

The next day I learned that all power at Fukushima had been lost and I knew things were not going to be simple. Then at noon on the 12th the roof of reactor one was blown off; at that point any expert must have known there had been a reactor meltdown. So I was certain of a core meltdown and because once it has gone this far, there is no going back, it was time to call for anyone who could evacuate to do so. I thought we were at that stage on the 12th.

Yet neither the government nor TEPCO said a single word about a core meltdown; they announced that the incident merited a 3 or 4 on the International Nuclear Event Scale. I remember thinking “You’ve got to be kidding! There’s already been a meltdown. This is at least a level 6 or 7.” But neither the government nor TEPCO gave any indication of this and there was no word of it in the media either.

One by one there were explosions at reactors 3, 4, and 2. As an expert in nuclear power, I understood there was absolutely nothing that could be done. I thought people needed to be evacuating, but still the Japanese government didn’t make the call. Government officials had set up at an off-site center near a power plant in Fukushima―at first they announced evacuation inside two kilometers, then that expanded to three, five, ten, and finally twenty km. After that nothing was done. The offsite center was supposed to coordinate the emergency response in the event of an accident, but it turned out that every one of the officials fled. They left the employees behind and fled. The Japanese government’s response was indescribably cruel.

Kasai: It seems the very words “meltdown” (メルトダウン) and “core meltdown” (roshin yōyū/炉心熔融) were strictly forbidden.

Koide: Exactly.

Kasai: I was in Japan watching on TV. What shocked me was all the nuclear power experts explaining the incident in the studio. I suppose it was a satellite relay, but when reactor number three exploded on our screens they were giving their analyses of the explosion in real time. There were experts on TV saying that the reactor had a blast valve that was used successfully. Even hearing that, an average viewer might think something was amiss. But having physicists, experts on radiation, on TV saying these things, well, even the average viewer wouldn’t buy that explanation. In a broad sense, nuclear experts like yourself played several roles in the media and government.

Koide: Yes, that’s clearly true for pronuclear experts. They all tended to tell a story that underestimated the accident. Immediately after the accident public announcements and information were restricted. As a result individual opinions or statements were strictly forbidden and nearly all experts remained silent, so even basic information was not broadcast. Though I’d made statements from the nuclear lab beginning on the 12th, it is likely there were instructions from the Ministry of Science and Education to silence me. The head of the lab convened several meetings where he told each of us not to make any statement, that the lab would toe the official line when dealing with the mass media. I thought this was wrong and said that anyone who was asked a question by the media should answer it, further saying that if I were asked a question, I had a responsibility to answer. Since then I’ve continued to make statements in the media. Still the large majority of nuclear researchers were not able to do this.

As a result it was the pronuclear researchers who monopolized the interpretations – exactly. So as they went to the TV studios I think each was told: “Today, it’s your turn to go to the studio.” I think that’s how they played their part and handled the media.

Kasai: With respect to controlling information, would you say your experience with the head of the nuclear lab shows how the professional organizations exert pressure on the universities?

Koide: Yes, I would. The head of the lab opened a conference with all the other laboratories―even I went. There he said that any statements to the media should be on message and come only from the information office.

Kasai: So pressure came from academic conferences.

Koide: Yes, there was pressure coming from the academic conference side as well. Take for example something like a conference on nuclear power. From the very start it was never a real discussion; it was a meeting of powerful and vocal spokesmen for the nuclear community or village (genshiryoku kyōdōtai/原子力共同体 or genshiryoku mura/原子力村), which is to say the group of pronuclear government officials and private companies mainly centered around the LDP and Toshiba, Hitachi, Mitsubishi, and other pronuclear manufacturers of power plants―and of course their supporters in the media. Thus as an organization the conference was predisposed to underestimate the accident and to then promote that underestimation.

Hirano: Immediately after the accident you testified in the Diet presenting data indicating the seriousness of the disaster and demanding that the government terminate the operation of all the power plants.4

Koide: I did.

Hirano: After that it seems you weren’t again asked to speak publicly, or given the opportunity to offer more detailed thoughts on the situation.

Koide: By “speak publicly” you mean in the Diet or in some other official government setting?

Hirano: Yes, and also in the media.

Koide: With respect to the media, I’ve never really had any confidence in them. Since the accident, I’ve been overwhelmingly busy and haven’t accepted a single invitation from TV stations.

Hirano: I see. So there were invitations.

Koide: There have been many calls saying, “come down to the studio.” But I always tell them that I am too busy for this sort of thing. I’d say, if you come to my office, we could meet. Many did come by, even back then. But as everyone knows, in television you might talk for an hour and none of it makes it on air, or if it does, it’s maybe thirty seconds.

Hirano: Right, and only the convenient parts.

Koide: That’s it and there’s really nothing that can be done about it. There was, however, one outlet for which I was extremely grateful: the daily radio program called Tanemaki Journal (種まきジャーナル).5 There I could go on every day and offer my thoughts live. I wish it could have continued, but it was completely and totally smashed. What a world we live.

Kasai: So, on the subject of standards used for assessing the danger posed by radiation for the human body and the environment: What are your thoughts on how the government deals with this issue?

Koide: They are absolutely not dealing with it at all. I think you already know this but in Japan the average person is not supposed to be exposed to more than one milliSievert per year―that’s set by law. Why is that the level decided on? Because exposure to radiation is dangerous. If exposure weren’t dangerous, if low levels of exposure were safe, there’d be no problem even without that legal limit. But exposure to radiation is dangerous―this is the conclusion of all research. So every nation in the world has set legal limits for exposure.

For people like me who get paid to work with radiation, it’s not really possible to observe the 1mSv/yr limit [1mSv/yr]. We’re told that in exchange for our salaries, we accept exposure to twenty milliSieverts a year. That’s the standard I work under in my job. But the current Japanese government has now stated that if contamination is under 20mSv/yr somewhere, that place is safe to return to―safe to return to even for children. This is way beyond common sense.

Hirano: What is the basis of this claim? Why would the government announce these numbers and forcefully declare these areas safe to return to? What’s the basis for the government’s numbers?

Koide: The basis for those numbers…for example the government says that organizations like the IAEA or the ICRP [International Commission on Radiological Protection] suggest that in emergencies during which the 1mSv/yr standard cannot be maintained standards should be set between twenty and 100mSv/yr. The government seizes on this and declares that since the IAEA and the ICRP have said this, that 20mSv/yr is therefore a safe level-usually adding that membership in both the IAEA and the ICRP is voluntary anyway. But because these organizations have said this is no reason to break Japanese law. If Japan is a nation governed by the rule of law at all, surely this means that the very people who make the laws should also follow them―that should be obvious. But these guys have declared 20mSv/yr safe even for children. There is absolutely no way I can consent to this.

Hirano: So there is no scientific basis for these levels.

Koide: Well… the danger corresponds to the amount of exposure―you probably know this―so for a country that has declared its intention to maintain the 1mSv/yr standard to then turn around and ask people to endure twenty times that level, there is no scientific basis for that declaration. That’s a social decision.

But if you want to inquire as to why, as I’ve mentioned to you, some 2.4 petaBecquerels of radioactive material have fallen on Japan, that material has been dispersed, contaminating Tohoku, Kanto, and western Japan. So in addition to the law setting the legal limit for exposure at 1mSv/yr, there is another law that states that absolutely nothing may be removed from a radioactive management area in which the levels exceed 40,000 Becquerels per square meter.

So the question becomes how many places or how much area has been contaminated beyond 40,000 Bq/m2? And according to the investigations, that answer is 140,000 km2. The entirety of Fukushima prefecture has been contaminated to where all of it must be declared a radioactivity management area. Indeed, while centered on Fukushima, parts of Chiba and Tokyo have also been contaminated. The number of people living in what must be called a radiation-controlled area is in the millions, and could exceed ten million.

For me, if Japan is in fact a nation governed by the rule of law, I believe the government has the responsibility to evacuate these entire communities. Instead of taking a proper action to secure people’s livelihood, the government decided to leave them exposed to the real danger of radiation. In my view, Fukushima should be declared uninhabitable and the government and TEPCO should bear a legal responsibility for the people displaced and dispossessed by the nuclear disaster. That’s what I think, but if that were to be done, it would likely bankrupt the country. I think that even though it could bankrupt Japan, the government should have carried out the evacuation to set an example of what the government is supposed to do. But obviously those in and around the LDP certainly didn’t agree. They’ve decided to sacrifice people and get by taking on as little burden as possible. So they’ve made the social decision to force people to endure their exposure. In my view, this is a serious crime committed by Japan’s ruling elite.

I would like people to know just how many thousands of people live in this abnormal situation where even nuclear scientists like me are not allowed to enter, not to mention, drink the water. It is strange that this issue has been left out of all debate over the effects of the radioactive exposure. We must be aware that contemporary Japan continues to operate outside the law in abandoning these people to their fate by saying it’s an extraordinary situation. Under such circumstances, I think, there are a multitude of symptoms of illnesses in contaminated areas. But if we’re talking about any given symptom, it’s hard to say since we just don’t have any good epidemiological studies, or even any good data. But there will surely be symptoms, namely cancer and leukemia.

However little exposure to radiation is, it causes cancer and leukemia―this is the conclusion of all current science. These symptoms are said to become visible 5 years after the initial exposure. But because radiation is not the sole cause of cancer or leukemia establishing a direct causal relationship is extremely difficult. For this very reason we need to continue to investigate the state of exposure by conducting rigorous epidemiological studies. But this government wishes instead to hide the damage so I’m afraid no such study is on the horizon. In addition, I have heard about many cases of nose bleeding, severe headaches, and extreme exhaustion. And I am truly concerned about small children and young people living in Fukushima as they are most vulnerable to exposure.

Hirano: So what is your view of the actual damages of radiation exposure on human health?

Koide: On the evening of the Fukushima dai-ichi reactor accident of March 11, 2011, a Radiation Emergency Declaration was announced. The Declaration suspended existing Japanese law concerning exposure to radiation. Though Japanese law sets the limit for exposure for the general population at one milliSievert a year [1mSv/yr], the new permissible level would be 20 mSv/yr. That Emergency Declaration is still in effect. It is common knowledge that even low levels of exposure are dangerous. Including even infants in this newly imposed 20mSv/yr standard will obviously lead to various diseases. Further, because the monitoring equipment was destroyed at the time of the accident we do not have accurate data on the exposure levels of the residents. Numerous cases of thyroid cancer have been found. The prevalence of thyroid cancer is dozens of times that of normal incidence. Pro-nuclear groups say those numbers are the result of the screening process itself, not the effect of radiation exposure. Which is to say that this was the first major screening of that population and so it was natural that many cases of thyroid cancer would be found. Put differently, what they are saying is that they have never conducted a thorough study of radiation exposure and its impact on human health. Science should acknowledge what it already knows and what it does not. If it is true that there is no established scientific data, a properly scientific approach would be to carry out a through investigation. To deny the damage to health by exposure to radiation without such an investigation is absolutely at odds with the scientific spirit. Prof. Tsuda at Okayama University has already conducted a detailed study on the outbreak of thyroid cancer, showing an epidemiological-like outbreak. Just as happened at Chernobyl, as time passes it is clear there will be more and more instances of all kinds of illnesses.

Hirano: In your books you’ve often stated that there is no uncontaminated food. But for most Japanese, such basic knowledge seems limited to food from Fukushima, and nearby parts of Ibaraki, Gumma, Chiba, Miyagi. For food produced outside these areas, do you think it’s necessary to have strict testing of food that is sold and consumed? What is to be done? Do you think food from outside these areas should also be subject to strict testing before being sent to market and consumed?

Koide: Right, as we discussed earlier, before the Fukushima accident the entire globe was already contaminated with radiation. This means that Tohoku or Kanto or Kansai food, all of it, has been contaminated with radiation―radiation from atmospheric tests. Beyond this, contamination from the 1986 Chernobyl accident reached Japan on the prevailing westerly winds, meaning that all Japanese food was contaminated. And on top of all this, with the Fukushima disaster, as I mentioned, it is not that a thick layer of contamination has dispersed to every corner of the globe from Fukushima, but that this thick layer of contamination is right now centered on Fukushima.

So if we were to carefully measure the levels of food contamination, we’d more or less find moving out from the highest levels in Fukushima to say western Japan or Kyushu, that the numbers would gradually decline to the lower levels received from the atmospheric tests. Right now the people of Fukushima have been abandoned in the areas of the highest levels of radiation. And abandoned people have to find a way to live. Farmers produce agricultural goods, dairy farmers produce dairy products, and ranchers produce meat; these people must do so in order to live. They are not the ones to be blamed at all.

As the Japanese state is absolutely unreliable in this matter, these people have no choice but to go on producing food in that place, all the while suffering further exposure. So I don’t think we can throw out the food they produce there under those conditions. Inevitably someone has to consume that food―I suggest it be fed to the pronuclear lobby (laughs). We should serve all of the most heavily contaminated food at say the employee cafeteria at TEPCO or in the cafeteria for Diet members in the Diet building. But that isn’t nearly enough. We must carefully inspect the food, and once we’ve determined what foods have what levels of contamination, once that is fully measured and delineated, then those who have the corresponding levels of responsibility should eat it, should be given it.

Now of course strict levels of responsibility cannot really be allotted one by one to individuals that way, so when it comes to this food, I would propose devising a “60 and over” system. The most contaminated foods could only be eaten by those 60 years old and older, and from there also have food for “50 and over,” “40 and over,” “30 and over” – giving the best food to children. For example, school lunches would get the most uncontaminated food available―there’d still be contamination from the atmospheric tests―but food with only those levels would be given to children and only adults would receive the contaminated food. That would be my proposal.

My proposal would first be a precise measurement, starting from Fukushima and then of course including western Japan and Kyushu, to sort out the levels and then determine the relative burdens. I am aware that this is a controversial proposal, but each one of us, especially those who built postwar Japan, bears responsibility for allowing our society to heavily dependent on nuclear energy without carefully reflecting on the risks and consequences of it. And more importantly, we have the responsibility for protecting children.

Kasai: Recently, that idea has been suggested in Nishio Masamichi’s Radioactive Archipelago (Hibaku retto/『被ばく列島』). You’ve just stressed that though the first step must be a rigorous measurement, right now that is simply impossible.

Koide: Right, completely impossible.

Kasai: So, that’s true of water as well. First I don’t think most people know how to measure the levels in water. You’ve already said how the current minimum standards are worthless, that below a certain threshold it would be displayed as “ND” (Not Detectable). For example, for tap water, up to 20 Becquerels would be posted as “ND,” exactly as if there was no radiation detected at all. Yet even with all these doubts on measurement, we must start with it, though it’s a dizzyingly long road ahead. But what do you think can be done to change this situation for the better?

Koide: Right now Japan has a standard of 100Bq/kg for general foodstuffs. Before the Fukushima disaster, Japanese foodstuffs were contaminated―by the atmospheric tests―at a level of 0.1Bq/kg. Of course there were some foods with less contamination and some with more. Still, roughly speaking it was 0.1Bq/kg. So when you’re talking 100 Bq/kg that’s allowing 1,000 times the [pre-Fukushima] levels.

As I said before, any exposure is absolutely dangerous. And the dangers increase corresponding to an increase in levels of exposure; this is the conclusion of all research. 100 Bq/kg is dangerous, 99 is dangerous, as is 90, and 50, and 10―they are all dangerous. 10 Bq/kg is 100 times the pre-Fukushima levels.

So I think it’s necessary to precisely measure the levels of contamination. As many people are living in a state of anxiety, groups like consumers’ cooperatives and other sorts of organizations are trying to measure the contamination on their own. But the measuring devices that these groups are able to get, such as the ones called NAI, these devices can only measure levels above 20Bq/kg. While this means that they can measure levels as little as one-fifth of the national thresholds, from my perspective even this lower level is far too high.

And the worst thing that could happen is thinking that any contamination below the detectable limits of these machines, meaning below 20Bq/kg, would be misunderstood as being free of contamination, and then having the Fukushima prefectural government actively using this data as good news: “measurements below the detectable limits of the device must be clean; we can even serve this food in school cafeterias,” or PR campaigns announcing “Fukushima produce is safe.” Of course it would be totally outrageous and unthinkable and yes I think every effort should be made to serve the least contaminated food in school cafeterias―but the reality is that any food tested below detectable levels is distributed to schools as safe produce.

I think we need to stop this situation, and technically speaking, I think several germanium semiconductor detectors must be deployed instead. But a germanium detector would cost from $100,000 to $200,000. And in order to use it, the detector needs to be kept at 150 degree below zero Celsius. So these are not devices that the average citizen is going to be able to use.

So no matter how dedicated any individual citizen may be, there are real limitations when it comes to measuring radiation levels. If you ask me what should be done, for example when faced with Cs-137 or Sr-90, what should be done about these contaminants? Well these contaminants were produced in a nuclear reactor at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi plant and it means that they are unmistakably TEPCO’s property. And if their private property is found to have contaminated other areas they have undeniable responsibility for it. So I think this is something that is required of TEPCO. I think it is TEPCO’s responsibility to precisely measure which foods have been contaminated, and to what extent, and then to report the results to the public. I think this is something the public should demand. After TEPCO the government also has responsibility―they gave their seal of approval to TEPCO after all. So the public should also demand that the government precisely measure the levels and publish the results.

Because there are limits to what one can do on one’s own, I think we need a movement that forces the government and TEPCO to take responsibility for the precise measurement of the contamination.

Hirano: Some have raised doubts over precisely this kind of rigorous measurement citing possible damage caused by rumors or misinformation (fūhyōhigai/風評被害), but to me this sort of criticism is tainted with a sort of “national morality” discourse (kokumin dōtokuron/国民道徳論).

Koide: Yes, I think so.

Hirano: There seems to be a very strong sense of dividing people into those who are seen as patriotic and those who are seen as un-Japanese (hikokumin/非国民).

Koide: For me, I’ve been making statements on the Fukushima contamination. These statements have been denounced and even made some angry with me. But the contamination is real. For a long time now I’ve been the kind of person who would rather hear the truth, no matter how awful, than to remain ignorant. I am absolutely not going to hide the truth; no matter how much criticism I have to take I am going to diligently report the truth. Yeah, a lot of people get angry with me. (Laughs).

Kasai: On this point, this year saw the publishing of Kariya Tetsu’s manga seriesOi shinbo: Fukushima no shinjitsu (『美味しんぼ – 福島の真実』). 6 It would seem a kind of political campaign was developed to attack it. What is your take on this?

Koide: The editors sent me a copy and I’ve read it. It’s an awesome manga. In this day and age we just don’t have this kind of detailed manga on this problem and I am grateful for it. And more, Oi shinbo talks about the nosebleeds [caused by radiation]. The nosebleeds are real. Lots of Fukushima residents are said to be suffering from nosebleeds. Itokawa, the mayor of Futaba machi, has shown us proof. One of my acquaintances often talks about the nosebleeds.

It was true at Chernobyl, too. But nosebleeds have not been definitively and scientifically linked to exposure to radiation.7 Still there is no denying that it is real and happening. So even if current science is unable to explain it, it’s for science to ask just what is going on? Science has a duty to explain this, to tell the truth without obfuscation. No matter the reasons, we should be allowed to tell the truth. So for me I don’t think there is anything wrong with this part of Oi shinbo.

Kasai: I think Oi shinbo clearly exposed the politically constructed narratives “damage from rumor or misinformation” and “emotional bonds” (kizuna/絆) as fictions, and so for this reason it appears it had to be crushed.

Koide: Exactly. But Kariya, the author of Oi shinbo, is not one of the criminals responsible for the Fukushima disaster. Rather the government officials who caused the Fukushima disaster are the criminals. Yet it is these same government bureaucrats who now come out and complain that this manga is out of order. I say, “No, it’s you who are out of order. We need to send you to prison right now.”

But isn’t it always the case that a criminal who has committed a crime remains unquestioned and so starts bashing those who are telling the truth? When that happens I think the problem is precisely this word you just used “emotional bonds.” Since Fukushima, I have come to hate this word. (Laughs).

Hirano: “Bonds” seems to be the new nationalism, doesn’t it?

Koide: Yes, yes it does.

Hirano: You’ve often said that the Japanese economy and the people’s lifestyle would be fine even without a single nuclear power plant. In fact, since the government shut all the nuclear reactors down, the people have experienced no real trouble at all. In addition, considered in light of world standards we still have material riches and a lifestyle of surplus. Given this, what are your thoughts on the call to restart the reactors? For what purpose, what reason do you think the government has?8

Koide: First of all, the power companies don’t want to go bankrupt. In other words, the heads of the power companies do not want to take personal responsibility. For example, if the reactors are restarted and there’s an accident, are the heads of the power companies going to be punished? We already know that they will not be. Even after the Fukushima disaster neither the chairman, nor the CEO, nor anyone below―not a single person―was punished.9 It certainly looks as if the reactors are restarted and there’s an accident, the heads of the power companies would not be required to take any responsibility. The heads of the power companies, from Kyushu Electric to Kansai Electric, have received this message loud and clear.

What’s more, if the nuclear power plants are idled and not allowed to restart, then all the capital they represent becomes a non-performing asset. And of course this is anathema to anyone in management.

Hirano: If we could return to a technical discussion specifically how to decommission a reactor. As have others in your field you’ve already stated that a full end game cannot be envisioned yet. Still could you talk about what makes this issue so difficult?

Koide: By decommissioning you mean the endpoint of the Fukushima reactors?

Hirano: Yes, what does it mean for Fukushima dai-ichi?

Koide: When we say decommission we basically mean: How do we fully contain the radiation? At least I think that’s the main point. Now this is impossible if we don’t know the status of the melted core. Though it’s been four years since the disaster we simply do not know where the core is or in what state it is.

This is a situation that only happens in nuclear accidents. However large a chemical plant explosion may be there’d probably be an initial fire, but usually after several days, perhaps weeks you’d still be able to go on site and investigate. You’d be able to see just how things broke down. And in some situations might even be able to fix them. But with an accident at a nuclear plant you cannot even go on site four years later―probably not even ten years later.

Hirano: Because the contamination is so severe that no one can come close to it.

Koide: Yes. For humans going there means instant death, so the only way at all is to use robots. But robots are extremely vulnerable to radiation. Consider, robots receive their instructions through series of 1s and 0s, so should the radiation switch a 0 to a 1 you’d end up with completely different instructions. Essentially robots are useless. Even if you are able to send them in they can never return. Because this has been the case up to now, the only way left in the end might be to use robots that try to avoid exposure or that are built as much as possible to withstand exposure, but that is no simple thing.

So it means until we figure out what to do it would still take many years. Once you understand this fact you can start thinking about what can be done. And at the very least the “road map” devised by the government and TEPCO is the most absolutely optimistic road map that there could be. They are convinced that the melted core fell through the bottom of the pressure vessel and now lie at the bottom of the containment vessel―basically piling up like nuggets of the melted core. There’s no way this would be the case. (Laughs).

As the severity of the disaster became clear, water was repeatedly thrown on the reactors. This water would evaporate and dissipate continuously. That was the actual situation. There is no way that the melted core would have stayed as slimy liquid and then piled up like so many little nuggets. It should have been scattered all over the place. This is how the government and TEPCO’s roadmap goes: The buns would stay at the bottom of the containment vessel, above which is the reactor pressure vessel―a steel pressure furnace. With the furnace floor broken open, there is a hollow at the bottom through which the melted core must have leaked.

So at some point both the containment vessel and the pressure vessel would be filled with water and they’ll be able to see the nuggets of melted core by looking from above down into the water. They say the nuggets (the fallen material), yes, that they sit some thirty to forty meters below the water’s surface, that they’ll eventually be able to grab and remove them. This is all it takes, according to the government and TEPCO’s roadmap. Not a chance. This simply cannot be done.

Hirano: Obviously we can’t confirm or really say anything definitive about the situation in the reactors, but what do you think has happened?

Koide: I simply don’t know. But as I have mentioned, this whole “nugget” scenario is just not the case, and so I think the materials are scattered all over the place. Though the containment vessel is made of steel, if the melted core has come in contact with that steel, just as it ate through the floor of the pressure vessel, it could possibly have melted through the containment vessel. Depending on how things developed this, too, is a possibility. Unfortunately, I simply do not know.

Hirano: If that is in fact the situation, what steps are necessary?

Koide: First, as we talked about earlier, radiation must be prevented from being released into the environment. As I consider this task as “decommissioning” or the final containment of the accident, I think in order to prevent the release into the environment you must do whatever you can starting from the worst-case scenario.

There are situations in which the containment vessel can suffer a melt-through. I think this likely has already happened. And if it has happened what should be done? Outside the reactor there flows ground water. If the melted core were to come in contact with the ground water, the whole situation would be unmanageable. While this may have already have happened, in order to get any kind of control over the situation, some sort of barrier must be built to prevent the melted core from reaching the ground water. I’ve been saying this since May 2011―and they have not done a thing.

Kasai: This barrier would be an ice dam, a wall of super-chilled soil.

Koide: That’s the most recent idea. But it simply cannot be done successfully. It would cost billions of dollars. And it would fail. And when it did fail they’d say there’s nothing to be done but build a concrete wall. No matter how foolish an idea may be, they’ll just keep moving from failure to failure.

But really, for the construction companies that’s a good thing. I think Kashima would be the ones to build the super-chilled earth wall, for some billions of dollars. And if it doesn’t work―they wouldn’t have to take responsibility. Next they’d build an impermeable concrete wall. Several huge construction firms (zenekon/ゼネコン) would be contracted and would all make billions.

But considered from the perspective of actually ending the disaster, it would be a series of failures. Personally, I think an underground, impermeable wall needs to be built immediately. They are not going to be able to remove the material. All that can be done is to contain it. Underground the wall needs to be strengthened; above ground the only choice is some sort of sarcophagus like the one they built over Chernobyl. But even this would take dozens of years―I’ll probably be dead by then.

Kasai: There are temporary tanks sitting on land for this water, but they are starting to leak. What should be done about this contaminated water? There’s not enough space for all of it on land; it cannot be controlled; and every year the volume grows larger.

Koide: The radioactive water has penetrated the coastline around the Fukushima Daiichi. Underground water in the large area of Fukushima has been seriously contaminated. And at some point those contaminated water tanks will fail. I thought we must do everything that we possibly could. Already in March of 2011 there was some 100,000 tons of contaminated water. Even then I proposed moving it but didn’t get anywhere with it. Now there’s up-to 400,000 tons. In the near―meaning not too distant―future there will be nothing left but to release it into the sea.10 The water contains plutonium 239 and its release into the Ocean has both local and global impacts. A microgram of plutonium can cause death if inhaled.

Contaminated Water Tanks

Koide: The Nuclear Regulatory Committee has been hinting at the possibility of releasing it into the ocean.Kasai: It appears that they are already moving toward that direction a little at a time aren’t they.

Kasai: They have been trying to persuade the fishing cooperatives and others to allow the release.

Koide: Yes, they have.

Kasai: Something that has not been much of a topic of discussion today is decontamination. It has become a rather large industry, in other words, “the exposure industry” (hibaku sangyō/被曝産業). Do you think decontamination is really meaningful and effective?

Koide: Yes, I do. And we must do it. But, to say that because we’ve decontaminated some area that the whole issue is resolved, or that people may safely live in a decontaminated place―I think that is a real problem.

First, fundamentally, people must not be forced to live in contaminated areas that must be decontaminated. First must come complete evacuation. The state must take on the responsibility to allow whole communities to evacuate. Of course, they did not do this.

Briefly, I use the word “decontamination” (josen/除染), which is a compound word written with the characters for “remove” and “stain.” But this is something that cannot be completed when it comes to radiation, so the original sense of the word “removal of contaminants” is impossible. But as long as people are abandoned in the contaminated areas, I believe all possible actions should be taken to lessen their exposure. It is essential that the contamination be removed as far away as possible, to be transported far from where people live. For this reason I prefer to call it “[toxic] relocation” (isen/移染).

But even if this is done, that does not mean that the radiation has been erased. This stuff contaminates everything from mountains to what have you, it gets into the space of people’s lives. When that happens it must be removed. But removal merely means moving it around―it does not mean eliminating it. It means another job is waiting to handle the contaminated materials that get moved around.

Right now the authorities say they want various prefectures and other local governments to build a temporary storage and bury the accumulated contamination there.

We talked about this before, but the contaminants themselves were clearly formerly in the reactor at TEPCO’s Fukshima Daiichi plant and are therefore also clearly TEPCO’s property. So while it is residents who are doing the hard work of collecting all these contaminants, I think it would be right and just for these contaminants to be returned to TEPCO. Earlier prof. Kasai told us the contaminants were being called “no-one’s property” (mushubutsu/無主物), but I say in all seriousness, the conclusion of my logic here is to say to TEPCO: “Hey, this is your crap” and return it to them. That way the residents are not forced to accept the stuff, TEPCO is. The best solution is to return all of the material back to the Fukushima Daiichi plant, but that is not possible. Right now that place is a battlefield between poorly paid workers and the radiation, so I don’t see this as a possibility.

I do have a second proposal. Fifteen kilometers south of Fukushima Daiichi [Fukushima 1] is the Fukushima dai-ni [Fukushima 2] nuclear plant. There is a lot of wide open space there. So first off we would return the Fukushima 1 contamination to TEPCO there. I think there would be enough space, but if there were not, the rest could be taken to TEPCO’s Kashiwazaki Kariya nuclear plant. It’s the world’s largest nuclear plant and so there is a lot of space. I think turning that place into a nuclear waste site is a good idea.What I would most like to do is have TEPCO’s headquarters buried under all the radiation, but whenever I say this people just laugh. (laughs)

Lately I’ve been invited to Kashiwazaki11 and talked about it. I think I’ve become a hated man there. (Laughs). But I think taking full responsibility for various actions is the most important thing. And when it comes to this particular disaster no one has greater responsibility than TEPCO. As I think it important for one to take full responsibility, if Fukushima 2 doesn’t work out, then Kashiwazaki Kariya is the only other option.

Hirano: State expenditures for decontamination have supposedly reached one trillion yen.

Koide: It’s more than that.

Hirano: This summer I spent some time in Iitate village. Of course at the time the place was crawling with decontamination workers. It was a truly bizarre scene. I had the feeling of running around on a moonscape. Of course there were no residents there-just decontamination workers in strange gear, trucks running all over the place. Looking at that scene, being shown the actual work of decontamination, it seemed to be an excruciatingly slow―even endless―endeavor. I mean they were scrubbing everything with small brushes. I was able to ask the workers a few questions―off the record. Many were people from Hokkaido, Okinawa, and Fukushima who had lost their homes. It was a collection of modern day migrant workers and victims of disaster. They said that they work for just 15,000 yen a day.

I asked them if they thought their work was doing any good. They said they needed the money and honestly had no way of knowing if this sort of minute and delicate work would remove the contamination.

Was this a mistake? Is scrubbing everything by hand and then dumping it all in the ground really the only way to decontaminate an area?

Decontamination Workers

Koide: Well I think both that it is and it isn’t effective. For example, when they first started the decontamination work, what they did was blasting everything with high-pressure water hoses. That’s bad. All that does is get all the contamination moving around. It’s really just dispersing it.

Some of my colleagues have said that is a bad method. Be it a roof or a wall, you shouldn’t just douse it with water. To really remove the contamination, you would first cover it with something that could prevent the escape of radioactivity then knock down the radiated structure, tear it all off, and then fold it up and collect it all. I think that’s probably true. But it takes a long time.

I think there are effective ways of doing it and I think there are ineffective ways. Still it is fundamentally impossible to erase the contamination and so it must be moved. The only thing we should be doing is thinking about the easiest way to relocate it all.

Hirano: That’s the meaning of “effective” in this situation isn’t it.

Koide: Right. So the current method may be rather small in scale. But for me even small-scale methods are necessary. As long as people are living there everything is necessary.

Of course, there’s legitimate criticism over the fact that this is a decontamination business and that the large construction companies are getting rich, but again, for me, as long as there are abandoned people still living there it all must be done.

Hirano: It was really a shock going there and seeing it. To see those workers and, honestly, their lack of conviction for the work. It was a really weird scene. No real enthusiasm, but rather one day after the other, contingent labor. The media has reported that the workers come from a few particular prefectures, but actually being there and talking to them, I could really get a true sense of the structure of economic inequality in Japan, that this sort of work found this kind of person, a person coming from economically precarious and socially marginalized backgrounds. In fact, you come to understand that decontamination work depends on these people.

For example, decontamination, or your preferred “relocation,” couldn’t those jobs be made more equitable―say by requiring TEPCO office workers, especially executives, to do it?

Koide: I’ve said that.

Hirano: You have? (Laughs).

Kasai: So…about the airborne radiation dosage and the soil contamination, there is a public entity that measures and publishes the airborne levels. But the soil contamination is not measured. I remember reading about Chernobyl that the soil contamination levels are the standard by which one gets the right to evacuation and refuge. But Japan only measures the air. And there are those who doubt the accuracy of the levels recorded. I thought the soil contamination had not been measured yet, but from what you mentioned earlier, we do know the extent of the contamination, don’t we?

Kasai: The actual levels?Koide: Yes, we do.

Koide: With respect to soil contamination we more or less know the extent of it. We largely know which prefectures, which towns, and which villages―as well as how badly―have been contaminated. Four years after the disaster it has moved around. Radiation moves through the environment; it has a material existence and also does die out. I’m sure much has changed since immediately following the accident.

We have the data necessary to draw a map of the situation immediately following the accident, but we don’t have the data necessary to draw a map of the contamination today. That said, we basically know the extent of the soil contamination.

Kasai: Who is it that is making these measurements?

Koide: It is basically the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Some local governments took part as well. Some independent groups, as well as some local governments, took part in taking measurements back then. But for us the number one data source is the US military.

Hirano: I see; how is that?

Koide: They worked at truly amazing speed-and accuracy.

Hirano: Sorry if this next thought seems a bit of a tangent, but right after the accident both the US and Japan were looking at the same data. But their interpretations of it were extremely far apart. The US ordered all of its personnel to evacuate an area 80 km from Fukushima. While Japan’s largest evacuation zone was 20 km. Where does this disparity in evacuation zones come from? They are both looking at the same data. How do they arrive at such definitive and divergent judgments?

Koide: Well…and this was true for me, too, any nuclear specialist would have known on March 11th-March 12th at the latest-that there had been a meltdown. And this means, quite simply, that control had been lost. And once control is lost you simply don’t know what is going to happen next-or that’s what you must think at the time. Disaster preparedness must always imagine the worst-case scenario. If you don’t plan for the worst-case scenario it will be too late. What the US did was believe there had been a worst-case scenario-a meltdown-and so moved to take care of its people. That’s why they ordered an 80 km evacuation. I think this was the correct strategy. Japan didn’t do this. Japan was always thinking of the ideal, the best case scenario. They had to be thinking they could still get control and based their policy on that optimistic assumption. So they only declared a 20 km evacuation zone. I would say that from this conclusion two things may unfold: one is their desire to see this as a best-case scenario and the other is their inability to deal with it.

Hirano: What do you mean by their inability?

Bags containing contaminated soil. This apocalyptic scene extends infinitely in the villages near the Fukushima dai-ichi

Koide: In a word, the Japanese state is incapable of functioning adequately when dealing with a disaster. That’s why they evacuated those within 20 km by bus but when it came to the 30 km zone they told those who could easily evacuate to do so and for all others to merely close their doors and windows.

Hirano: So there was no emergency management.

Koide: None. There simply is not a single person in the Japanese government who had thought an accident like this was possible. They all immediately fled the off-site center and so there was absolutely no emergency management―there couldn’t be. And because management was now impossible, there were no announcements. Even if they had declared an 80 km evacuation zone there were no emergency shelters. They had made no preparations, so there was nothing to be done.

Hirano: Last summer I interviewed Murakami Tetsuya 12 Just as the accident was happening he reached out to the government. But he got no response. He went to the prefecture. No response from them either. In the end he just used his own judgment. So really there was essentially zero emergency management in place. His thoughts at the time were to get the whole village to emigrate; that really there was nothing to do but to buy land and move to Hokkaido. He said these were his actual plans at the time. In fact, it would seem that the myth of safety has so totally permeated the bureaucracy that there really is no one who thinks about these things―wouldn’t you say?

Koide: That’s right. Not a single nuclear expert or policy maker ever seriously considered the possibility of an accident like this. I knew accidents were possible, and that when they happened the damage would be enormous; I had been commenting on the possibility, referring to some results of simulations. But still I would have thought the kind of disaster that happened at Fukushima was some kind of impossible nightmare―yet it actually happened. It was like the worse nightmare becoming a reality. And if even I thought this then all those pronuclear people surely never gave it a moment’s thought. And so when it actually happened, no one had thought about, let alone built a system to deal with it.

II The Responsibility of the Scientist and the Citizen

Kasai: In your books and lectures you often express strong respect for Tanaka Shōzō.13 Can you connect what you’ve just said to this as well?

Koide: Sure. I first became aware of Shōzō when I was in the student movement during the 1970s This was a time when there was close attention paid to Japan’s many pollution incidents, such as at Minamata. Personally I was working on nuclear power, but it was a time when, like it or not, we learned of all the harm that came along with building Japan into a modern nation. What I got from Shōzō was this epiphany that just like the Minamata disease right there before our eyes these sorts of pollution incidents went way back in Japanese history. With Japan’s decision to cast off Asia and follow the West after the Meiji Ishin of 1868 came these sorts of incidents, and the question within that was just how should one live? I learned the way Shōzō lived his life. I thought: Wow, it is possible to live that way; I must do it. Unfortunately I am completely unable to do so, but I never stop thinking that Shōzō’s was a wonderful way to live a life.

Hirano: Going back to an earlier discussion. You’ve repeatedly talked about the government’s responsibility, scientists’ responsibility, and individual responsibility. It would seem that this word “responsibility” is an extremely important keyword for you. You often emphasize it in your writing, too. What I want to ask concerns the issue of scientists’ special responsibility, a particular social responsibility. Scientists are often thought of as technicians, but this is not really the case. As a result, I feel you’ve pursued an intense interrogation of yourself as a scientist. As you’ve said you are not going to enter politics, could you connect this discussion of scientific responsibility to your earlier discussion of doing all that has fallen to you personally to do? How should we think about these two things?

Koide: I am in science and as such I have to take on the responsibility of a scientist-Just as a politician must take political responsibility. I think I mentioned this to you the last time, but I am an absolute individualist (tetteiteki na kojinshugisha/徹底的な個人主義者). I don’t want to be constrained by anyone. I want to be able to decide my own life for myself. But because I’ve made this choice by myself I must also take full responsibility for that choice.

It’s two sides of the same coin. I don’t take orders from anyone. And this means that I alone bear the responsibility. It’s really as simple as saying: I’m a scientist and so I have the responsibility of a scientist.

Hirano: On this way of thinking about responsibility: “Who is the subject responsible?”―this way of thinking about it seems to be quite absent in contemporary Japan.

Koide: Right. People living in Japan today have not made decisions as individuals. They just “go with the flow;” as long as they follow the “authorities” whom they believe will guarantee the happiness of their individual selves. This seems true of education, too. Go to a slightly better school; get into a slightly better company; grow a bit more rich, a bit more grand. I think everyone is swept up in this current, and it’s really senseless.

I think it is extremely important that each and every individual live out their individuality. The absolute worst thing is for everyone to become blindly obedient to the “authorities,” yet this is the Japan we find ourselves in today. And so no one takes any responsibility. Living in such a society it is too easy to say, “It can’t be helped.” Everyone is thus able to blame the society as a whole; “It can’t be helped.” And so no one takes any individual responsibility.

The most extreme and obvious example was the war. Everyone would say: “It’s not my fault; I was deceived. The military were the culprits.” Saying this allows people to remain at a distance, indifferent. It is bad news for a nation when its citizens have only this view of responsibility.

Hirano: You’ve declared, “I am an absolute individualist.” Personally I am very interested in that statement. So could you speak a bit more concretely about the meaning of your individualism for how one lives a life? In other words, could you explain just what you mean by this “individualism?”

That is, in Japan being individualistic is more often a way to say egotistical; a sort of disregard of others. One should pursue one’s own interests―in English the word is “selfish” ― egocentric ― pursue your own egotistic advantage. Now this seems completely different from the way you use the term. Could you speak directly to this difference?

Koide: I think you’ve just done so.

Hirano: Did I? (Laughs). So that’s it then, just as I said? Still it’s clearly not selfishness.

Koide: No, I don’t think it’s about interests.

Hirano: It’s about values isn’t it?

Koide: Yes, it’s about personal values. You and I are different people. I am different again from Mr. Kasai. Why? Well our genetic information is different. I received a bundle of information from my parents. You and Mr. Kasai, too, are influenced by your genetic information. Every one of the over one hundred million Japanese is a unique human being; and every one of the over 7.3 billion people on earth are unique individuals.

History may keep moving on, and there is a big, wide world here on this planet earth. That said, right now, at this moment, and right now, in this place, I exist as an irreplaceable being. It is nothing but an absolute truth. You normally live in Los Angeles, but right now at this moment you are a person who is here. Mr. Kasai has come down from Tokyo. While acknowledging all the implications of being within the flow of history, we are all right here, right now.

In other words, every single individual human being has a different way of living a life; they are each unique. They have each lived a life that absolutely no one else could have lived. It is a real loss if they don’t live up to their full potential. Those are my thoughts.

So for my own unique self, and so for your own unique self, and Mr. Kasai’s own unique self, none of us should be compelled by someone else to do something (meirei o sarete/命令されて). If we don’t live our lives according to the will coming from deep within ourselves, that’s a real loss; we must all live with our values coming from within ourselves.

I am going to retire next March, but though I am the lowest ranked employee here― above me are assistant professors and professors ― because of the peculiar arrangements of working where I do, I am not compelled to take orders from anyone. I am the lowest ranked so of course there is also no one below me to order around. So I am in a position where I never take nor give orders. For me this is the ideal position to be in.

And so I can live out my own life according to my own values; I’m allowed to live a life that suits me. Now I found myself in this position largely by accident, and then chose to continue to live my life this way. Related to this, I am a human being and so will make mistakes, but these mistakes will be things that I have chosen, things that I have personally done so there is nothing to do but to take responsibility for them. This is what I mean when I say that responsibility is an extremely important word.

Hirano: Well, you’ve exhaustively criticized this competitive society. You’ve said that this competitive society has ruined Japan and destroyed life based on what you call responsibility.

Koide: Yes. Everyone is running towards the exact same goal. It’s ludicrous. You want to go that way; I want to go this way. I think this would be the ideal society. Full mutual recognition is a good thing.

Hirano: Does your view come from your personal experience? In your books you state that you were a really conscientious student when you were younger (laughs).

Koide: (laughs) Well, yes.

Hirano: You studied extremely hard. Did everything extremely hard. You continued this in your nuclear research in college believing that a new energy source was cheap and good for everyone. You must have thought this was a great thing.

Koide: That’s right.

Hirano: But you eventually noticed that it was all wrong. So on this, from deep in your own experience, it’s an individual history, an individual experience, in one sense it’s connected to your current individualism, to how you live your life focused on the important things to you.

Koide: I think that’s right. So, well, when I was young, in my late teens, I was consumed by the dream of nuclear power. I devoted my life to it. That was all a mistake―it did not take me too long to realize that.

Hirano: When did it happen? In graduate school?

Koide: My third year in university.

Hirano: Third year―so as an undergraduate.

Koide: Yes, I came to this realization in the latter half of my undergraduate studies. It was foolish and I curse myself for it, but I didn’t quit. To this day I’ve lived my life as someone who made that wrong choice, and there is nothing to do but make amends for that choice.

At a minimum I wanted to get rid of nuclear power before there was a bad accident. I guess I’ve lived with this wish for over forty years―but that wish stayed out of reach. And here we have had the accident so my life has been for nothing. You could say that thing I wanted most to do has been denied. Really, what have I lived for? I think about that from time to time.

As this was my choice I have to accept it. So while the meaning of my life may have been lost, still I was able to live my own life as I pleased, without submitting to the orders of others and without ordering others around―for this I am grateful. My hopes were never realized. History is full of that kind of thing. Likely very few people see their hopes fulfilled. And while in my case they were rejected, I was able to live the life I wanted and that is a life to be grateful for.

Hirano: In a way, it’s just how Tanaka Shōzō lived his life isn’t it?

Koide: Yes it is. That is what I like about Shōzō.

Hirano: On that point. His life, too, was a defeat.

Koide: Complete and total defeat.

Hirano: Still, he used all sorts of means, and followed all the way through on his beliefs.

Hirano: So getting back to Fukushima, it seems when it comes to the life choices of the so-called Japanese elites, they seem caught in a system in which they will succeed and become famous by crushing their individuality and subsuming it under some organization in order to get ahead in a society and achieve fame and status. And the education system seems to be promoting this lifestyle where these sorts of people are created through intense competition. I think the very end result of this social and educational system was revealed, and it exploded in an explicit and ugly manner through various problems the Fukushima disaster has posed.

Koide: Yes, I think so. You said it.

Hirano: I see. In one sense it would have been possible even for these Japanese elites to make their personal responsibility clear and take appropriate actions only if they had lived a life based on individualism as you suggested.

Koide: Yes I think such a possibility exists, but unfortunately in Japan today that possibility has been completely crushed. It was abundantly clear from the Fukushima disaster that no one in this country is going to take responsibility.

Hirano: You’ve already talked about how TEPCO and the government made huge mistakes in dealing with the problem immediately after the accident. What do you see as the definitive mistake that led to this disaster?

Koide: There’s a ton of them. Any specialist would have known right away there had been a meltdown, and that everyone needed to be evacuated immediately. And evacuating to 20 km away is totally inadequate. Iitate village some 40-50 km away received an enormous amount of contamination and was neglected for over a month.

Soma residents evacuated to Iitate, this kind of stupidity cannot stand, the government’s criminal mistakes.

The Hosokawa family of Iitate Village continues to live in the heavily radiated area to look after their horses (2014). More than a dozen horses died since 2011.

Kasai: I’m deeply taken by your previous discussion on responsibility. It’s really a story of something with no owner. A golf course that has had to close because it is considered contaminated with radiation from TEPCO’s plant has recently sued. TEPCO’s top attorneys argued in defense that the radiation is not their property, which would make it no one’s property and therefore TEPCO is not responsible. It seems the opposite of what you’ve just said about responsibility, to be sure, yet this declaration of complete lack of responsibility, once passed through the logic and system of the courts, these lawyers have arrived at precisely this conclusion. It is not a question of individual responsibility; it is a problem of the social system. Lack of any responsibility is the basis of the entire social system. What are your thoughts on this?

Koide: It’s exactly as you say. This is what it has come to. I couldn’t care less about a country like that. But in order to overcome this situation, it’s something I mentioned earlier, but there is no way but for rather foolish citizens to get smarter. Only each individual standing up for his or her own way is going to do it.

Hirano: You’ve also talked about “responsibility for being fooled.” You’ve said that even the deceived are guilty and stressed that they too must take responsibility. How do you think about this at the individual level? For example, you’ve often stated that there should be a new food labeling system put in place by which especially the generation that agreed to build the reactors would be obliged to eat the contaminated food―would this be an example of taking individual responsibility for you?

Koide: Yes, that’s exactly what I mean. So, because I think that every Japanese adult has responsibility for both allowing the rampant development of nuclear power and the Fukushima disaster, I said that they should be the ones to eat the contaminated food. And so that this disaster may never happen again, nuclear power must be eliminated―of course there should be no question of restarting the reactors. Yet, what I’ve just said is not really a widespread idea. Slowly all the reactors are being restarted.

Hirano: So in that sense Japanese citizens’ responsibility is increasing in that they are allowing the restart of the reactors.

Koide: I think the nuclear power issue is precisely analogous to the war.

Hirano: Indeed, as with the damage of misinformation and national morality discourse we talked about and the pressure that comes from those hints of someone being somehow “un-Japanese,” it seems to really resemble the war.

Koide: I think so, yes.

Hirano: I’d like to ask more about the responsibility for being misled. Up to now the reason most would say that nuclear power has been allowed is the myth of safety―a myth invented by the coordination of the government, TEPCO, and the media. So Japanese citizens have been robbed of being told the truth, of having the chance to know the truth.

Koide: That’s true.

Hirano: So the likely response to your position would be that it’s unjust to blame those who were robbed of the chance to know the truth. How would you answer this challenge?

Koide: I also said that the current situation is just like during the war. Then, too, the media only reported the information coming from imperial headquarters: The Japanese military enjoyed nothing but a string of victories. We were all told that because of the emperor Japan was a divine country and therefore could not lose. You would go to school and there would be the emperor’s portrait hanging on the wall. There was a place where the emperor was enshrined right there on school grounds. Every child was taught that the emperor was present there.

In such a country it wasn’t strange to think that Japan would win the war. But those who knew more about the world, including of course those in the military, knew that Japan could not win. Still they said nothing. And so everyone was swept along with the current.

But history is harsh, and in the end Japan was battered. And people at that time said, “Ah, we’ve been misled. The military are the culprits.” But even within all of this there were those who resisted the war. The number of people tortured and killed by the Special Higher Police was huge. And those people, too, were labeled as “un-Japanese” and ostracized from society by the majority of the population. Whole families, whole groups of people were obliterated.

So those who lived then were duped, they were given false information. But should they say that’s where their responsibility ends? I would respond that even if they were duped, the duped still bear the responsibility of the duped. How did each and every one of them live their lives during the war? How did they deal with the information they were being given? I think we need to include these kinds of questions when we interrogate ourselves over taking responsibility. Now if you say this people get angry but I think without question the emperor has absolute responsibility for the war. We ended up moving on without trying to pursue the emperor’s war responsibility.

Even today you’ll see people happily shouting “Tennō heika banzai,” Long Live the Emperor. At midnight NHK will broadcast the Japanese flag flapping in the wind. I can’t stand that and so don’t watch TV. Most Japanese get happy when they hear ‘honorable’ addresses by His Majesty the Emperor or news about the imperial family. From the bottom of my heart I think we should have pursued his war crimes and punished him with whatever it takes, including execution. I have been saying this and people get very angry.

I am told not to criticize the emperor. They say if I do I’ll harm the anti-nuclear movement.

Hirano: Even people in the anti-nuclear movement warn you about things like that? A critical reference to the emperor’s wartime responsibility could be fatally divisive for the movement?

Koide: Those roots are that strong when you talk about war responsibility. But as I have mentioned to you, I feel at the bottom of my heart that each and every individual must take personal responsibility for how he or she lived his or her life. That’s the reason why I wanted the emperor to take his responsibility as a person.

We must build such a country. Even the duped and the lied to have responsibility as individual human beings. It’s true for those who lived through the war, and it’s true for those who promote nuclear power in Japan today―indeed it’s true for everyone on earth. Each one, should they be deceived, is responsible for being deceived.

Hirano/Kasai: Well we’ve gone on long today and heard some really important things. Thank you very much.

Katsuya Hirano is Associate Professor of History at UCLA. He is the author of The Politics of Dialogic Imagination: Power and Popular Culture in Early Modern Japan (Chicago). This interview is the second installment of his oral history project on Fukushima in The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus. The first interviewwas with Murakami Tatsuya: “Fukushima and the Crisis of Democracy: Interview with Murakami Tatsuya”, The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 13, Issue 20, No. 1, May 25, 2015.

Hirotaka Kasai is Professor of Political Thought at Tsuda College in Tokyo, Japan. He has published articles and book chapters on Maruyama Masao and radical democracy in Gendai Shiso and others.

Robert Stolz is Associate Professor of History at University of Virginia. He is the author of Bad Water: Nature, Pollution, and Politics in Japan, 1870-1950 (Duke). He has published an article on Tanaka Shozo in The Asia-Pacific Journal: “Remake Politics, Not Nature: Tanaka Shozo’s Philosophies of ‘Poison’ and ‘Flow’ and Japan’s Environment”, Vol. 5, Issue 1, January 2, 2007.

Akiko Anson is a freelance translator who lives in Iowa City, Iowa. Anson obtained a BA degree in English Literature from Gakushūin University in Tokyo, Japan and an MA degree in Asian Studies from the University of Iowa.

Notes

1Koide Hiroaki, “The Truth About Nuclear Power: Japanese Nuclear Engineer Calls for Abolition,” The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 9, Issue 31 No 5, August 1, 2011.

2Translator’s note: There is also a significant amount Cs-134 (although now perhaps 20% of Cs-137 totals). Large amounts of Cs have flowed into the ocean as well. Cs-134 is the main tracer for following Fukushima effluents in the ocean. I am indebted to Timothy Mousseau for this insight.

3放射線管理区域 “Controlled area means an area, outside of a restricted area but inside the site boundary, access to which can be limited by the licensee for any reason.”

4See the English translation of his testimony at the Diet: Koide Hiroaki, “The Truth About Nuclear Power: Japanese Nuclear Engineer Calls for Abolition” The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 9, Issue 31 No 5, August 1, 2011.

5“Tanemaki Journal,” an Osaka based radio show by Mainichi Broadcasting Station, began to air critical evaluations of the Fukushima incident immediately after March 11th. Tanemaki Journal invited Koide as a commentator on a daily basis and he offered astute and up-to-date comments on the disaster. Despite, or perhaps because of, its popularity, according to some reports, the radio program was shut down in July 2012 under pressure from Kansai Electric Power Company which was a major sponsor of the TV station MBS. When Mainichi announced the termination of Tanemaki, listeners protested outside the company’s office. The program won a Sakata Memorial Journalism Award in March 2012.

6Kariya Tetsu, Oi Shinbo 111 Fukushima no shinjitsu (Tokyo: Shōgakukan, 2014). The episode was published in April 28th , 2014 in a popular comic book. After returning from their visit to Fukushima, Protagonist and his father began to feel very dull and experienced nosebleeds. The episode developed into a social and political issue as it came under attack by conservative politicians and media for stirring up “damage by rumor.”

7Oi Shinbo discusses the theory that nosebleeds may be the result of ionizing radiation that converts H2O in the nasal passages to the hydroxyl radical HO which can then form hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), see Kariya, Oi Shinbo, 111: 240-48.

8Kyushu Electric Power Co. (KEPCO) reactivated the No. 1 reactor in August 2015 and No. 2 in October in the same year. Abe Shinzō’s government expressed confidence in the safety the restart by calling the new safety measure “the world toughest.” According to the Japan Times, the government plans to have nuclear power account for 20 to 22 percent of the country’s total electricity supply by 2030, compared with roughly 30 percent before the disaster at the Fukushima complex. The government continues with the policy despite the overwhelming public opposition against the reactivation of the reactors and the clear evidence that Japanese economy is sustainable without nuclear energy.

9Mutō Ruiko and Fukushima residents filed a lawsuit against TEPCO and the Japanese government officials, seeking criminal responsibility for the Fukushima nuclear accident. Muto’s interview will be published in the Asia-Pacific Journal this year.

10In September 2015, TEPCO released its first 850 tons of filtered radioactive groundwater into the sea. This is a part of TEPCO’s “subdrain plan” that was approved in late July, 2015, after a year-long battle with local fishermen who opposed the release fearing that it would pollute the ocean and contaminate the marine life. 300 tons of contaminated water is being generated at the plant daily. TEPCO has yet to deal with remaining 680.000 tons of highly contaminated water that was used to cool the reactors during the 2011 meltdown.

11Kashiwazaki is a city in Niigata prefecture.

12The Tokaimura nuclear accident occurred on September 30th 1999, resulting in two deaths. It was the worst civilian nuclear radiation accident in Japan prior to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster of 2011. The criticality accident happened in a uranium processing facility operated by JCO, a subsidiary of Sumitomo Metal Mining Co. in the village of Tokai, Ibaraki Prefecture. Both the national and the prefectural governments failed to deal promptly with the accident due to the lack of evacuation plan and Tatsuya Murakai, then the major of the Tokaimura, decided to evacuate villagers from the affected area. 27 workers, who contained the crisis, were exposed to radioactivity.

13Tanaka Shōzō (1841-1913) is considered to be Japan’s first environmentalist. Tanaka is well known for his activism in connection with pollution caused by waste from the Ashio Copper Mine in Tochigi prefecture. From the mid-1880s, the Watarase river near the mine became was heavily contaminated by mine waste and in 1890 a large flood carried poisonous waste from the mine into surrounding fields and villages. Tanaka took the cause to the National Diet as a member of the House of Representatives, but it ended with little success. In 1900, Tanaka and villagers in the valley of the Watarase river planned a mass protest in Tokyo, but were stopped and dispersed by government troops. He resigned from the Diet in 1901 and made a direct appeal to Emperor Meiji. He became the supporter of local autonomy and developed his own anti-war, anti-imperialist, and environmental philosophy. He died of cancer in Yanaka village in 1913.

Posted in English
Comments Off on “The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster is a Serious Crime”

Video: China’s New Aircraft Carrier Force, Challenges US Naval Hegemony?

April 20th, 2016 by South Front

People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) officials acknowledged the existence of the first indigenously built aircraft carrier for the PLAN on December 31st, 2015. The carrier is based on the same Soviet era template as the Liaoning currently in service, and is being built in the same Dalian shipyard as its predecessor.

The Liaoning was a development of the Admiral Kuznetsov Class carrier Varyag purchased from the Ukraine in 1998 and totally refitted in the Dalian Shipyards. The Liaoning was commissioned on September 25th, 2012 after extensive sea trials and has been in service with the PLAN in the role of a training platform by which the Chinese Navy aims to learn and perfect the complex process of aircraft carrier operations.

Known as Carrier 16, the Liaoning (image below) is a conventional aircraft carrier that utilizes a skip ramp to launch aircraft. This design limits the size and weight of the aircraft that can be employed, a major limitation overcome by the steam catapults of larger aircraft carriers and the new electro-magnetic catapults in use on the new USS Gerald Ford Class now entering sea trials. The relatively small size of the Liaoning further limits the number of aircraft that can be carried, serviced and stowed onboard. A total of 24 J-15 fighters, 6 Z-18 anti-submarine warfare helicopters, 4 Ka-31 early warning helicopters, and 2 Harbin Z-9 rescue helicopters are carried.

The J-15 fighter is the naval version of the J-11B which is based on the Russian Su-33, and can only be launched via the skip ramp with a reduced weapons payload of approximately 2,000 lbs. with a maximum fuel load. Thus, the J-15 can only be utilized from the Liaoning with either a reduced range or reduced weapons payload. The aircraft is limited in both interceptor and strike roles due to the inherent limitations of the skip jump design.

Chinese naval planners are already hard at work to rectify the shortcomings of the Liaoning in the follow-on vessels, Carrier 17 which is being constructed, and Carrier 18 which is already in the planning stages. Carrier 17 is being designed with greater underdeck hangar space, possibly denoting a higher compliment of aircraft, and it is surmised that Carrier 18 will be equipped with steam catapults to overcome the limitations inherent in the skip jump design.

Military analysts speculate that the PLAN will build and operate at least three aircraft carriers. This will allow for one vessel to be in operational service, one engaged in training operations and one undergoing maintenance at any given time. China has wisely utilized the Liaoning as a training platform by which to learn and perfect its aircraft carrier operations and to learn what is most desirable in any future aircraft carrier design, as it is becoming obvious that the first three vessels are just the beginning of a more ambitious program.

The largest unknown concerning the PLAN’s current aircraft carrier program is how they intend to use these costly and complex vessels operationally. The vessels lack a large and powerful strike aircraft component and have a limited range due to their conventional propulsion. Consequently, the carriers would have to remain within the range of land-based ASW and early warning and surveillance aircraft such as the Tu-154 and Y-8 AWACS, because they lack their own fixed-wing ASW and EWACS assets, and would require underway replenishment from a fleet based supply vessel and fuel replenishment ship. It would appear that the new Type 901 fleet supply vessel currently under construction in southern Guangdong province is meant to service the fledgling carrier battle group. Details are sketchy, but the two vessels planned are estimated to be between 40,000 and 45,000 tons displacement, twice the displacement of the Type 903A fleet tankers currently undergoing sea trials.

Possible future strategic uses of a PLAN Carrier Battle Group include deployment in the South China Sea to effectively increase Chinese Area Control/Access Denial capabilities. Potential regional adversaries such as Taiwan, Vietnam and the Philippines would have to alter their strategic calculus to account for the added threat of a Chinese Carrier Battle Group in the region when considering any future warfare scenarios.

The armed forces of Taiwan have taken notice of the threat and conducted war games recently that involved the addition of a PLAN CBG in a hypothetical invasion of the island nation. It is most likely that the first three aircraft carriers are just a developmental stepping stone to a much more flexible, capable and powerful class of aircraft carrier. If it is one thing that the PLAN has shown in recent decades, it is committed and capable of developing and fielding modern, complex warships and weapons systems in its quest to stand on a level playing field with any potential adversary, chief amongst them the United States.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Video: China’s New Aircraft Carrier Force, Challenges US Naval Hegemony?

Video: China’s New Aircraft Carrier Force, Challenges US Naval Hegemony?

April 20th, 2016 by South Front

Posted in English
Comments Off on Video: China’s New Aircraft Carrier Force, Challenges US Naval Hegemony?

Jerusalem: City of Hate. Political Ideology has Created an “Unholy City”

April 20th, 2016 by Anthony Bellchambers

Palestinian militant group Hamas, against which the Israeli government has carried out a continuous attempt at regime change through an illegal, six year blockade of essential goods into Gaza, praised Monday’s blast that has injured at least 21, calling it “a natural reaction to Israeli crimes”.

As both sides continue to terrorise one another in what should be an international Holy City that affords free access to all faiths, the bus bombing of yesterday in south Jerusalem confirms Israel as a simmering cauldron of hate in which every resident, Jew and Arab, walks in fear.

The occupation has made hatred endemic through the failed ideology of Likud Zionism, personified by leader Binyamin Netanyahu who continues to treat the UN, the EU and world opinion, with contempt.

It is now probably too late for peace in our lifetime. The deliberate failure to establish an independent state for five million indigenous Palestinians, dispossessed of their land and homes, has ensured that no person in any part of the Israeli state can know whether they will be safe and uninjured by the end of any particular day.

Jerusalem has tragically become the unholy city as a result of a political ideology that has at its core a policy of apartheid denoted by the continuing illegal settlement of Israelis on occupied Palestinian land in violation of international law. However, there is a factor that is potentially even more dangerous that is the undeclared nuclear arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, controlled by the Likud government.

As for Hamas. It is a terrorist organisation in the same category as the former Irgun Zvai Leumi of 1947 the precursor of the present Likud Party of Binyamin Netanyahu: i.e. freedom fighters who will kill to achieve their political objectives.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Jerusalem: City of Hate. Political Ideology has Created an “Unholy City”

Selected Articles: Israel’s Active Cooperation with ISIS and Al Qaeda

April 19th, 2016 by Global Research News

Israel Actively “Cooperates” with the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Military Aid Channelled into Syria out of the Golan Heights

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 19 2016

Syria’s chief negotiator at the Geneva peace talks Bashar Ja’afri accused Israel of “cooperating” with the Islamic State and Al Nusra, an affiliate of al-Qaeda in the Golan Heights According to Ja’afari (quoted by RT): “This Israeli provocation confirms without…

Who is Behind Egypt’s “Gift” of Two Strategic Red Sea Islands to Saudi Arabia

By Abayomi Azikiwe, April 19 2016

During the week of April 11 it was revealed that the Egyptian government of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is proposing to turn over the strategic islands of Tiran and Sanafir to Saudi Arabia, located at the exit of the Gulf…

Beyond the Empire of Chaos: Building Ecology into the Economy. Life Capital Value, Base and Measure

By Prof. John McMurtry, April 18 2016

Professor John McMurtry Ecological and social science research increasingly demonstrate that ‘globalization’ is not what it seems. It does not produce more prosperity and reduce poverty for the world, but just the opposite. Ever more powerful transnational corporate money sequences…

The Grim Conditions of Jordan’s Immigration Detention Camps. Blatant Human Rights Violations

By Siraj Davis, April 18 2016

The following elucidates the grim conditions of immigration detention camps and the defective process of deportation existing within Jordan, which innocent migrant workers have endured for so long, in silence. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Tamkeen, Global Detention Project,…

America’s Plan B for Syria: Give Al-Qaeda More Powerful Weapons

By Stephen Gowans, April 18 2016

According to the Wall Street Journal [1], Washington has a Plan B for Syria. If the UN-mediated Geneva talks between the Syrian government and foreign-backed opposition fail to bring about the resignation of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad (i.e., the regime…

Propaganda for a Price: The NED, Reporters Without Borders and the 2016 Press Freedom Index.

By Timothy Alexander Guzman, April 18 2016

Posted in English
Comments Off on Selected Articles: Israel’s Active Cooperation with ISIS and Al Qaeda

Hollywood’s Johnny Depp and Animal Rights

April 19th, 2016 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

“At the end of it we’ve got a message that is going all around the world right now, it’s going off like a frog in a sock telling people that if you come to this nation and you don’t obey our laws, you’re in trouble.” -Barnaby Joyce, ABC News, Apr 19, 2016

Johnny Depp was happy to feign ice cool, valium laced casualness when talking about it last year. His pet Yorkshire terriers, named Pistol and Boo, have been the ongoing subject of disagreement with the bio-security minded Australian authorities. Their interest in the canines was sparked last year when Amber Heard, his wife, attempted an act of smuggling into the country via private jet. Husband Depp was engaged with yet another Pirates of the Caribbean project, and wife Heard did not deem it fitting to worry about the myriad quarantine regulations that characterise Australia’s border controls. The dogs were none the wiser.

In September last year, Depp, when cast a question on whether he was going to take his dogs for a gondola ride in Venice, answered with dismissive aplomb: “I killed my dogs and ate them, under direct orders of some kind of, I don’t know, sweaty, big-gutted man from Australia.”[1]

As easy as it is to be dismissive of Australia’s paunchy current deputy prime minister, crimson-red from sun, stress, and a suggestion of imbibing, a serious note prevails. Barnaby Joyce should not be cast aside as a relic of a provincial backwater indifferent to the fine lines of the law. If anything, he has come across as a crafted caricature, noisy about the egalitarian nature of the Australian spirit in the face of Yankee rough riding. This is Hollywood getting all too cute.

The ecological wars fought in Australia tend to be of a savage sort, cruel, merciless and genocidal in intensity and tendency. The fears are always the same: agro-economic threats, and the assault on biodiversity (more a secondary matter).

It is not necessarily that Australia’s quarantine and border controls are sensible, well-informed or decently applied. Feverish and arbitrary, they reveal a quotidian manner when it comes to concern about porous borders: some will be allowed through, while others won’t. By in large, they are determined to makes sure as few species and agents get through on their watch.

The premise is purely sovereign and patriotic: if we are going to destroy a country with unseen and undetected bacteria or viral phenomena, then let us be the ones to introduce it. Let Australian scientists and sagacious wise men and women of agriculture and the biosecurity field introduce the next malignant strain against resilient rabbits, or the next technique of destruction for the Indian Mynah Bird. Such killing and destruction is entirely a matter of Queen and country.

The overview by Joyce, who uttered his comments in the holy position of agriculture minister, was unvarnished in its simplicity. In foreign presses, such a statement would come across as almost childish. “There is a process if you want to bring animals: you get the permits, they go into quarantine and then you can have them.” Exemptions for “the sexiest man alive twice” would be corrosive to the rule of law – or at the very least the rule of quarantine.

Much of this sounds mindlessly corrosive, but Depp and Heard had to make their case clear. Hollywood had come up against an ecological test. And however egalitarian Joyce may claim to be in the business, the standards towards the dream factory are different to those afforded an asylum seeker who arrives by boat, or the Chinese visitor replete with swallow nests.

Some get the accommodation of a cruel detention centre, or a savagely punitive fine; wealthy actors, playing on innocence and a lack of malice, fare better. This is exactly what Heard and Depp found: feign and dissimulate in recording a video of apology for their actions, and get off virtually scot-free. “Australia is a wonderful island with a treasure trove of unique plants, animals and species,” begins Heard.[2]

Depp then chimes in: “It has to be protected.” What follows is a half-baked effort at condescending anthropology: “Australians are just as unique, both warm and direct… When you disrespect Australian law they will tell you firmly.”

Joyce’s response to this act of cinematic idiosyncrasy? “What I can say is although I don’t think he’ll get an academy award for his performance, the fact that he did it… he looked like he was auditioning for the Godfather.”

In what has become a prolonged episode of fancy and fame, Joyce dotted his interviews during the day with suggestions on how he might have actually filmed the effort more appropriately. Joyce the environmental protector had become a pseudo-director. “Do it again Johnny, do it with gusto mate, a little gusto.” To the Sunrise show on Channel Seven, he observed that Depp should “rise to the camera”.

An otherwise serious biosecurity matter that might have seen a ten year prison sentence had become cinematically farcical. No conviction was recorded against Heard’s name, despite her admission to one charge of falsifying border protection documents in smuggling the dogs into the country. The worst she had to deal with was a one-month good behaviour bond. As Joyce had to observe after the ruling, “The court determines the punishment of the court so I’m not going to start being in contempt of court.” Thus ended the war on terriers.

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

Notes:

[1] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-05/johnny-depp-jokes-he-killed-and-ate-dogs-pistol-and-boo/6752206

[2] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-19/depp’s-apology-like-‘an-audition-for-the-godfather’-joyce-says/7336736

Posted in English
Comments Off on Hollywood’s Johnny Depp and Animal Rights

Israeli Tourist Map of Jerusalem Rewrites History. Removes Palestinian Culture from the Map

April 19th, 2016 by Charlie Hoyle

The Israeli Ministry of Tourism is removing Palestinian culture from the map, in the most literal sense.

Last month, a new English-language guide to Jerusalem’s Old City was published, featuring fifty-seven tourist sites. Among them, only one was Muslim, five were Christian, while a whopping fifty-one were Jewish. Distributed for free at tourist offices, the map undermines Palestinian political claims to Jerusalem through a deliberate cultural whitewash that re-imagines the historically multi-ethnic and multi-religious city as exclusively Jewish.

According to a report from Haaretz, the map refers to the Dome of the Rock, the one Islamic site it mentions, by the Israeli, Hebrew terms of Temple Mount, Har Habait, and Mount Moriah. More alarmingly, the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest site in Islam and an important symbol of Palestinian nationalism, is labeled Solomon’s Stables.

These are paltry and distorted offerings, given the nearly 1,000 years of Islamic rule over Jerusalem.

Tourist map of Jerusalem omitting key non-Jewish sites. Olivier Fitoussi

Previous Map of Jerusalem

Among the news map’s many omitted Christian sites is the Lutheran Church of the Redeemer, whose bell tower is one of the most recognizable features of the Old City’s skyline. The fourteen stations along the infamous Via Dolorosa – the path Jesus walked before his crucifixion – are also unlisted, even though they are a major tourist attraction.

Similarly, St Anne’s Church, built around 1138 and a striking example of medieval architecture, is not featured. The church, which is a testament to the city’s layers of religious heritage, was converted into an Islamic school after Saladin conquered the city in the 12th century before again becoming a church during Ottoman rule. This amalgamated history is marked by an Arabic-language plaque above the church’s front door.

Ignoring these centuries of diversity, the map lists a number of Jewish sites that are either of no interest to foreign visitors or that have a decidedly political (rather than religious) meaning. This includes multiple Jewish settler homes in the Muslim Quarter, which were appropriated from their Palestinian inhabitants with the help of Ateret Cohanim – a group that works to create a Jewish majority in the Old City. It also includes various illegal Israeli settlements, such as Maale ha-Zeitim and Beit Orot in the Mount of Olives, that have no meaningful religious significance.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian neighborhoods of Ras al-Amud and al-Tur have been altogether excluded from the map, and replaced with green fields. This erasure of East Jerusalem’s Palestinian inhabitants, who make up 40% of Jerusalem’s population, and a large majority in the Old City, is further reflected in the font sizes used to mark various landmarks.According to Haaretz, larger fonts have been used to mark the Jewish Quarter while smaller ones have been used for the Christian, Muslim, and Armenian Quarters.

The Israeli Ministry of Tourism has defended the map and rejected calls to revise its content, saying it serves as an “excellent” guide for international tourists. This erasure of 2,000 years of non-Jewish history is, however, little more than a thinly veiled attempt to bolster Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem, in an on-going battle of narratives over the city’s identity.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Israeli Tourist Map of Jerusalem Rewrites History. Removes Palestinian Culture from the Map

Yemen: Al-Qaeda’s Expansion. Saudi-Led Military Actions Coordinated with those of AQAP Terrorists

April 19th, 2016 by South Front

Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has been rapidly expanding across Yemen since the Saudi-led intervention in the country. AQAP took control of five cities in past weeks and gained control of two additional provincial capitals in the past two months. The group is de-facto ally of the Saudi coalition in the conflict. U.S. airstrikes against AQAP look like a bad PR stunt amid the close collaboration with the group’s main ally in the country.

In February, AQAP secured its access to the key route linking its al Mukalla stronghold to Ja’ar. Its rapid expansion may mark the start of an effort to consolidate control over the area that it could govern. AQAP will most likely continue this effort by aiming to recapture Lawder and Mudia and set an access to al Bayda. Anti-al Houthi forces aligned with the Saudi-led coalition currently control the towns, but AQAP is operating in the area without problems. Indeed, AQAP is facing a little resistance from any Saudi-backed forces.

The Saudi-led coalition’s actions to combat the al Houthi-Saleh forces and re-establishing Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi’s government in Aden are clearly coordinated with AQAP. The group has been actively targeting the leadership of the popular resistance committees allied with the al Houthi-Saleh forces. An important fact is the same committees coordinated with the Yemeni military against the group in 2012. Thus, despite the coalition’s statements to combat AQAP, the Saudi-led forces will unlikely open a front against their ally.

American PR actions, called “countering AQAP”, will not halt AQAP’s expansion. Limited number of airstrikes just maintain a semblance of the anti-terror campaign in the country. In turn, the US-supported gulf countries’ actions are setting the ground for further expansion of the group. Despite the ceasefire, the Yemen war is far from its over. AQAP, meanwhile, is strengthening the military capabilities and consolidating gains on the ground.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Yemen: Al-Qaeda’s Expansion. Saudi-Led Military Actions Coordinated with those of AQAP Terrorists

Venezuela’s Opposition: Attacking Its Own People

April 19th, 2016 by Eric Draitser

The corporate media would have you believe that Venezuela is a dictatorship on the verge of political and economic collapse; a country where human rights crusaders and anti-government, democracy-seeking activists are routinely rounded up and thrown in jail. Indeed, the picture from both private media in Venezuela, as well as the mainstream press in the U.S., is one of a corrupt and tyrannical government desperately trying to maintain its grip on power while the opposition seeks much-needed reforms. In fact, the opposite is true.

The sad reality of Venezuela is that it is the Bolivarian Revolution that is being undermined, targeted, and destabilized. It is the Socialist Party, its leftist supporters (and critics), Chavista activists and journalists, and assorted forces on the Left that are being victimized by an opposition whose singular goal is power. This opposition, now in the majority in the National Assembly, uses the sacrosanct terminology of “freedom,” “democracy,” and “human rights” to conceal the inescapable fact that it has committed, and continues to commit, grave crimes against the people of Venezuela in the service of its iniquitous agenda, shaped and guided, as always, by its patrons in the United States.

This so-called opposition – little more than the political manifestation of the former ruling elites of Venezuela – wants nothing less than the total reversal of the gains of the Bolivarian Revolution, the end of Chavismo, and the return of Venezuela to its former status as oil colony and wholly owned subsidiary of the United States. And how are these repugnant goals being achieved? Economic destabilization, street violence and politically motivated assassinations, and psychological warfare are just some of the potent weapons being employed.

Making the Economy Scream

In what is perhaps the most infamous example of U.S. imperialism in Latin America in the last half century, the Nixon administration, led by Henry Kissinger, orchestrated the 1973 overthrow of Salvador Allende, the Socialist president of Chile. In declassified CIA documents, it has been revealed that President Nixon famously ordered U.S. intelligence to “make (Chile’s) economy scream,” a reference to the need to undermine and destabilize the Chilean economy using both U.S. financial weapons, and a powerful business elite inside Chile, in order to pave the way for either the collapse of the government or a coup d’etat. Sadly, U.S. efforts proved successful, leading to a brutal dictatorship that lasted nearly two decades.

The same effort is currently underway in Venezuela, where the economic difficulties the country is facing can be directly attributed to the insidious efforts of Venezuela’s right-wing opposition, and its backers in the United States. While corporate media reports over the last two years have shown viscerally shocking images of empty store shelves, blaming supply problems on the incompetence and corruption of the Maduro government, none of the stories bother to examine the question of why supplies have dwindled in the way they have.

The economic difficulties the country is facing can be directly attributed to the insidious efforts of Venezuela’s right-wing opposition, and its backers in the United States.

There is analysis pointing to corruption, an important problem to be tackled, to be sure, as well as lack of access to capital, and myriad other issues. But never does one find the real crux of the problem being discussed: supply and distribution remains in the hands of the right-wing elites whose interests are served by making life unbearable for the masses of poor and working people.

As renowned economist and former Venezuelan ambassador to the United Nations, Julio Escalona explained in Caracas on the eve of the December 2015 elections which ushered the right-wing back into the National Assembly:

“The majority of Venezuela’s imports and distribution networks are in the hands of the elite … Many of the goods needed for Venezuelan consumption are diverted to Brazil and Colombia. We are experiencing manufactured scarcity, a crisis deliberately induced as a means of destabilization against the government … This is psychological war waged against the people of Venezuela in an attempt to intimidate them into abandoning the government and the socialist project entirely.”

The significance of this point cannot be overstated, as the lack of basic necessities, coupled with daily obstacles such as long lines at supermarkets, is enough to bring hardened Chavista activists, let alone ordinary Venezuelans, to question or even abandon the political project. And that is precisely the goal – make the economy scream, so the Chavistas will shut their mouths.

Of course, there’s little doubt that the scarcity of goods is largely manufactured for political ends. One need only look at the conspicuous reappearance of goods in the immediate aftermath of the right-wing Unity Roundtable victory in the December 2015 elections to see how connected the supply problems are with political agendas. Additionally, massive hoarding of basic consumer goods in warehouses owned by prominent Venezuelan business interests sheds added light on the lengths to which the right-wing opposition and elites will go to make their own country’s economy scream.

And then there’s the economic elephant in the room: oil. According to OPEC figures, oil revenue accounts for roughly 95 percent of Venezuela’s export earnings, with the energy sector comprising roughly a quarter of the gross domestic product. In eighteen months, from April 2014 to January 2016, the price per barrel of crude oil has dropped from US$108 to under US$30, a drop of nearly 75 percent. This price collapse has devastated Venezuela’s economy as oil revenue is needed to provide everything from basic services to the continuation of the public housing mission. And while President Maduro has refused to implement austerity, the drop has undeniably impacted the overall economy.

But is this price collapse merely the product of “simple economics” as the New York Times recently wrote? Or is it yet another orchestrated assault on oil-producing nations targeted by the U.S.? Russian President Vladimir Putin certainly implied that in late 2014 as the oil plunge took shape. Putin stated, “There’s lots of talk about what’s causing (the lowering of the oil price). Could it be the agreement between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to punish Iran and affect the economies of Russia and Venezuela? It could.” Indeed, the collapse of oil couldn’t have come at a more opportune time for the U.S. globally, or for the U.S. proxy opposition inside Venezuela, as the effects of the plunge had obvious and immediate political ramifications.

One should also include hyper-speculation against Venezuela’s currency on the list of economic weapons being employed. Everything from the removal of currency and commodities out of the country, to the fostering and promotion of black market currency exchanges, has driven inflation through the roof in the country. While economic policy and mismanagement indeed play a role in this, it is equally true that the bolivar is yet another victim of the economic war.

It would be very difficult for any country to manage to ride out the confluence of negative economic developments and domestic economic subversion that Venezuela has had to endure. But coupled with a campaign of political violence and psychological war, the destabilization has taken on new dimensions.

In the U.S., and throughout North America and Europe, when one hears of violence in Venezuela, it is almost always either in the context of street violence or alleged “brutal crackdowns” on political protesters. However, the real political violence is carried out by the right-wing opposition, its paramilitary allies, and their backers in the U.S.

Violence sends a very clear message throughout Venezuelan society: do not stand up for your rights, do not try to defend the Revolution.

Perhaps no targeted killing has had a greater impact on the country and the Revolution than the 2014 assassination of Robert Serra, a young, up-and-coming legislator from the PSUV who was murdered by individuals connected to former Colombian President and self-declared enemy of the Bolivarian Revolution, Alvaro Uribe. Serra was seen by many as the future of the PSUV and of the Chavista movement in the country. His murder was interpreted by millions as a direct assault on the Revolution and the future of the country.

Just this year, Venezuela has seen a number of other assassinations carried out by the same networks backed by the right wing and their international allies. The well-respected journalist and prominent Chavista Ricardo Duran was murdered outside his home in Caracas. Likewise, Fritz St. Louis, International Coordinator of the United Socialist Haitian Movement and Secretary General of the Haitian Cultural House Bolivariana de Venezuela, was assassinated. Recently, Venezuela also saw opposition “activists” in the western city of San Cristobal brutally run down two police officers after the “protesters” hijacked a bus.

Sadly, there are many more killings that could be listed here. Such political violence is yet another indication of the “dirty war” – to borrow a term all too familiar in Latin America – being waged against the Bolivarian Revolution and Venezuela’s government.

This sort of violence sends a very clear message throughout Venezuelan society: do not stand up for your rights, do not try to defend the Revolution.

And that message is continually hammered home by a right-wing media that is, in effect, the propaganda arm of the right-wing opposition and the United States. As author and investigative journalist Eva Golinger revealed in 2007, the U.S. funded a program to provide financial support to Venezuelan journalists hostile to Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution. This was a concerted effort aimed at influencing public opinion through the right-wing media, shaping the views of Venezuelans against their government. And that propaganda assault continues to this day, utilizing every possible means of disinformation and misinformation to turn the people of Venezuela against the Bolivarian Revolution, and against the socialist project.

The opposition and its U.S. patrons ceaselessly trumpet democracy and human rights, while having no regard for either in Venezuela. From quite literally taking food from the mouths of Venezuelans, to wantonly killing Chavistas and citizens alike, the opposition has proven itself to be not just reactionary and anti-democratic, but brazenly criminal.

In these times of political and economic turmoil in the Bolivarian Republic, one must recall just what exactly the so-called “opposition” is. And one must equally consider what sort of country Venezuela will become were they to be given even the slightest bit more power.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Venezuela’s Opposition: Attacking Its Own People

Who is Behind Egypt’s “Gift” of Two Strategic Red Sea Islands to Saudi Arabia

April 19th, 2016 by Abayomi Azikiwe

These islands have been under Egyptian administrative control since 1950 just two years after the founding of the State of Israel.

This decision which is subject to approval by the Egyptian parliament has generated much debate and opposition inside the North African state. Al-Sisi was compelled to address the questions surrounding the ownership and administration of the two Red Sea islands in a nationally televised speech on April 14.

In a speech delivered in front of political officials, intellectuals and journalists broadcast live on state television, Al-Sisi stressed that “We did not surrender our right, and we returned the right back to its people,” saying there are documents which prove the islands are Saudi.

The military leader turned civilian president in 2013-2014, rebuffed his critics echoing the broad rejection of the government actions, claiming “The way the issue has been addressed weakens Egypt’s position.” Al-Sisi argued that Egypt had only two choices in the matter involving the islands “either enter into a conflict with Saudi Arabia, or giving Saudi back its land and right. We will not infringe on anyone. Also, we will not give away our land to anyone, and will not take anyone’s land.”

Many observers of Egyptian politics believe that the parliament is aligned with the al-Sisi government and will vote in favor of the measure. Recognizing the broad opposition to the announcement, the president has warned Egyptians not to demonstrate against the decision.

Egyptian Prime Minister Sharif Ismail and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman endorsed the agreement to change the maritime borders between their two countries during a visit by Saudi monarch King Salman Bin Abdulaziz to Egypt the week prior to the statements by al-Sisi.

Israel and the United States Approves of the Decision

An article published in the Washington Post on April 13 reported that the decision by the Egyptian government was being supported by the State of Israel. The assessment of the writer, Ruth Eglash, indicated that the announced transfer of administrative control of the two islands illustrated the continuing cooperation between Tel Aviv and Riyadh in regard to the strategic interests of imperialism in the region.

Eglash noted

“The two countries (Israel and Saudi Arabia) have no formal ties, but there have been hints of quiet cooperation — or at least a strategic dialogue — over certain issues such as Iranian influence in the region. As analysts pondered the implications for Israel of Saudi control of the two islands — at the entrance to the Gulf of Aqaba, an important shipping route for Israelis and Jordanians — Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon told Israeli reporters that he had received official documentation that Saudi Arabia would continue to allow Israelis freedom of passage in the area.”

This same article continues saying Yaalon confirmed that Israel had been consulted before the transfer, which was apparently done by Egypt to reward Riyadh for its major financial help. Also emphasized by Eglash is that the “Israeli daily Haaretz” reported “the transfer plan needed the approval of Israel, the United States (because Washington helped broker the Egypt-Israel peace accord), and a multinational observer mission monitoring the islands.”

The islands are important in regard to the contested sovereignty and ownership of the Gulf of Aqaba, a major issue in international law for decades. The Gulf of Aqaba is located at the northern tip of the Red Sea, east of the Sinai Peninsula and west of the Arabian mainland. The coastline expands across four countries: Egypt, Israel, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

The 1967 six day war (June 5-10)between Israel and the regional states of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, was prompted in part due to the exercise of sovereignty by the-then government of President Gamal Abdel Nasser who blockaded the Straits of Tiran preventing Israeli shipping from passing through the Gulf of Aqaba beginning on May 23. Tel Aviv later launched an attack against Egypt which was backed by the U.S. administration of then President Lyndon B. Johnson.

In a speech to soldiers at an advanced Air Force headquarters in Sinai, President Nasser said any ships flying Israeli flags or transporting strategic materials would be forbidden to pass in and out of the Gulf past Sharm El Skeikh at the mouth of the Gulf. One week earlier on May 16, 1967, Nasser ordered the removal of the first United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai.

The UNEF had been established in the aftermath of the Suez Crisis of 1956 when the Egyptian government had nationalized the canal sparking the intervention of Egypt, France and Israel in a failed effort to overthrow Nasser.

Nasser declared on May 23 that

“We are now face to face with Israel and if they want to try their luck without Britain and France, we await them. The Israel flag will not pass through Aqaba Gulf and our sovereignty over the Gulf entrance is not negotiable. If Israel wants to threaten us with war they are welcome.” (sixdaywar.co.uk)

Nonetheless, after the death of Nasser in 1970 another war was fought in October 1973 when Egypt under President Anwar Sadat launched an attack in the Sinai to reclaim land captured by Israel in 1967. In the aftermath of the 1973 war another UNEF was deployed from October 1973 to July 1979.

During this period Egypt and Syria were committed to the liberation of Palestine and the defense of regional states from Israeli aggression. The Soviet Union supported Egypt politically and militarily in both the 1967 and 1973 wars.

Egyptian Dependency on Saudi Arabia and the U.S. Continues

Today Egypt’s military turned civilian regime is largely dependent upon economic and political support from Saudi Arabia and the United States. Washington supplies at least $1.3 billion in direct aid to the Egyptian government every year along with military equipment, advisors and intelligence sharing.

Even with the uprising against former President Hosni Mubarak resulting in his toppling, the successor to Sadat after his 1981 assassination, three subsequent Egyptian governments have continued their reliance on assistance from Washington and its allies in the region including the State of Israel.

Saudi Arabia has been instrumental in facilitating the dominance of U.S. foreign policy interests in the area. According to an article published by Bloomberg on January 4 of this year it says:

“Saudi Arabia agreed to provide Egypt with more than $3 billion in loans and grants to help its dollar-starved economy. The kingdom will loan $1.5 billion to develop the Sinai Peninsula and $1.2 billion to finance Egypt’s oil purchases, Egyptian Minister of International Cooperation Sahar Nasr told Bloomberg News from the Saudi capital, Riyadh. Egypt will also receive a $500 million grant for buying Saudi exports and products, she said, without providing further details. The loans are on favorable terms and will be formally signed on Tuesday, she said.”

This Egyptian decision involving the plan to relinquish control over Sinafir and Tiran to Saudi Arabia indicates that the existing foreign policy imperatives of Washington and Riyadh take precedent over the liberation of Palestine and the genuine independence of states in North Africa and the Middle East.

Within the military sphere the alliance is clearly illustrated through Egypt’s cooperation under Saudi and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) leadership in the yearlong war against the people of Yemen which has resulted in the deaths of at least 10,000 people and the displacement of millions of others.

Abayomi Azikiwe is editor at Pan-African News Wire

Posted in English
Comments Off on Who is Behind Egypt’s “Gift” of Two Strategic Red Sea Islands to Saudi Arabia

Media Pretend Not To Know About British Boots on the Ground in Libya

April 19th, 2016 by Craig Murray

Yesterday Philip Hammond, UK foreign secretary, visited a naval base in Tripoli to be shown docking facilities for British military vessels. The authoritative Jane’s Defence Weekly published that the 150 strong amphibious Special Purpose Task Group of commandos and special forces is in the Mediterranean on the amphibious warfare vessel Mounts Bay. Obviously purely a coincidence with Hammond’s visit!

Just as in Syria and in Yemen it will not be admitted that British forces are in combat. In classic Cold War fashion, they are “military advisers and trainers.” There is a specific development which disconcerts me in Yemen, where the SAS operatives supporting the devastating Saudi bombings of the Houthi population have been seconded to MI6. There is a convention that military operations are reported to Parliament and MI6 operations are not, so the sole purpose of screening the SAS as MI6 is to deceive the UK’s own parliament.

That of course only adds to the utter immorality of British support of the appalling Saudi bombing campaign. Britain’s supplying the arms to the Saudis and lending direct military assistance amounts to complicity in war crime.

Saudi Arabia pursued the overproduction of oil initially to force out high cost US fracking producers. That objective has largely been achieved with a subtantive fall in US production. But Saudi strategists have now been struck by the potential for continued low oil prices to cause pressure for the Russian budget. This was a key factor in the Saudi decision to block any moves towards OPEC production curbs. The Saudis are now obsessed with the notion of full Sunni control over Syria, and aim to pile economic pressure on Russia to achieve this. But it is by no means clear that the level of pain which would be required to force Putin to end military support for Assad, would not also put so much strain on the Saudi budget that it would risk destabilising the Saudi regime itself.

Just what could cause western elites to acknowledge that Saudi Arabia is the largest single problem in the Middle East, and that continued support of the House of Saud is entirely counterproductive, it is difficult to envisage. The problem of course is that what is bad for the world can be very profitable for the 1%.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Media Pretend Not To Know About British Boots on the Ground in Libya

Moby Prince, la pista Usa

April 19th, 2016 by Manlio Dinucci

«Mayday Mayday, Moby Prince, siamo in collisione, prendiamo fuoco! Ci serve aiuto!»: questo il drammatico messaggio trasmesso venticinque anni fa, alle 22:25:27 del 10 aprile 1991, dal traghetto Moby Prince, entrato in collisione, nella rada del porto di Livorno, con la petroliera Agip Abruzzo. Richiesta di aiuto inascoltata: muoiono in 140, dopo aver atteso per ore invano i soccorsi. Richiesta di giustizia inascoltata: da venticinque anni, i familiari chiedono invano la verità. Dopo tre inchieste e due processi. Eppure essa emerge prepotentemente dai fatti. Quella sera nella rada di Livorno c’è un intenso traffico di navi militari e militarizzate degli Stati uniti, che riportano alla base Usa di Camp Darby (limitrofa al porto) parte delle armi usate nella prima guerra del Golfo. Ci sono anche altre misteriose navi. La Gallant II (nome in codice Theresa), nave militarizzata Usa che, subito dopo l’incidente, lascia precipitosamente la rada di Livorno.

La 21 Oktoobar II della società Shifco, la cui flotta, donata dalla Cooperazione italiana alla Somalia ufficialmente per la pesca, viene usata per trasportare armi Usa e rifiuti tossici anche radioattivi in Somalia e per rifornire di armi la Croazia in guerra contro la Jugoslavia. Per aver trovato le prove di tale traffico, la giornalista Ilaria Alpi e il suo operatore Miran Hrovatin vengono assassinati nel 1994 a Mogadiscio in un agguato organizzato dalla Cia con l’aiuto di Gladio e servizi segreti italiani. Con tutta probabilità, la sera del 10 aprile, è in corso nella rada di Livorno il trasbordo di armi Usa che, invece di rientrare a Camp Darby, vengono segretamente inviate in Somalia, Croazia e altre zone, non esclusi depositi di Gladio in Italia (vedi blog di Luigi Grimaldi sul Moby Prince).

Quando avviene la collisione, chi dirige l’operazione – sicuramente il comando Usa di Camp Darby – cerca subito di cancellare qualsiasi prova. Ciò spiega una serie di «punti oscuri»: il segnale del Moby Prince, ad appena 2 miglia dal porto, che giunge fortemente disturbato; il silenzio di Livorno Radio, il gestore pubblico delle telecomunicazioni, che non chiama il Moby Prince; il comandante del porto Sergio Albanese, «impegnato in altre comunicazioni radio», che non guida i soccorsi e viene subito dopo promosso ammiraglio per i suoi meriti; la mancanza (o meglio sparizione) di tracciati radar e immagini satellitari, in particolare sulla posizione dell’Agip Abruzzo, appena arrivata a Livorno dall’Egitto stranamente in tempo record (4,5 giorni invece di 14); le manomissioni sul traghetto sotto sequestro, dove spariscono strumenti essenziali alle indagini. Così da far apparire quello del Moby Prince un banale incidente, anche per responsabilità del comandante. I familiari delle vittime sono riusciti ora a ottenere l’istituzione di una commissione parlamentare d’inchiesta, non solo per dare giustizia ai loro cari, ma per «chiudere un capitolo indegno della storia italiana». Capitolo che resterà aperto se la commissione limiterà come al solito l’inchiesta all’esterno di Camp Darby, la base Usa al centro della strage del Moby Prince. La stessa inquisita dai giudici Casson e Mastelloni nell’inchiesta sull’organizzazione golpista «Gladio».

Una delle basi Usa/Nato che – scrive Ferdinando Imposimato, presidente onorario della Suprema Corte di Cassazione – fornirono gli esplosivi per le stragi, da Piazza Fontana a Capaci e Via d’Amelio. Basi in cui «si riunivano terroristi neri, ufficiali della Nato, mafiosi, uomini politici italiani e massoni, alla vigilia di attentati». Il May Day del Moby Prince è il May Day della nostra democrazia.

Manlio Dinucci

Posted in Italiano
Comments Off on Moby Prince, la pista Usa

Moby Prince, a pista estadunidense

April 19th, 2016 by Manlio Dinucci

« Mayday, Mayday^{^[1]}, Moby Prince, nós estamos em colisão, e pegamos fogo! Necessitamos de ajuda! »: esta foi a dramática mensagem transmitida há 25 anos às 22:25:27 de 10 de abril de 1991, pela balsa Moby Prince, que se chocou, no ancoradouro do porto de Livorno, com o petroleiro Agip Abruzzo. O pedido de ajuda não foi escutado: morreram 140 pessoas, depois de terem esperado socorro em vão, durante horas. A demanda por justiça também não foi ouvida: há 25 anos, as famílias buscam em vão a verdade. Após três investigações e dois processos. Contudo, a verdade emerge imperiosamente dos fatos.

Naquela noite, havia no ancoradouro de Livorno um intenso tráfego de navios militares e militarizados dos Estados Unidos, que traziam de volta à base estadunidense de Camp Darby (limítrofe ao porto) uma parte das armas utilizadas na primeira guerra do Golfo.

Havia também outros misteriosos navios. O Gallant II (codinome Theresa), navio estaduidense militarizado que, imediatamente após o acidente, deixa precipitadamente o ancoradouro de Livorno. O 21 Oktoobar II da empresa Shifco, cuja frota, doada pela Cooperação italiana à Somália, oficialmente para pesca, foi utilizado para o transporte de armas estadunidenses e de dejetos tóxicos inclusive radiativos à Somália e para abastecer de armas a Croácia em guerra contra a Iugoslávia.

Por ter encontrado as provas desse tráfego, a jornalista Ilaria Alpi e seu cinegrafista Miran Hrovatin foram assassinados em 1994 em Mogadiscio numa emboscada organizada pela CIA com a ajuda da rede Gladio e dos serviços secretos italianos.

Com toda probabilidade, na noite de 10 de abril, no ancoradouro de Livorno estava em curso o transbordo de armas dos Estados Unidos que, ao invés de voltar a Camp Darby, foram secretamente enviadas à Somália, à Croácia e a outras zonas, sem excluir os depósitos da Gladio na Itália (ver o blog de Luigi Grimaldi sobre o Moby Prince^{^[2]}). Quando ocorre a colisão, os que dirigem a operação – certamente o comando estadunidense de Camp Darby – tenta imediatamente apagar todas as provas. Isto explica uma série de « zones de sombra »: o sinal do Moby Prince, a apenas duas milhas do porto, que chega com muitas interferências sonoras; o silêncio da Rádio Livorno, geradora pública de telecomunicações, que não chama o Moby Prince; o comandante do porto, Sérgio Albanese, « ocupado com outras comunicações de rádio », que não orienta o socorro e imediatamente depois é promovido a almirante por méritos; a falta (ou mais ainda, o desaparecimento) dos traçados de radar e imagens de satélites, em particular sobre a posição do Agip Abruzzo, que apenas tinha chegado do Egito a Livorno em um tempo estranhamente recorde (quatro dias e meio em vez de 14); os roubos na balsa sob sequestro, onde desapareceram os instrumentos essenciais às investigações. Ao ponto de fazer parecer que o Moby Prince sofreu um acidente banal, inclusive por responsabilidade do comandante.

As famílias das vítimas conseguiram no presente obter a instituição de uma comissão parlamentar de inquérito, não apenas para fazer justiça aos seus parentes, mas para « fechar um capítulo indigno na história italiana ». Capítulo que permanecerá aberto se a comissão limitar como habitualmente a investigação ao exterior de Camp Darby, a base estadunidense que está no centro do massacre do Moby Prince. A mesma que esteve sob investigação dos juízes Casson e Mastelloni no inquérito sobre a organização golpista « Gladio ». Uma das bases dos EUA e da Otan que – escreve Ferdinando Imposimato, presidente honorário da Corte Suprema de Cassação – forneceu explosivos para os massacres, desde o de Piazza Fontana aos de Capaci e Via d’Amelio^{^[3]}. Bases nas quais « se reuniam membros do terrorismo mais obscuro, oficiais da Otan, mafiosos, políticos italianos e maçons, às vésperas dos atentados ».

O Mayday do Moby Prince é o Mayday de nossa democracia.

Manlio Dinucci

Publicado em italiano : Il Manifesto

Traduzido por José Reinaldo Carvalho para Resistência.

^{^[1]} « Mayday » é uma expressão utilizada internationalmente nas comunicações de rádio e telefônicas para sinalizar que um avião ou um barco está acidentado.

^{^[2]} http://grimaldimobyprince.blogspot.fr/2009/04/moby-prince-dietro-il-naufragio.html

^{^[3]} Atentados de : Piazza Fontana em Milão, em dezembro de 1969 (17 mortos, 88 feridos): Capaci (autopista de Palermo), contra o juiz Falcone em maio de 1992 (assassinado com sua mulher e três agentes de sua escolta) ; Via d’Amelio em Palermo, em julho de 1992 contra o juiz Borsellino (assassinado com os cinco agentes de sua escolta)

– See more at: http://www.resistencia.cc/manlio-dinucci-moby-prince-a-pista-estadunidense/#sthash.GTFmiRIG.dpuf

Manlio Dinucci é jornalista e geógrafo italiano

Posted in Português
Comments Off on Moby Prince, a pista estadunidense

Crimes against Humanity: Israel Ambulance Paramedics Withhold Treatment to Wounded Palestinians

April 19th, 2016 by Jonathan Cook

There is mounting evidence that Israeli ambulance crews are withholding treatment from Palestinians injured during a wave of attacks over the past six months, according to rights groups.

Physicians for Human Rights in Israel, a medical watchdog group, found that wounded Palestinians had been left untreated for as long as two hours.

In some cases, it is believed medical teams failed to tend to the injuries of suspected attackers as revenge, in the expectation that they would die from their wounds.

In parallel, says the group, Israeli soldiers regularly deny Palestinian crews in the occupied territories access to injured Palestinians in violation of international agreements. Palestinian ambulances have been regularly fired on and paramedics attacked as they tried to reach the scene.

Physicians for Human Rights accused Israel’s leading medical bodies – the Israeli Medical Association, which lays down ethical codes, and Magen David Adom, which supervises ambulance services – of ignoring the evidence it has collected of such abuses.

“We have seen no serious response to our complaints, no investigations, not even an attempt to meet us. They don’t appear to want to give answers,” Mor Efrat, a researcher for the rights group, told Al-Jazeera.

Settler ambulance teams

Concern that some ambulance crews are adopting a policy of denying Palestinians treatment has been heightened by the increasing role of medical teams located in illegal Jewish settlements.

These paramedics appear to be openly flouting internationally established principles of neutrality that all medical staff are supposed to observe.

In December the leaders of United Hatzalah, a settler ambulance service implicated in several cases in which Palestinians have been refused treatment, visited a leading ultra-Orthodox rabbi, Chaim Kanievsky, to receive instructions on what to do with Palestinians injured during attacks.

According to a report on the settlers’ website Israel National News, Kanievsky told them that if the injured Palestinian “was in a life-threatening condition, they should leave him or her to die”. Other rabbis have made similar calls.

The issue of Israel’s treatment of injured Palestinians was thrust into the spotlight late last month when a soldier from the Israeli army’s medical corps was caught on video executing a badly injured Palestinian in the West Bank city of Hebron.

Abdel Fattah al-Sharif, aged 21, had been shot and wounded during a suspected knife attack on a checkpoint. Before the medical corps soldier, identified this week as Elor Azaria, executed him by firing a bullet into his head, al-Sharif was left bleeding on the ground for more than 10 minutes.

Both army medics and two civilian ambulance teams, one of them United Hatzalah, refused to treat him. After the video was publicised, Azaria was arrested.

On Monday, an Israeli military court charged the soldier with manslaughter and inappropriate military conduct. However, there has been an outpouring of support for him, from the Israeli public, politicians and rabbis.

Delaying treatment

Efrat, of Physicians for Human Rights, said the failure by both the Israeli Medical Association and Magen David Adom to speak out against abuses committed by Israeli medical staff created the climate that made possible the events in Hebron.

Leonid Eidelman, head of the Israeli Medical Association, told Al-Jazeera the criticisms were “unfair” and that his organisation had “stated clearly that no political or personal preferences should influence treatment” of wounded Palestinians.

The criticisms of ambulance crews follow a heated debate among Israel’s medical authorities about whether staff should abide by the Geneva Conventions, which require them to remain neutral at all times and prioritise treatment based solely on the severity of injuries.

ZAKA, an Israeli organisation of community medical volunteers, has backed members who refuse to treat Palestinians before Israeli Jews. By contrast, Eli Bein, the head of the Magen David Adom, has said he expects ambulance staff to follow international humanitarian law.

Nonetheless, Magen David Adom has justified the failure of its paramedics to treat al-Sharif in Hebron last month, claiming they were waiting for authorisation from the Israeli army.

Army commanders told the Haaretz newspaper the claim was unfounded and was being used as a “pretext for delaying treatment”.

The stance of the Israeli Medical Association has been equally ambivalent, according to critics.

In 2008 the Association adopted an ethical code – based on a Talmudic injunction that “Charity begins at home” – to treat Israelis before Palestinians. Under pressure from Physicians for Human Rights, the code was quietly revoked in December.

Doctors told the Times of Israel website that the Association was afraid of a political backlash if it publicised the change. “Whatever their official positions, these bodies are not speaking out clearly against violations of medical ethics. And they are certainly not taking any action,” Efrat said.

Palestinian crew attacked

In addition to last month’s incident in Hebron, Physicians for Human Rights have highlighted several other clear cases of medical violations.

One of the most disturbing relates to 19-year-old Muhannad Halabi, who was shot during an attack in the Old City of Jerusalem last October. Witnesses, including an Israeli medic, told the watchdog group that Halabi was left untreated for two hours before paramedics pronounced him dead.

Israeli soldiers fired stun grenades at a Palestinian crew that tried to reach him. A request from Physicians for Human Rights to Israel’s justice ministry to investigate the incident has gone unanswered.

In a second incident, a week later in the Old City, a video shows Palestinian paramedics being beaten and pushed away as they try to reach Basel Sidr, aged 19. Their medical equipment was also damaged. Witnesses said an Israeli ambulance crew looked on for 20 minutes before a medic approached Sidr to check his pulse and declare him dead.

In another video, paramedics are shown denying treatment to Sa’ad al-Atrash, who was shot at least six times last October by soldiers at a checkpoint in Hebron. Witnesses say he was left for half an hour lying in the street before being evacuated to hospital, where he died of his wounds.

There are strong suspicions that al-Atrash was shot by a trigger-happy soldier, in what Amnesty International called an “especially egregious” example of unlawful killing.

In another case, last November, 21-year-old Mohammed al-Shawbaki was left untreated by three Israeli ambulance crews for 30 minutes, while a Palestinian crew was blocked from approaching.

Efrat said they had also filed complaints to the Israeli police and army about 18 incidents in the past six months where Palestinian medical teams had been prevented from caring for the wounded. Only one investigation had been opened.

Pressure for action

Euro-Med Monitor, an international human rights group based in Geneva, has collected evidence of a further four cases where Israeli paramedics violated the Geneva Conventions by denying Palestinians treatment.

They include Ahmed Manasreh, a 13-year-old Palestinian accused of a stabbing attack in East Jerusalem last October. Videos show a Magen David Adom ambulance driving past Manasreh as he lay bleeding in the street, having earlier been run down by an Israeli vehicle.

Evidence of denial of treatment is likely to add to the pressure on two global organisations – the World Medical Association, and the International Committee of the Red Cross – to investigate the actions of their Israeli partner organisations.

A group of UK doctors launched a campaign earlier this year demanding that the World Medical Association expel the Israeli Medical Association for failing to act against Israeli doctors involved in the torture of Palestinians.

A number of reports by human rights groups suggest that, in violation of medical ethics, Israeli doctors are treating Palestinians who have been tortured in Israel’s prisons and interrogation centres. The documented abuses range from physical and sexual assaults.

A spokesman for the World Medical Association told Al-Jazeera it was not aware of the allegations and would be discussing them with the Israeli Medical Association.

The International Committee of the Red Cross said Magen David Adom was an “independent” emergency service and any issues would be “addressed internally” by the movement.

Mustafa Barghouti, a Palestinian politician and physician, said there was overwhelming evidence that Israeli ambulance crews were “consistently and systematically” denying treatment to wounded Palestinians.

“Israel should be removed from the [International Committee of the] Red Cross for these violations until it is prepared to follow internationally accepted codes of conduct,” said Barghouti.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Crimes against Humanity: Israel Ambulance Paramedics Withhold Treatment to Wounded Palestinians

Vidéo- Escalation nucleare in Europa

April 19th, 2016 by Manlio Dinucci

Posted in Italiano
Comments Off on Vidéo- Escalation nucleare in Europa

Escalation nucleare in Europa

April 19th, 2016 by Manlio Dinucci

La Casa Bianca è «preoccupata» perché caccia russi hanno sorvolato a distanza ravvicinata una nave Usa nel Baltico, effettuando un «attacco simulato»: così riportano le nostre agenzie di informazione. Non informano però di quale nave si trattasse e perché fosse nel Baltico.

È la USS Donald Cook, una delle quattro unità lanciamissili dislocate dalla U.S. Navy per la «difesa missilistica Nato in Europa». Tali unità, che saranno aumentate, sono dotate del radar Aegis e di missili intercettori SM-3, ma allo stesso tempo di missili da crociera Tomahawk a duplice capacità convenzionale e nucleare. In altre parole, sono unità da attacco nucleare, dotate di uno «scudo» destinato a neutralizzare la risposta nemica.

La Donald Cook, partendo l’11 aprile dal porto polacco di Gdynia, incrociava per due giorni ad appena 70 km dalla base navale russa di Kaliningrad, ed è stata per questo sorvolata da caccia ed elicotteri russi. Oltre che le navi lanciamissili, lo «scudo» Usa/Nato in Europa comprende, nella conformazione attuale, un radar «su base avanzata» in Turchia, una batteria missilistica terrestre Usa in Romania, composta da 24 missili SM-3, e una analoga che sarà installata in Polonia.

Mosca avverte che queste batterie terrestri, essendo in grado di lanciare anche missili nucleari Tomahawk, costituiscono una chiara violazione del Trattato Inf, che proibisce lo schieramento in Europa di missili nucleari a medio raggio.

Che cosa farebbero gli Stati uniti – che accusano la Russia di provocare con i sorvoli «una inutile escalation di tensioni» – se la Russia inviasse unità lanciamissili lungo le coste statunitensi e installasse batterie missilistiche a Cuba e in Messico?

Nessuno se lo chiede sui grandi media, che continuano a mistificare la realtà. Ultima notizia nascosta: il trasferimento di F-22 Raptors, i più avanzati cacciabombardieri Usa da attacco nucleare, dalla base di Tyndall in Florida a quella di Lakenheath in Inghilterra, annunciato l’11 aprile dal Comando europeo degli Stati uniti. Dall’Inghilterra gli F-22 Raptors saranno «dispiegati in altre basi Nato, in posizione avanzata per massimizzare le possibilità di addestramento ed esercitare la deterrenza di fronte a qualsiasi azione destabilizzi la sicurezza europea».

È la preparazione all’imminente schieramento in Europa, Italia compresa, delle nuove bombe nucleari Usa B61-12 che, lanciate a circa 100 km di distanza, colpiscono l’obiettivo con una testata «a quattro opzioni di potenza selezionabili». Questa nuova arma rientra nel programma di potenziamento delle forze nucleari, lanciato dall’amministrazione Obama, che prevede tra l’altro la costruzione di altri 12 sottomarini da attacco (7 miliardi di dollari l’uno, il primo già in cantiere), armato ciascuno di 200 testate nucleari.

È in sviluppo, riporta il New York Times (17 aprile), un nuovo tipo di testata, il «veicolo planante ipersonico» che, al rientro nell’atmosfera, manovra per evitare i missili intercettori, dirigendosi sull’obiettivo a oltre 27000 km orari. Russia e Cina seguono, sviluppando armi analoghe.

Intanto Washington raccoglie i frutti. Trasformando l’Europa in prima linea del confronto nucleare, sabota (con l’aiuto degli stessi governi europei) le relazioni economiche Ue-Russia, con l’obiettivo di legare indissolubilmente la Ue agli Usa tramite il Ttip. Spinge allo stesso tempo gli alleati europei ad accrescere la spesa militare, avvantaggiando le industrie belliche Usa le cui esportazioni sono aumentate del 60% negli ultimi cinque anni, divenendo la maggiore voce dell’export statunitense.

Chi ha detto che la guerra non paga?

Manlio Dinucci

Vidéo Pandora TV

Posted in Italiano
Comments Off on Escalation nucleare in Europa

Real Hypocrisy versus Real Change: Canada’s PM Trudeau Backs Arms Deal with Saudi “Lords of Terrorism”

April 19th, 2016 by Mark Taliano

“Reverse Projection”, as described by Canadian professor John McMurtry, is a staple of propagandists as the imperial West imposes its toxic agenda of war and poverty domestically, and throughout the world.

Public Relations liars are the new myth makers who create the new stories to sell to an increasingly anesthetized public.

All of the lies serve to entrench the transnational oligarch class and to deny wealth, freedom, democracy, and Life itself to the rest of us.

Canada’s governing party, the Liberals, led by the ever charismatic Justin Trudeau, is a perfect front for a criminal agenda where black is sold as white, and white is sold as black. The Liberal party will have a long tenure.

Justin Trudeau’s defense of the sale of military equipment to Wahhabi Saudi Arabia as a matter of “principle” will no doubt solidify his glowing reputation.

Not only is Wahhabi Saudi Arabia a chief financier for NATO’s criminal terrorist proxies who are chopping their way through theMiddle East and Africa, but its degenerate ideology, a deformed misinterpretation of Koranic teachings, will also continue to flourish, thanks to countries like Canada, that grow and sustain the spiritual cancer, to the detriment of humanity, and the benefit of the few.

Justin Trudeau’s self-professed “feminism” is a perfect veneer to cover the depravities of Canada’s misogynist foreign policy.

Felicity Arbuthnot describes in “United Nations Farce: Saudi Arabia to Head UN Human Rights Council,” some of the highlights of Saudi Arabia’s domestic human rights record:

“By 15th June this year executions reached one hundred ‘far exceeding last year’s tally and putting (the country) on course for a new record’ according to The Independent (15th June.) The paper adds that the Kingdom is set to beat it’s own grisly, primitive record of one hundred and ninety two executions in 1995.

The paper notes that: ‘ …the rise in executions can be directly linked to the new King Salman and his recently-appointed inner circle …’

In August 2014, Human Rights Watch reported nineteen executions in seventeen days – including one for ‘sorcery.’ Adultery and apostasy can also be punished by death.”

It gets better. Arbuthnot explains:

“At home women are forbidden: ‘from obtaining a passport, marrying, traveling, accessing higher education without the approval of a male guardian.’ (HRW Report, 2014.) Saudi is also of course, the only country in the world where women are forbidden to drive.”

The Axis of Evil, to which Canada so willingly belongs, includes Apartheid Israel , the Persian Gulf monarchies, and the US-led NATO terror organization. Each of these polities has declining rights and freedoms at home which serve as a foundation for the destruction that the Western Axis spreads globally, largely beneath the radar of domestic public perception.

The “matter of principle”, as described by Trudeau, is like a “code of honour” between arms-trafficking mafia clans. The “principle” being honored will be instrumental in the deaths of more innocent people in Yemen , Syria, and beyond. It will also be an instrument for Wahhabism, and against democracy and the rule of law globally.

If, god forbid, the West’s terror proxies win in Syria, then the democratic government of Syria will be replaced by a barbaric puppet regime beholden to the West.

Fortunately, the Syrian people have witnessed the depravities of the West’s destruction of Iraq, its demolition of Libya, and its nazification of Ukraine, so they will be less likely to compromise with the forces of evil that they are defeating at this very moment. Nor should they compromise.

In an article entitled “Syrian 2016 Elections Defy US and NATO ‘Regime Change’ Agenda,” Canadian peace activist Ken Stone describes his observations of the current Syrian elections in these words:

“On the walls of the buildings along the narrow streets were plastered hundreds upon hundreds of election posters. Over the streets were strung banners showing small and large groupings of well-dressed candidates representing each slate. Clearly, the 250 parliamentary seats were being hotly contested.”

Later, he explains:

“Having worked on many Canadian elections, I can attest to the fact that Syrian elections are different from Canadian elections. But that doesn’t mean they don’t represent the national will, as claimed by US State Department.

After all, with the Canadian first-past-the-post system, the representation of political parties in the House of Commons in Ottawa bears little resemblance to their share of the popular vote. And, in Canada, we have, in effect, a two party system. Only the big business-friendly Liberals and Conservatives have ever held power in our country in 150 years.”

“Real change,” as demonstrated by Canada’s covert foreign policy, means more totalitarianism, more misogyny, more terrorism, more displaced peoples, more refugees, more death, and more destruction.

This isn’t exactly the “real change” that the public relations mandarins sold to Canadians.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Real Hypocrisy versus Real Change: Canada’s PM Trudeau Backs Arms Deal with Saudi “Lords of Terrorism”

“Neoliberal Restoration”: Hybrid War Hyenas Tear Brazil Apart

April 19th, 2016 by Pepe Escobar

The gloomy and repulsive night when the female President of the 7th largest economy in the world was the prey of choice fed to a lynch mob of hyenas in a drab, provincial Circus Maximus will forever live in infamy.

By 367 votes for and 137 against, the impeachment/coup/regime change-light drive against Dilma Rousseff cleared the Brazilian Congressional circus and will now go to the Senate, where a “special commission” will be set up. If approved, Rousseff will then be sidelined for 180 days and a low rent tropical Brutus, Vice-President Michel Temer, will ascend to power until the Senate’s final verdict.

This lowly farce should serve as a wake-up call not only to the BRICS but to the whole Global South. Who needs NATO, R2P (“responsibility to protect”) or “moderate rebels” when you can get your regime change just by tweaking a nation’s political/judicial system?

The Brazilian Supreme Court has not analyzed the merit of the matter – at least not yet. There’s no solid evidence anywhere Rousseff committed a “crime of responsibility”; she did what every American President since Reagan has done – not to mention leaders all across the world; along with her Vice-President, the lowly Brutus, Rousseff got slightly creative with the federal budget’s numbers.

The coup has been sponsored by a certified crook, president of the lower house Eduardo Cunha; holder of 11 illegal accounts in Switzerland, listed in the Panama Papers and under investigation by the Supreme Court. Instead of lording over near-illiterate hyenas in a racist, largely crypto-fascist circus, he should be behind bars. It beggars belief that the Supreme Court has not turbo-charged legal action against Cunha. The secret of his power over the circus is a gigantic corruption scheme lasting many years featuring companies/corporations contributing to his and others’ campaign financing.

And that’s the beauty of a soft coup/regime change-light/color revolution chapter of Hybrid War when staged in such a dynamically creative nation such as Brazil. The hall of mirrors yields a political simulacrum that would have driven deconstructionists Jean Baudrillard and Umberto Eco, if alive, green with envy; a Congress crammed with fools/patsies/traitors/crooks who are already being investigated for corruption has conspired to depose a President who is not under any formal corruption investigation – and has not committed any “crime of responsibility”.

The neoliberal restoration

Still, without a popular vote, the – massively rejected – tropical Brutus twins, Temer and Cunha, will find it impossible to govern, even though they would perfectly incarnate the project of the – immensely arrogant/ignorant – Brazilian elites; a neoliberal triumph, with Brazilian “democracy” trampled down six feet under.

It’s impossible to understand what happened at the Circus Maximus this Sunday without knowing there’s a gaggle of Brazilian political parties that are seriously threatened by the non-stop overspill of the Car Wash corruption investigation. To ensure their survival, Car Wash must be “suspended”; and it will, under the bogus “national unity” proposed by lowly Brutus Temer.

But first, Car Wash must produce a high-profile scalp. And that has to be Lula in jail – compared to which the crucifixion of Rousseff is an Aesop fable. Corporate media, led by the noxious Globo empire, would hail it as the ultimate victory, and nobody would care about Car Wash’s enforced retirement.

The 54 million-plus who voted for Rousseff’s reelection in 2014 voted wrong. The overall “project” is a government without vote and without people; a Brazilian-style parliamentary system, without bothering with pesky “elections” and crucially, including very “generous” campaign financing flexibility not bound to incriminate powerful companies/corporations.

In a nutshell, the ultimate aim is to perfectly “align” the Brazilian Executive, Legislative, Judiciary and corporate media interests. Democracy is for suckers. Brazilian elites remote controlling the hyenas know very well that if Lula runs again in 2018, he will win.

And Lula has already warned; he won’t buy any “national unity” crap, he’ll be back in the streets fighting whatever illegitimate government pops up.

We’re now open for plundering

As it stands, Rousseff runs the risk of becoming the first major casualty of the NSA-originated, two-year-long Car Wash investigation. The President, admittedly an incompetent economic manager and lacking the right stuff of a master politician, believed that Car Wash – which practically prevented her from governing – would not reach her because she is personally honest. Yet Car Wash’s not so hidden agenda was always regime change. Who cares if in the process the nation is left on the verge of being controlled exactly by many of those indicted by the anti-corruption drive?

Lowly Brutus Temer – a vanity case version of Argentina’s Macri – is the perfect conduit for the implementation of regime change. He represents the powerful banking lobby, the powerful agribusiness lobby and the powerful federation of industries in Brazil’s economic leader, the state of Sao Paulo.

The neo-developmentalist project for Latin America – uniting at least some of the local elites, invested in developing internal markets, in association with the working classes – is now dead, because what may be defined as sub-hegemonic, or peripheral, capitalism is mired in crisis after the 2008 Wall Street-provoked debacle. What’s left is just neoliberal restoration. TINA (“there is no alternative”). This implies, in the Brazilian case, the savage reversion of Lula’s legacy; social policies, technological policies, the drive to globally expand large, competitive Brazilian companies, more public universities, better salaries.

In a message to the nation, Brutus Temer admitted as much; “hope” after impeachment will be absolutely swell for “foreign investment”, as in let them plunder the colony at will; back to the trademark history of Brazil since 1500.

So Wall Street, US Big Oil and the proverbial “American interests” win this round at the circus – thanks to the, once again proverbial, vassal/comprador elites. Chevron execs are already salivating with the prospect of laying their hands on the pre-salt oil deposits; that was already promised by a trusted vassal in the Brazilian opposition.

The coup goes on. The real hyenas haven’t yet pounced. So it’s far from over.

Posted in English
Comments Off on “Neoliberal Restoration”: Hybrid War Hyenas Tear Brazil Apart

Israel Actively “Cooperates” with the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Military Aid Channelled into Syria out of the Golan Heights

April 19th, 2016 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Syria’s chief negotiator at the Geneva peace talks Bashar Ja’afri accused Israel of “cooperating” with the Islamic State and Al Nusra, an affiliate of al-Qaeda in the Golan Heights

According to Ja’afari (quoted by RT):

“This Israeli provocation confirms without any doubt the cooperation between Israel and terrorists of Daesh (Isis) and Nusra Front on the demarcation line between where the Golan is and UN troops are positioned.

“It is no coincidence at all that this Israeli escalation was accompanied by irresponsible statements by members of the so-called Saudi delegation at talks here in Geneva,” Ja’afari added, referring to the main opposition group.

The statement of Syria’s envoy to the peace talks confirms something which is known and documented. Israel alongside Saudi Arabia and Turkey is a State Sponsor of Terrorism.

Israel does not deny that they have been supporting Al Qaeda out of the Golan Heights from the very outset of the war on Syria (March 2011). The occupied Golan Heights is being used as a military and logistics hub in support of Al Qaeda. Military aid and supplies are channeled into Syria through the occupied Golan Heights.

Prime minister Netanyahu confirmed in a semi-official statement that Israel is supporting Al Nusrah fighters out of the Golan Heights. The IDF top military brass acknowledged that “global jihad elements inside Syria” including foreign mercenaries are supported by Israel.

In 2014, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s visited the IDF field hospital in the occupied Golan heights, which is being used to treat wounded Al Nusrah mercenaries. The Jerusalem Post acknowledged that the hospital is being used to support the jihadist insurgency. (JP, February 19, 2014)

While the IDF field hospital was established to support Al Qaeda in an operation coordinated by IDF Special Forces, Netanyahu casually accused Iran for “its support of terrorist groups around the world”. (JP, February 19, 2014)

Netanyahu toured the Golan Heights with Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz.

At a lookout point overlooking the Syrian border, OC Northern Command Maj.-Gen. Yair Golan briefed Netanyahu on the presence of global jihad elements inside Syria, as well as on the work being done to fortify the Israeli-Syrian border fence. (Ibid)

In the image below:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon next to a wounded mercenary [terrorist], Israeli military field hospital at the occupied Golan Heights’ border with Syria, 18 February 2014″ (emphasis added)

Moreover, it is worth recalling that in 2011 at the outset of the war in Syria, NATO (with the support of Israel) became actively involved in the recruitment of Islamic fighters. Ironically, this was confirmed by the Israeli media. Reminiscent of the enlistment of the Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war, NATO headquarters in Brussels in liaison with the Turkish High command, according to Israeli intelligence sources, was involved in the enlisting of thousands of terrorists:

“Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (Debkafile, August 31, 2011 emphasis added).

Posted in English
Comments Off on Israel Actively “Cooperates” with the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Military Aid Channelled into Syria out of the Golan Heights

A French Teacher and France’s State of Emergency

April 18th, 2016 by Catherine Shakdam

If France has often presented itself as a modern democracy, a Republic which values have revolved around the guarantee and protection of personal freedom and free speech, such claims no longer reflect ground realities.

France today is an empty shell of a Republic, a pretence democracy governed by an elite which has played terror, fear, and prejudices to better exert its control over a gullible populace. For all its grand-standing on despotism, France today eerily resembles those dictatorships it once slammed for being illegitimate.

And if France once did in fact held Freedom and Liberty in the palm of its Republican hand, its new state of emergency long disappeared any hope of Justice for those who still dare stand as free men.

Under the ever-suffocating shadow of the Elysee, France has learnt that any murmur against the state, any contention, and any criticism can, and will be prosecuted.

Saleh Lamrani stands testimony to France’s new dystopian reality. In February 2016, Professor Salah Lamrani, a French Literature Middle School tenured teacher in the Paris popular suburb of Seine Saint Denis was unjustly, and unlawfully suspended, following phantasmagorical claims he espoused radical tendencies.

Mr Lamrani, whose professional file remains without so much as a blemish, exemplifies France’s descent into ultra-national fascism – this new sense that France needs to stand puritan and absolute in the declaration of its values – even if it means … especially if it means, silencing those who still dare live pluralism as a God given right.

It all began with one teacher’s love for writing and a passion for the French language. A tradition which gifted the world of the likes of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile Zola and Baudelaire has risen today a tyrant, suppressing thoughts, words and philosophies, wielding fear and repression to better bully so-called potential dissidents into not just silence but intellectual uniformity.

A free thinker, Mr Lamrani came to clash with a narrow-minded head-teacher, both a product and a tool of the “system”. Mrs Khadidja Bot, his head-teacher did not approve you see of his writings, his ideals, and the ideas he explored and debated on his own personal blog. Never mind the fact that, she, had not right, and more importantly no jurisdiction over his thoughts.

Never mind that, she, a person of authority working for the Republic, should have abided by those principles which read still: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

For he, a teacher of the Republic weighted on matters of politics and foreign policy, he was castigated by a system which demands intellectual submission.

Because Mr Lamrani openly challenged France’s state of emergency, a zealot Mrs Bot took it upon herself to “teach” him a very republican lesson – that freedom comes at a price … a heavy one at that!

In an interview I conducted with him on February 14, Mr Lamrani explained how his troubles stemmed from the implacable authoritarianism his school’s most senior figureheads demonstrated against his person.

“I was suspended without any investigation and in spite of my formal complaint for moral harassment and slander due to my school authoritarian management – who didn’t like my Union and blogger activities, and who accused me publicly of being a dangerous terrorist.”

In times such as ours such claims should not be taken lightly as they can result in dramatic repercussions – not the least Mr Lamrani’s personal safety, and freedom.

Mr Lamrani’s “crimes” were that he denounced state repression, while proclaiming personal political truths on a platform which was his own, outside school hours, and without any effect on his work as a teacher.

Because one head-teacher, Mrs Khadidja Bot, imagined herself a “keeper” of the establishment, a self-appointed tyrant of the national education complex, one man’s life and future now stand in jeopardy. Because, she, a person of authority, chose to slander and label, to better assert her “power”, a valuable teacher has been shunned by his community and vilified by his colleagues. Without so much as a shred of evidence, without the authorities ever bothering to open an inquiry into his alleged “radicalism”, one man was stripped of his professional dignity.

Mr Lamrani’s calls for justice today have been answered with despicable brutality, and intolerable cruelty.

In the throes of a legal battle against Mrs Bot, Mr lamrani has been systematically picked upon, lied about, and harassed.

To better rationalize the illegitimacy of her position against Mr Lamrani, and because this one tenacious teacher has persisted in his silent vigil t before the school gate, Mrs Bot resorted to the use of violence, hoping to co-opt her victim into breaking the law.

Students have been threatened should they speak to him, students have faced disciplinary actions for supporting him, parents have been bullied by the school administration for demanding an explanation, and lies have been cultivated so that Mr lamrani could be dismissed as a dangerous dissident – a nut case no worth listening to, let alone believe.

Only Mr Lamrani is not crazy, and he is not the violent fascist Mrs Bot has been so keen on portraying him as … It is, she, who acted a tyrant. It is she, who chose to shut down the school, and thus disrupt students’ education so that she could drive her rejection of Mr Lamrani further still.

The victim of an unjust system, and a clear case of abuse of power, Mr Lamrani is being painted as the guilty party for standing up to a bully.

It is she, who has yet to anchor her decision to dismiss him in the rule of law.

How far before we say too far? More importantly why are we allowing for wannabe despots to wield authority without transparency?

Accountability is implied in the word democracy … it might be time to practice it.

Today Mr Lamrani could be arrested … on what charge no one can really tell since he never once broke the law. But since France is under a state of emergency, police needs only to decide for him to be incarcerated.

How grand France Republic truly is, when it is intellectuals who populate its prisons.

Posted in English
Comments Off on A French Teacher and France’s State of Emergency

Election Campaign 2016: Major Issues Facing African Americans Largely Ignored by both Clinton and Sanders

April 18th, 2016 by Abayomi Azikiwe

Democratic Party candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are both making appeals to win over African American voters during the final two months of the primary and caucus elections.

Nonetheless, very few specific issues are addressed during the course of the debates particularly the New York contest in mid-April.

Some of the essential concerns requiring attention include the need for jobs and income, considering the continuing astronomical jobless rate and impoverishment among the masses; housing and land, where over the last century African Americans have lost 13 million acres of farm land largely in the South and during the previous decade millions have been displaced from their homes due to the foreclosure and eviction crisis and the systematic forcing of others from the core urban areas; education prospects are far dimmer than in the 1960s and 1970s with the abolition of affirmative action, the privatization of schools, the closing of school buildings, mass lay-offs of teachers and the cut backs in academic and extra-curricular programs; healthcare issues persists despite the Affordable Care Act as infant mortality rates remain very high in the cities, the proliferation of treatable diseases and the lack of accessible clinics and hospitals; and communications outlets where the corporate media utilizes its influence to systematically demoralize and demobilize the people in an effort to halt the movements aimed at social change and revolutionary transformation.

Housing and the Right to the Cities

African American communities across the United States have not recovered from the impact of the Great Recession of 2007-2008. In the area of housing, the economic crisis rendered large sections of major urban areas such as Detroit, Chicago, New York City, and Los Angeles, devastated.

Predatory lending schemes initiated by the banks drained the limited household wealth of African American working families. This phenomenon coupled with the loss of jobs and other economic opportunities forced millions to relocate to suburban and out-of-state areas.

Some of the same interests involved in the massive fraud involving home ownership, later moved into rental properties, in part prompting the escalation of rents and fueling the demand for housing in cities and suburbs. Many of the neighborhoods of African Americans and other working class people have been cleared out for what is called “gentrification”, where these same community residents are no longer able to afford to live in the area.

Aggravating the housing crisis even further is the mass incarceration of African Americans and Latinos where existing laws make them ineligible for low-and-moderate-income housing in the restructured metropolitan areas. There has been some discussion about drafting new rules that would make it more difficult for private and public landlords to systematically discriminate against those who have criminal justice records.

Such a revised set of guidelines from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) would solve problems for those being denied rental properties by prohibiting landlords and real estate agencies from refusing service to those seeking housing only because they have been convicted by the courts. (nbcnews.com, April 5)

This initiative, announced on April 4 by HUD, suggests that any refusal to rent or sell to people who have criminal records is inherently discriminatory due to the fact that the nationally oppressed—African Americans and Latinos specifically—are disproportionately profiled, arrested, convicted and imprisoned.

Jobs and Income

During the last year of the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and a leading proponent of Civil Rights, Human Rights and Peace in the U.S., also advocated for the enactment of legislation to provide jobs to everyone able to work and to set standards for a guaranteed annual income. Such an approach would alleviate poverty and create much needed employment within the public sector.

In order to implement such a policy it would require a major redistribution of wealth from the ruling class to the working masses, jobless and farmers. There would be a need as well to slash the Pentagon and Homeland Security budgets which are largely designed to oppress the peoples of Africa, Latin America and the Asia-Pacific along with efforts to maintain dominance within the former Soviet Union and Eastern European socialist states.

Organizations based in oppressed nations inside the confines of the U.S. should demand in exchange for their electoral support a well-defined economic program for full employment and a minimum yearly income. A plan for the reconstruction of the cities and the rural areas historically inhabited by African Americans should be the focus of a development program based on the rehabilitation and building of new housing and livable communities.

Based on the historical legacy of enslavement, legalized segregation and modern-day underdevelopment and super-exploitation of African American labor–the banks, corporations, federal and state governments must be compelled to provide funding for these projects. Existing public policies that facilitate the forced removal of oppressed and poor people from prime districts within the urban areas must be immediately halted.

Education and Healthcare

In cities like Detroit the infant mortality rates far exceed countries within the so-called developing world. Cuba, although having faced a blockade for over five decades, has a far superior healthcare system for its people than the U.S., which is considered the leading economic power internationally.

The healthcare status of oppressed communities impacts educational achievements. The lack of prenatal care, the exposure to high levels of lead and harmful metals and chemicals can have a detrimental effect on children’s psychological and physical well-being.

Public schools in many urban areas and suburbs are currently under siege, with school buildings in extreme disrepair, subject to closings–where students are taught in overcrowded classrooms by educators whose salaries and benefits are being reduced. Public funds allocated for student education are in many cases channeled to private corporations and their agents within the school system, leaving the bare minimum to the students.

Under the guise of implementing a “business model” of governance in the public schools and municipalities, working people are being denied the bourgeois democratic rights to elect members of their school boards and make decisions about how educational curriculums and programs are to be implemented.

Mass Communications and Political Mobilization

Perhaps one the most critical methods utilized to maintain the class dominance of the wealthy is the way in which the corporate media reinforces the status-quo. The oppressed and working people are blamed for their own social plight while the rich are portrayed as having some inherent right to govern absent of any semblance of democratic practice and accountability.

During the course of the debates for both the Republican and Democratic Parties, these important issues affecting African Americans and other oppressed and working people are never addressed in a substantive manner. Clinton and Sanders are spending considerable time attempting to win the support of the workers and the oppressed yet it is not clear what programs they are committed to enact if elected to the presidency.

Both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz make no pretenses of soliciting African American voters. The battle among the Republicans is to fashion a far right-wing and even neo-fascist agenda without it being labelled as such.

However, all of the major challenges gripping the African American communities around the country have been brought to the fore through mass demonstrations and other forms of self-mobilization and organization aimed at building mass support for the eradication of racism and economic exploitation.

The call for a $15 minimum wage, the movement against police violence, the struggle against school privatization and for quality housing is largely centered in the streets, workplaces and educational institutions. Irrespective of who is elected president in November the opposition to bourgeois class rule will continue to be a focal point of the majority of the people in the U.S.

Abayomi Azikiwe is editor at Pan-African News Wire

Posted in English
Comments Off on Election Campaign 2016: Major Issues Facing African Americans Largely Ignored by both Clinton and Sanders

Video: Syrian Military Operation in Aleppo City against the ISIS

April 18th, 2016 by South Front

Last weekend, Syrian forces continued operations in Aleppo City and neighbored areas. Following advances in Salaheddine District and al-Mallah farm area, the loyalist troops are now advancing in the city. An expected sub-objective of the operations is to divide the militant-controlled areas destroying the militants’ logistics and creating number of small pockets to defeat militant units in isolation from each other.

Any successful offensive operations of the pro-government forces in Aleppo City will face an antagonism of the Western block on both diplomatic and military levels, which means the incensement of the propagandistic campaign in main stream media and supplies to militant groups operating in the area. The ongoing discussions on providing anti-aircraft weapons to militants are a part of this scenario.

The recent attempts of different militant groups to expand the zone of control in the northern part of the Aleppo province aim the similar goals:

To strengthen the negotiating position in the talks
To set the ground to proclaim an alternative government if the talks are failed

However, this would be possible only in case if the moderate militants are able to control a significant part of the province including Aleppo City.

Meanwhile, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and allies are conducting operations in the Eastern side of the Khanasser-Aleppo highway. The decision was made after ISIS units attacked the SAA’s positions in strategic heights of Shabith and Al-Qaliya which overlook the villages of Atshana, Kharbeh Zobd, al-Toubeh and Akil. The security of supplies through the Khanasser-Aleppo highway is an important element of the ongoing operations in Aleppo City.

On Saturday, the SAA liberated al-Sin air base near Damascus. The operation was coordinated with an offensive aimed on liberation the hilltop village of Tal Sawwan in the East Ghouta. According to pre-military reports, the SAA almost liberated the village. It had been controlled by Jaysh Al-Islam.

In the Latakia province, the Syrian forces – the SAA, the NDF and the SSNP – launched a fresh offensive on the town of Kabani in the Kurdish Mountains. Heavy clashes are ongoing there.

On April 14, the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) liberated the town of Hit the province of Anbar province, following 2 weeks of the urban warfare with ISIS militants. The ISF entered the town on April 4.

On April 18, the Iraqi F-16 fighter jets conducted airstrikes against the ISIS headquarters in the Tal Kayf district northeast of Mosul. Pro-government sources report that at least 17 militants were killed in the air raids, including Ahmed Qasim al-Farahat, an ISIS financial official.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Video: Syrian Military Operation in Aleppo City against the ISIS

Sanders and Clinton: Palestinian Defender vs. Israel Apologist

April 18th, 2016 by Prof. Marjorie Cohn

Professor Marjorie Cohn

An amazing thing happened at the prime-time Democratic debate in Brooklyn on Thursday. A few days ahead of Tuesday’s delegate-rich New York primary, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders dared to criticize Israel. Rival Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, stood firm as an uncritical apologist for Israel.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Sanders to explain his assertion that Israel’s actions during the 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict, after Hamas launched rocket attacks on Israel, was “disproportionate and led to the unnecessary loss of life.” Sanders stated that Israel has the right to defend itself and “to live in peace and security without fear of terrorist attack,” adding, “That is not a debate.”

But Sanders went on to say that 10,000 Palestinian civilians had been wounded and 1,500 were killed. Sanders actually understated the fatalities. According to an independent international commission of inquiry convened by the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than 2,100 Palestinians lost their lives in that conflict.

Seventy-one Israelis were killed.

Sanders added, “Now, if you’re asking not just me, but countries all over the world was that a disproportionate attack? The answer is that I believe it was.”

The U.N. commission documented 2,251 Palestinian deaths, including 1,462 civilians (299 women and 551 children), and the wounding of 11,231 Palestinians, including 3,540 women and 3,436 children. By contrast, six Israeli civilians and 67 Israeli soldiers were killed, and up to 1,600 were injured.

Quoting “official Israeli sources,” the commission reported that Israeli “rockets and mortars hit civilian buildings and infrastructure, including schools and houses, causing direct damage to civilian property amounting to almost $25 million.” The commission found that 18,000 Palestinian housing units were totally or partially destroyed; much of the electrical, water and sanitation infrastructure was incapacitated; and 73 medical facilities and several ambulances were damaged. Moreover, 28 percent of the Palestinian population was displaced.

In international law, the principle of proportionality requires an attack be proportionate to the military advantage sought. Israel did not provide information to the commission to support the conclusion that “the civilian casualties and damage to the targeted and surrounding buildings were not excessive.” The commission therefore found that the Israeli attacks could be disproportionate, and may amount to war crimes.

When Blitzer asked Clinton whether she agreed with Sanders that Israel “overreacts to Palestinians attacks” and that in order to achieve peace, Israel must end its “disproportionate” responses, she demurred, citing the requirement that Israel take “precautions.”

The principle of precautions in international law means Israel had a legal duty to take precautions to avoid or limit civilian casualties. The commission concluded, “In many incidents, however, the weapons used, the timing of the attacks, and the fact that the targets were located in densely populated areas indicate that the Israel Defense Forces [IDF] may not have done everything feasible to avoid or limit civilian casualties.” The commission said that the IDF’s use of roof-knock warningsbefore the strikes did not constitute effective warning. The commission found that either the people affected didn’t understand that their homes were being subjected to “roof-knocking” or the IDF gave insufficient time for them to evacuate after the warnings.

The commission also criticized Israel for “inferring that anyone remaining in an area that has been the object of a warning is an enemy or a person engaging in ‘terrorist activity.’ Those civilians choosing not to heed a warning do not lose the protection granted by their status. The only way in which civilians lose their protection from attack is by directly participating in the hostilities.”

As the commission pointed out, the targeting of civilians may amount to a war crime as well as a violation of the right to life enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Sanders made another declaration one would not expect from an American politician on national television. He said, “If we are ever going to bring peace to that region which has seen so much hatred and so much war, we are going to have to treat the Palestinian people with respect and dignity.”

But Clinton could not bring herself to agree with Sanders. In fact, Sanders pointed out that during Clinton’s speech to AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) in March, “I heard virtually no discussion at all about the needs of the Palestinian people. Almost none in that speech.”

Clinton did tell AIPAC that “Palestinians should be able to govern themselves in their own state, in peace and dignity,” and she made a veiled reference to “avoiding damaging action, including with respect to settlements.” Israel continues to build illegal settlements on Palestinian land.

But Clinton spoke only of the threat to Israel from the Palestinians and Iran. She called out anti-Semitism, and opposed BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions), an international nonviolent movement initiated by Palestinian civil society to pressure Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian lands.

In the Brooklyn debate, Sanders said that in order to achieve peace in the region, the United States must play “an even-handed role,” adding, “We cannot continue to be one-sided. There are two sides to the issue.”

But for Clinton there is only one side and that is Israel’s. When she mentioned the Palestinians during the debate, she described them as threats to Israel, focusing only on Hamas. Absent from her remarks was any mention of the humanity of the Palestinian people.

During her address to AIPAC, Clinton advocated “bolstering Israeli missile defenses with new systems.” But she said nothing about providing the Palestinians with missile defenses against 155-millimeter Israeli artillery.

Although Sanders had declined an invitation to personally address AIPAC, he made a statement he would have delivered to the group. It included: “But peace also means security for every Palestinian. It means achieving self-determination, civil rights, and economic well-being for the Palestinian people.”

Sanders also argued for “ending what amounts to the [Israeli] occupation of Palestinian territory, establishing mutually agreed-upon borders, and pulling back settlements in the West Bank,” as well as “ending the economic blockage of Gaza.”

Clinton promised AIPAC that one of the first things she would do as president would be to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House. She would probably also push to increase the $3.1 billion in military assistance the United States provides to Israel annually—more than to any other country.

There is a vast difference between Sanders and Clinton on Israel. Make no mistake. A President Hillary Clinton would strengthen Israel’s noose around the necks of the Palestinian people. She would not be an honest broker in any process to bring peace to that region.

Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and deputy secretary general of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. Her most recent book is Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues. Follow her on Twitter @marjoriecohn.

This article first appeared on Truthdig.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Sanders and Clinton: Palestinian Defender vs. Israel Apologist

Beyond the Empire of Chaos: Building Ecology into the Economy. Life Capital Value, Base and Measure

April 18th, 2016 by Prof. John McMurtry

Professor John McMurtry

Ecological and social science research increasingly demonstrate that ‘globalization’ is not what it seems. It does not produce more prosperity and reduce poverty for the world, but just the opposite. Ever more powerful transnational corporate money sequences multiply through organic, social and ecological life hosts looting and polluting them.

But what can the social alternative be?

Philosophers across schools reject any ultimate common value, and no political party has any unifying solution. Meanwhile a Hobbesian imperative rules – that all must compete harder in this end-game to survive. The cumulative consequence is that common life capital bases are increasingly depredated and stripped to further enrich the corporate rich. Business statistics themselves show that the poorer half of the world has lost over 40% of its wealth in the last five years, while less than one-tenth of one percent of the world’s population has multiplied its private wealth. Yet the World Bank still claims ‘global poverty reduction’, elite voices blame ‘overpopulation’, and games spectacles capture most attention.

With even the opposition repeating masking slogans of “neo-liberal”, policy drivers to reclaim the life capital of humanity are not conceived. ‘Liberal’, ‘Conservative’, ‘Keynesian and ‘Marxist’ theories lack any life capital base or measure. All acceptable economic schools assume priced commodity-cycles as an end in themselves. So-called ‘neo-classical economics’ has no life coordinates, while political leaders assume this economics in a world of invisible-hand rule.

Even ecological economics remains confined to raw material replacements so that board-foot plantations and biodiverse forests are not distinguished in value. One welcomes counter-evidence to this profile across parties and schools, but none is shown. As in the past, few in favorable positions want to move out of the value system that rules. There is fiddling at the margins, but the ruling paradigm works ever more systemic oppression and ruin on the ground.

Keynesianism is the favorite alternative of progressive economists in the press, but it too is life-capital blind. Keynes himself only questioned the Supply = Demand equation, arguing it could also be the reverse with Demand leading the productive cycle (ie., by government spending, even if it were only “holes in the sand”). This is about as far as the ‘alternative’ goes, with military, PPP, green-wash schemes and bank handouts spending trillions of public wealth to keep the big corporate money-sequences going.

‘Growth’ is the panacea, that is more priced commodities. The life-coherent idea that the demand of the economy is ultimately the demand of life systems for life goods is completely repressed. Money-exchanges alone compute even if the ice-caps melt, more billions are malnourished and ever more species go extinct.

Life Capital, not Marxism is the Solution

For Marx, productive forces are the ultimate driver of history and the base of human evolution, with the environment as instrumental value for human production re-creating the world to serve ever more empowered stages of productive development. In these respects Marx’s position and orthodox techno-economics today are alike in principle. They argue for opposite outcomes – working-class revolution versus capitalist-system growth – but both are forms of technological determinism. Neither has a life capital base – the missing ground and link of received economic thought.

Close examination reveals that productive-force determinism is the ultimate driver of society for Marx with no grounding life-value base to control or direct it – Stalinist growth being an extreme example of the problem. My own long research through these issues has concluded that life capital is the underlying ground long eluding us – the ultimate base of human society and development, and the only concept which unifies across social, ecological and organic systems. It is the unseen foundation of the unifying alternative, and applies across domains.

Defining Life Capital as Universalizable and Objective Value through Time

Life capital is an objective and quantifiable process whose criterion is life wealth/capacity that produces more life wealth/capacity without loss and with cumulative gain through generational time (e.g., a society’s public hydro infrastructure, its literacy development, or an individual’s organic fitness through age stages).

Yet it is crucial to emphasize that life capital does not presuppose a private possessor of it. Nor does it require a private profit. But both these false presuppositions have become instituted as akin to physical laws in the reigning ‘economic’ paradigm.

At the most comprehensive level, life capital denotes the collective life bases of the planetary ecosystem and all the socially constructed conditions of humanity’s provision of life goods which are reproduced and gain through generations. In any form, macro or micro, life capital is always that which enables life capacities to reproduce and advance through time. Life capital, at any level, however, can be run down by a life-blind economic system such as ‘globalization’ today. The collapse of the Easter Island culture is a paradigm example of this hollowing out of a society’s life capital bases in life-blind devotion to its system constructions as an end in self. We follow this pattern on a global scale today.

How Life Capital Applies to our Daily Lives

Life capital is all that we continuously depend on to live and live well – breathable air, potable water, everyday knowledge, energy infrastructures, and life-protective laws and regulations. There is no good of our lives not dependent on it to stay alive and well, but the current ruling system increasingly despoils it across sectors. This is the essential problem of our world.

On the individual level, each one of us is a bearer of life capital which we manage better rather than worse by developing rather than wasting or depleting it. On the micro as well as the macro level, our life capital is far deeper in value than what can be sold in the market. Yet we lack the concept for what ultimately matters to us, that without which every life is reduced, malnourished and dies. This is especially true for social and ecological life capital on which we depend without knowing it – for example, effective societal norms and infrastructures ensuring clean air, water, stable climate, civil safety, electricity infrastructures, education, healthcare, income security.

All this becomes self-evident with testing inspection. But nothing is less comprehended in the reigning ‘Economics’. Its paradigm is decoupled from life means and substance in principle, with money demand for them as their only worth. If it is not priced for exchange and purchase, it has no value in this value system. There is no life-value in the calculus. If a natural resource or beauty does not make money, it is ‘wasted’. If a corporation kills people by its negligence, the value of their lives is the income to replace them.

It may seem that life capital has already entered into progressive economists’ vocabulary with concepts of ‘ natural capital’, ‘social capital’, ‘human capital’ and ‘knowledge capital’ which have become familiar in recent decades (beginning with ‘human capital’ from 1960’s onward applied to people who increase their own market value by earning university degrees). Yet these seeming forms of life capital reverse its meaning. They mean only what can be equated to a money value in the market, and so rule out life capital value itself – the value in itself and for life of nature, society, and knowledge. Life value, all real value on earth, cannot be conceived within the instituted blinkers.

Since only what increases revenues/reduces costs in money transactions and sequences is a “cost” or “benefit” to this value calculus, polluting, depleting and otherwise destroying life capital is built in as more “efficiency” because it reduces cost inputs. Thus a contradiction arises across the oceans and forests of the world. Life capital is perpetually despoiled as ‘natural capital’ to maximize money-value profit however natural life capital is in fact destroyed, moving from one site to the next as ‘globalization’. What is called ‘development’ and ‘growth’ cannot distinguish between this ‘investor value adding’ and the cumulative destruction of life systems.

What Has Gone Wrong at the Most Basic Level

As money becoming more money for transnational private possessors has become the ruling value system of the planet, the moral disorder is not examined or represented as it behaves. Rather it is auto-venerated in stock epithets of ‘freedom’, ‘prosperity’, and ‘new wealth’. In reality, a triad mechanism of media indoctrination, transnational treaty commands and armed force have imposed the system step by step. The global money-sequence system operates in accordance with three internal laws not discussed. It selects for more priced commodities without life standards, multiplies money demand to the richest, and – mot deeply – depredates life capital across social and ecological life support systems.

That this system cumulatively entails eco-genocidal effects is taboo to raise within official society. Most people have no idea of the inner logic of the reigning assumptions. Orthodox theory is instead devoted to perfecting the models of money-sequence ‘value adding’ with arcane mathematics leading devices for the rich to slip between the cracks of the law. Wall Street has in this mode modelled control of the buyable water and land in the world for future profit to its ‘investors’ with anything else that can be bought and sold to spike private money sequences.

While every plane of existence from which more money-value can be extracted is in the cross-hairs, no effectively binding protection for life capital bases has been allowed since the mildly successful Ozone Layer Protocol of 1988. The planet is systemically converted into private money sequences to the top depriving and destroying organic, economic and natural life support systems. The crowning irony is ‘austerity programs’ for society to keep the meta program going. At the same time, corporate-rights treaties are backed by severe punishments of taxpayers for any profit-reducing deviation by democratic laws – for example, to reduce neuro-toxins in the air, or stop toxic dumps, proscribe dolphin meat, or prohibit slave labour products. All is enforceable by financial and armed embargo in the last resort, and corporate state politicians are pervasively lobbied with electoral financing and post-office wealth to serve the new world order.

The emergence in the 2016 American presidential primaries of candidate policies to reverse these transnational corporate rights expresses a growing political resistance of the US population – even if the issues are obscured in the corporate media. It has been a long time coming. Thomas Berry long ago observed that “corporate profit is the deficit of the Earth”. Yet in the more exact words of Wall Street analysis: “With captive customers, the cash flows are virtually guaranteed. The only major variables are the initial prices paid, the amount of debt used for financing, and the pace and magnitude of price hikes – easy things for Wall Street to model.”

‘Freedom’ here consists in no recourse left for society to stop or limit the hollowing out of life capital to maximally profit transnational ‘investors’. In pretence of ‘free trade’, peoples are deprived of what ultimately matters to them without knowing what has happened. This is why in the end people feel increasingly helpless and meaningless in a world run out of control.

Primary Implications for Public Policy and Recovery

Re-grounding begins with a first principle. Real economic value is not created by the global market or by money exchanges. This ruling delusion has been promoted by neo-economics since the turn of the 20^th century when it reduced economics to dyadic money exchanges with no life coordinates or bases – a system in which the best of possible worlds is a money-price gain for the exchangers. In life-capital understanding, the economic ground begins with reproduction of the planetary atmosphere itself, the oceans, hydrological cycles, soil cover, forests, fellow species, and all such life bases now erased from accounts by the reigning model.

Yet life capital includes far more than the planet’s physical resources on which life depends. It denotes all real goods that are reproduced and/or cumulatively advance through time, including scientific knowledge, life protective norms, and accessible energy sources. These are all measurable life capital formations along with the human-made bases of the real economy of producing goods otherwise in short supply.

Orthodox economics, in polar contrast, eliminates all life capital from view, and all commodities are ‘goods’ by definition. Only what can be privatized to yield more money counts as ‘economic’ or ‘competitive’. Thus a system of taking more than is put in every cycle with no limit becomes the supreme law of ‘value creation’ with all its profitable produces as ‘goods’, never bads.. Behind the scenes, the, the ‘masters of the universe’ create money by ever rising debt-issues and service charges which create nothing, but propel margin feeding in ever greater multiples.

No step is possible without the guarantee and force of corporate states. “My administration”, said President Obama to his Wall Street audience on April 3 2009, “is the only thing between you and the pitchforks”. Governments’ servant economists and stacked committees, double-standard tax policies, escalating subsidies, armed force protections, privatization of public knowledge, and foreign wars are further dimensions of this transnational corporate system at work.

Life capital is opposite in nature. Whether our own lives or family, our bioregion or the planetary life-host – or the tree, garden or birdlife, vocation or vocabulary at hand – there is one underlying formula of life substance and flourishing across al of them. Life capital produces more life wealth/capacities without loss and with cumulative gain through time in all its variations, the law of true human evolution. Securing our life capital base to live by is its first moral axiom across cultures and tastes. This underlying first principle entails, in turn, policy and regulation to prevent any life capital being run down, wasted or destroyed – as almost all are now. Our collective and individual life capital of ecological, social and organic life hosts are all at risk.

Solution follows from recognising the problem. Moral and policy deciders collectively reclaim human purpose by binding life-capital standards to regulate production, trade and investment- as we already do now with water and sewer standards and enforced laws against criminal attacks.

How the Mass Media Paralyse Societies within the Life-Blind Money Mechanism

The mass media are advertising vehicles which sell media spaces to the wealthiest corporations. They are operationally structured as a propaganda system for the corporations buying the spaces and the system they are embedded in. This is an analytic description confirmed by examining their electronic and hard-copy operations across formats.

It follows that the mass media promote and idealize the corporate operations and wealth sustaining them. But what is not recognised is that these corporations collectively depredate the life capital bases of societies with no connected media investigations. With no life capital standards governing, a global market race to the bottom forms without alternative.

All the while, trillions of dollars/Euros/pounds of public money go to big banks and corporations to keep them going. A staggering $5.3 trillion (U.S.) of public money by IMF calculation is given to fossil-fuel corporations alone, even as the climate destabilization they lead reaches cataclysmic proportions. Despite finally known emergency, even all ecological life support systems together do not receive a small fraction of what subsidizes the big banks and oil/motor industries propelling their collapse.

What is not seen is not responded to. The mass media are, in fact, structured to divert attention from the system’s degenerate trends to sell priced commodities as their law of motion. Endless images, gossip and tales of appetite, fear and projection hold populations in thrall disconnected from their common life-ground. The latest Enemy of the US/EU is then cast as the real threat to global life security – presented, for example, by intermittent hate messages on Vladimir Putin. What is actually occurring in tidal trends – the acidifying oceans, rising climate instability, species extinctions, and youth without meaningful life vocations –dissolve out of view.

The system remains auto-assumed as the best of possible worlds by the media, economists, formal economic models, and academic mainstreams. And why not? Human slavery too was thought optimal for centuries – in fact, it was the first major commodity of ‘global free trade’. Mass homicide by system starvation and ecocide are still called ‘costs of development’ with no challenge of the term. As knowledge and information themselves become proprietary monopolies, we come to see that the world’s deepest problem is the instituted mind-lock of the reigning paradigm beneath consciousness of it. its life blind logic.

From Sports to the Academy: Life Capital Bases Blocked Out A-Priori

On the system-wide level, the dominant mass media are governed by three implicit goals – selling corporate ads, validating money power, and blocking out life capital bases. Professional sports exemplify the system as its ultimate site of transnational market propaganda. They draw increasing mass audiences round the world with no competitor to mobilize public attention and commitment. The inner logic of the ruling value system is imprinted beneath notice.

The more money sports stars get, the more money take is glorified, the more ads are sold, the more public attention and wealth are diverted from profound public issues like the degrading life capital bases of society and the planet. In this way, the ultimate struggle for better life on earth is displaced by commercial contest spectacles and logos competing for private money pay-offs for the few. Free time itself is subjugated by the corporate money system.

Mass spectator sports are an allegory and a linchpin of the system’s hold (and I say this as a former professional player). Battle cries of ‘everything is at stake’ drive ersatz-tribal passions to displace what really matters to life on Earth. Even if a public issue comes into the spectacle-sales agenda, it too is converted by corporate ads into sales images of concern and action. The rising catastrophic storms, sea-rises and weather extremes are euphemized as ‘climate change’ with only market solutions promoted.

In the US, the most popular sports are linked to military displays, bands and metaphors, with few noticing the US military is the biggest killer and greatest polluter in the world. Again we see the many levels at which life-blind aggression and attack is built into this system. The destruction becomes part of the excitement with, for example, pristine nature as a favorite scene of beauty to sell fossil-fuel super engines ripping up the life terrain. Reduced to ad vehicles, the mass media follow one underlying law of meaning. The truth is what sells. Parallel to the games spectacles, marketed personalities are the centre of elections too. Collective life capital bases as the proper concern of nations and democracy do not compute within the reigning mind-set.

The academic world has been taken over by corporate self-maximization in less visible ways. University administrations have become corporate fund managers accountable to no academic standards in their multiplied spending on their own offices, salaries, and corporate-ladder culture. Their essential function is partnering with leveraged corporate research funds necessary to replace underfunding by corporate states – a 25 year planned process in North America.

At the same time, commercial publishers have bought up once-independent scholarly journals across the academic world, multiplied their prices to libraries, and imposed corporate procedures of refereeing with corporate forms ruling out critical autonomy of evaluation. Throughout, the externally profiting transnational corporations exploit university scholars’ need to be published with no payment for their services. In fact, the publishing corporations pay nothing for the entire life-capital infrastructure of advancing learning and disseminating knowledge, an extremely costly affair for advanced facilities and world-level expertise. All educational costs are borne by taxpayers and student fees, exerting mounting downwards pressure on public capacities of research and teaching. Ever more cuts follow from corporate states and administrations so that, for example, casual labour with no research support does most of the teaching and instruction. Throughout research for new commodities for the global corporate market becomes the dominant objective of funding sciences themselves.

Every step of these systemic degradations and front-line dispossessions dismantles the life capital evolution of public learning and higher research leading the species’ evolution.

Lead Philosophies Decoupled from the Life-Ground Too

In the background, the most lauded thinkers block out the advancing corporate occupation and its life capital alternative in principle. Martin Heidegger seems to sense the great hollowing out in his signature idea of our “forgetfulness of Being”. Yet he has no life-ground to go on but the “home of language” rooted in pre-Socratic conceptions. Wittgenstein and others follow with “language games” and “linguistic philosophy” in the English-analytic tradition, but again with life-ground and social structure bracketed out as if they did not exist.

Today’s leading social philosopher-scientist, Jurgen Habermas, reduces “life-world” (Lebensvelt) to background assumptions, and rules out any alternative economic order a-priori. The dominant justice/moral theories of John Rawls and Robert Nozick have dominated normative philosophy over half a century, but cannot get beyond self-maximizing agents in a social void with no collective life capital bases imagined across industries of literature. ‘Communitarian’ philosophy moves underneath liberal atomism to social institutions and traditions as common bearings of persons and social reality, but has no deeper test or validation of them in universal life needs or life capital ground. Even socialist theory and doctrine provides no unifying life foundations integrating ecology, economics and life-value choice space.

Throughout the evolved life ground is lost – the life capital bases of humanity and nature as ground and measure of all life value through time in process of reproduction, loss or gain. We already have the basics in any working public health system where every one of these parameters can be known down to the finest detail of life capacity performance and well-being, but joining the dots into unifying concept and common thread across domains is the missing meta step.

The Postmoderns Revolt Against Any Common Life-Ground At All

Many celebrate post-modern with thinkers like Foucault, Baudrillard, Derrida and Lyotard who are believed to expose the inhuman and the repressive in our institutions and language by a liberation from metaphysics of duality and deep structures. Less noticed, the postmodernists implicitly repudiate any unifying life-ground whatever. Life capital does not exist. Like the global market, postmodernism proclaims the free, the particular and the disruptive without any life base, while ignoring the actual global command system’s attack on planetary life itself. Some like Deleuze may loathe capitalism. But they have no conception of humanity’s universal life bases and necessities to ground agreement or alternative to what destroys them.

Organising principles which bridge from the past through the present to the future by objective common life interests are, yet again, ruled out. The economists’ life-blind paradigm of liquid mechanics goes on being mapped onto the living world, unquestioned even by the self-conceived subversives of totalizing structure.

Life Capital Meaning Steers Humanity’s Underlying Evolution

A simple example is herds of livestock. Their life capital continues so long as they reproduce or gain in collective life capacity of yield in meat, milk-production, pull-power, manure, and hide material, all quantifiable through time. The same can be said of socially constructed and regulated life capital formations – public literacy and health systems, clean air and water, electric-light access, recycling garbage and sewage systems, life security in body and speech, book and film libraries, ecological integrity including noise bylaws, biodiverse pathways and surroundings. We find life capital meaning most inclusively and incisively when we consider our lives without any of them.

In polar contrast, public spending is now increasingly diverted to subsidize the private money-sequence system in trillions of dollars to dominant corporations leading the depredation of life capital bases – for example, ‘quantitative easing’ to the destabilizing and non-productive speculations of big banks and the massive subsidization of the armaments, oil and luxury motor industries. But the most built-in appropriations of public wealth and collective life capital bases are by corporate lobbies feeding on public services and the public purse directly by privatization schemes. To cite British MP John McDonnell: “Privatization over the last four decades has been a history of snatching up public assets to print private money. From the earliest privatizations of water, energy and rail to the PFI [Private Financial Intitiatives] from the last decade, it has been one long confidence trick.”

The same covert raiding of public life capital to feed private corporate profits has been imposed by captive states across the world – a systematic eating away of social life support systems and services accompanying the looting of ecosystems and natural resources as ‘the last frontier of easy money’. Collective life capacities and capital are the victim, but no measure of their losses exists. In fact, every overloading, depletion, pollution, abandonment, reverse liability, under-investment in infrastructures, and price-gouging of ‘privatization’ programs follows the reigning paradigm’s primary axiom of rational choice. In its abstract form, the rule of self-maximizing preference in all things is the overriding law of modern reason with no proof or question of it in even the inner sanctums of high theory.

Life-coherent reason is missing – consistency with life capital requirements. Consistency with evidence and other statements provide empirical and logical validity, but not life validity – the lost life-ground of knowledge. It is already at work without the name in valid life-protective and safety regimes across sectors, and in medical science, public health and infrastructures and requirements of life necessity across domains. The underlying meaning is the evolution of human society itself towards ever more life-coherent rule systems of how to live on the planet. Life capital defence and advance is the missing link and guiding thread across domains.

Public money is properly investment flow of society into life capital. But much goes immediately to paying off private banks which create the money as unlimited debt issues with permanent service demands, a distinguished from central bank loans with no such private-profit issue and claws on the public purse – as in successful economies like China and in Canada’s before 1974 when its great social and physical infrastructures were built. Another US $26 trillion today goes offshore to evade public taxation. At every level, the life capital bases of society are invaded by private money-sequence demands adding costs and degrading them so that most are in cumulative decline. This is the macro pattern of life capital dispossession and common wealth destruction by the transnational money-sequence system until a public life capital turn steers us.

The Unifying Alternative follows from the Logic of the Problem

In the degenerate trends identified above, the private market system lacks life capital coordinates and binding standards to guide it. Yet if we consider human advances made through generational time, we find the underlying principle of public life capital always at work in some form – from language development by agreed-on conventions enabling more meaningful communications to protection of community water supplies and waste-recycling separation to knowledge criteria and storing across the lines of death to the ecological protection systems that ultimately decide the rise or fall of civilisations. Seek any exception to this evolutionary pattern so far as humanity advances. It is the unseen moral vocation of the race.

Steering is life-coherent through time by life-capital measure and principle at all levels – as already being achieved in life-coherent energy and trash conversion systems, still-working public health systems, open knowledge centres of dissemination and learning, and ecological understanding dissolving life-blind ignorance. The life capital base of developed societies has already evolved beneath market phenomena, but without second-order understanding or even a name.

Thus the global money-sequence system continues to seek ‘growth’ that cumulatively despoils life capital and support systems without a connecting concept of the problem and solution across domains. Life capital provides this missing concept and common ground as the set-point of life-coherent policy deciders across jurisdictions. It is always what ultimately matters to human and fellow life – that without which life capacities are destroyed over time. Its measure invariably enables an objectively unifying meaning of life-value gain or loss throughout – of life security in need, of housing and nourishing food supply, of adequate clean water and sewage cycles, of accessible learning and knowledge, of public facilities and structures of production and art, and of the environmental integrity of our life-host – in short, the true goods of life which are now everywhere at risk without a life-value ground and compass to guide choice and action.

John McMurtry is an elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and his work is published and translated from Latin America to Japan. He is the author and editor of the three-volume Philosophy and World Problems published by UNESCO’s Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), and his latest book is The Cancer Stage of Capitalism/from Crisis to Cure.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Beyond the Empire of Chaos: Building Ecology into the Economy. Life Capital Value, Base and Measure

Blanket Student Debt Amnesty Now

April 18th, 2016 by Mike Whitney

A couple weeks ago the Wall Street Journal confirmed our worst fears about the student loan program, that is, that it was going to blow up in the government’s face just like all the other gigantic debt-bubbles that preceded it. For the sake of background, here’s a brief excerpt from the article that will bring readers up-to-date:

“More than 40% of Americans who borrowed from the government’s main student-loan program aren’t making payments or are behind on more than $200 billion owed, raising worries that millions of them may never repay.

The new figures represent the fallout of a decadelong borrowing boom as record numbers of students enrolled in trade schools, universities and graduate schools.

While most have since left school and joined the workforce, 43% of the roughly 22 million Americans with federal student loans weren’t making payments as of Jan. 1, according to a quarterly snapshot of the Education Department’s $1.2 trillion student-loan portfolio.” (More Than 40% of Student Borrowers Aren’t Making Payments, Wall Street Journal)

While it all sounds very shocking, the real eye-popper was buried deep in the text where it was most likely to be ignored. Here it is:

“Carlo Salerno, an economist who studies higher education and has consulted for the private student-lending industry, noted that the government imposes virtually no credit checks on borrowers, requires no cosigners and doesn’t screen people for their preparedness for college-level course work. “On what planet does a financing vehicle with those kinds of terms and those kinds of performance metrics make sense,” he said.” (WSJ)

Let’s see if I got this right: The Fed, government regulators and the entire political establishment looked the other way while the mortgage industry cranked out trillions of dollars of “toxic” subprime liar’s loans that Wall Street bundled into garbage bonds that wound up blowing up the entire global financial system and plunging the world into a severe recession from which we still haven’t recovered. Then, a couple years later, they start pumping up another lethal trillion-dollar credit bubble, this time comprised of equally toxic “student liar’s loans”?

Is that what they’re saying?

That’s it, alright. This is why there should be blanket amnesty for all the student debt generated in the last decade. It’s because the whole thing was another filthy credit-swindle from the get go.

And let’s be honest; it’s not the government lenders who were scammed in this deal, it’s the students. They’re the victims, in the same way that the applicants, who borrowed hundreds of thousands of dollars for mortgages they could never repay, were the victims. The lender is ALWAYS responsible when a loan that goes belly up. ALWAYS. Because it’s their freaking job to figure out who can pay and who can’t. Period. That’s all they do, lend money. And they’re pretty damn good at it too, when they actually expect to get repaid, which in this case, they don’t. That’s why we know it’s a scam.

So now we’re supposed to believe that no one could have foreseen this trainwreck ahead of time. Is that it? Is that what Obama and the media and the rest of the crooked financial establishment want us to believe; that no one could known that 40 percent of the borrowers were going to ‘stiff’ the government?

Baloney. The handwriting was on the wall from the very beginning. Take a look at this interview I did with professor Alan Nasser in 2011.

M Whitney–Is it fair to say that the student loan industry is a scam that targets borrowers who will never be able to repay their debts?

Alan Nasser—It’s as fair as fair can be. First, the student loan industry is huge – a large majority of students from every type of school are in debt. Debt is held by 62 percent of students enrolled at public colleges and universities, 72 percent at private non-profit schools and 96 percent at private, for-profit (“proprietary”) schools. It was announced last summer that total student loan debt, at $830 billion, now exceeds total US credit card debt, which is itself bloated to the bubble level of $827 billion. And student loan debt is growing at the rate of $90 billion a year. So we’re not talking small change.

How many of these students are subprime borrowers? That is, how closely do student loans resemble junk mortgages? The answer hinges on three factors: how these loans are rated, how likely the borrower is to repay, and the default rate on student loans.

…the Department’s Inspector General Office employed a more realistic method in its 2003 audit, which calculated lifetime risk. It estimated that over their lifetime between 19 and 31 percent of college freshmen and sophomores would default on their loans… For community college students, the prospects were grimmer still: between 30 and 42 percent were expected to default. And the future was most discouraging for students at for-profits: between 38 and 51 percent were anticipated to default. You can see that the default rate among student borrowers is expected to be higher than that for subprime home mortgages.” (The Student Loan Swindle, CounterPunch)

Repeat: “between 38 and 51 percent were anticipated to default” … “Higher than subprime mortgages.”

Bottom line: The shysters who issued these roadside bombs knew from the beginning that a high percentage of them were going to blow up. What more proof do you need that the whole thing is crookeder then hell? And this interview was conducted back in 2011, which means that these credit chiselers knew what they were doing from the very beginning. The Obama-Fed-Wall Street cabal wanted to inflate another massive credit bubble so the thieving lenders could skim heftier profits while Obama crowed about his great economic recovery. That’s what it’s all about. And they didn’t care that gullible college kids were being drawn-and-quartered so they could make more dough either.

What kind of country is this anyway, where the government deliberately bamboozles its kids about the “value of a good education” just so they can extort as much money as possible from them in the future?

Here’s Nasser again:

“Alan Collinge of StudentLoanJustice.org has shown that the Department of Education makes more on defaulted loans than it does on loans in good stead. Washington has just as much an interest in encouraging student loan defaults as do, for example, collection companies, which obviously live off defaults.”

“Cha-ching!” That’s the happy sound of your predatory government fleecing your children.

It’s outrageous!

Of course the private lenders make even more than the government does because they’ve developed a whole system for extracting as much wealth as possible from their unwitting victims. No surprise there. Private lenders always get their pound of flesh and then-some.

So here’s a question for you: Why do you think Congress passed legislation making it impossible to discharge student loan debt through bankruptcy just months before the surge of student lending began? Do you think it was all just a big coincidence?

Give me a break! This thing has “setup” written all over it. Congress knew what they were doing. They knew they were part of a big sting operation targeting credulous students who never guessed that their government was just a bunch of lousy shakedown artists. And now congress can pat themselves on the back for a job well done, for luring millions of millennials into a lifetime of indentured servitude. That’s quite an accomplishment, don’t you think?

Hurrah, for Congress! The scumbags.

Here’s Alan Nasser again:

“Because Congress chose to withhold key consumer protections from student borrowers …the latter are virtually forced to enroll in “loan rehabilitation” programs. The borrower is subject to a form of extortion, whereby (s)he essentially buys her way out of allegedly more severe penalties with payments that are rarely applied to principal or interest on the defaulted loan. These outlays are in effect the price of access to a substitute loan, accompanied of course by additional fees. The new loan is typically larger than the defaulted one…

The fee system is at the heart of the private lenders’ affection for default. It gives to loan guarantors the same kind of interest in default that is so obvious in the case of collection companies. Collinge has analyzed IRS filings of guarantors of federal student loans. It turns out that guaranty agencies average about 60 percent of their income from fees alone. If the default rate declines, so do the fees and income of the guarantors.” (CounterPunch)

Get the picture? So the worse it gets for the students, the better it gets for the lenders. Students get a lifetime of drowning in red ink, and lenders get a nice fat bonus of 60 percent off the top. Nice, eh?

Don’t you love America?

Let’s cut to the chase: Students have been defrauded on a massive scale by the credit Mafia, the brotherhood of crooks (Gov and private) whose only goal in life is to suck as much blood as humanly possible out of their victims and then move on to the next. That’s how the game is played.

The only way to defeat this cadres of racketeers is to stop paying. That’s it. No more money for you.

We’re not talking about lower rates, or partial relief or a temporary debt moratorium. Oh, no. We’re not looking for any namby-pamby, half-loaf “loser” solution. We’re talking about total, blanket student debt amnesty. Wipe the slate clean. End the debt now.

And if it crashes the US Treasury, well, good riddance.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at [email protected].

Posted in English
Comments Off on Blanket Student Debt Amnesty Now

Troubled Waters and the Sporting Dilemma in Australia. The Legend of Grant Hackett

April 18th, 2016 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

“New safety briefing tells passengers to familiarise themselves with their nearest Grant Hackett, remembering it may be behind them.” The Shovel, Apr. 18, 2016

The sporting hero suffers a disservice, notably in countries such as Australia. Feted, lauded and congratulated in their bloom, figures of Olympian stature and record such as Grant Hackett are deemed the immortals. Their fragility is concealed, packaged in the muscle and fitness that is peak performance and victory. When they snap on the willow of reality, fragile as ever, mortality creeps in with mocking menace. Fans and sponsors beat a hasty retreat. The authorities move in.

Sporting immortality distorts and mangles. For one, it is finite, a touch of puffery that eventually goes its way. In time, the sports figure descends from Olympus, often in heavy and violent fashion. The fans of adoration will find some other object of their interest.

Many figures find such transition to a life after sport difficult, notably in societies where sports personalities assume cerebral and charismatic dimension. Peter Brock was always the driver that made Bathurst his own – but in the final analysis, he remained a driver who did not have to deal with the consequences of a life beyond driving. The car, the culture, and the engine, all seemed to purr with their own anointing qualities.

In Hackett’s case, it was, till recently, the pool, that great body of water that crowned him. Stones, as Ovid pointed out, are the hollowed victims of water. The swimmer, however, mimicking the fish of grace, works with it, achieving feats of speed. With Hackett, resilience over distance mattered. Between 1997 and 2006, he remained the undefeated distance freestyler over 1,500 metres. (He won gold at both the 2000 and 2004 Olympics in that event.)

Sports writer Robert Craddock noted Hackett’s “pristine” reputation, one that made banking executives and public relations gurus salivate. “The man with the toothpaste smile, pop singer wife and delivery so smooth he was hired as a TV broadcaster, Hackett’s image was whiter than a polar bear in a snowstorm.”[1]

Finding it difficult to stay out of the pool competitively, Hackett ventured a return. Despite engendering much support at the national titles, the effort failed. Having not qualified for the Australian team for the Rio summer games, Hackett encountered an assortment of demons. A Virgin Australia business-class passenger alleged on Sunday that Hackett had groped him from behind, targeting of his nipples with purpose. “There was no altercation – I was sexually assaulted by that man.”[2]

On reaching Melbourne’s Tullamarine airport, Hackett was photographed being taken from the plane by the Australian Federal Police, saddled to a wheelchair. Prior to boarding the flight, an observation was made that Hackett might have been under the influence, in the gloriously precise wording of the Herald Sun, “of something”. Channel Seven claimed to cite police sources noting Hackett’s “extended period” in the toilet mid-flight, from which he “emerged aggressive and agitated”.[3]

Such behaviour should be the rich bread and butter of psychologist and social worker. But while doctors, trainers, physiotherapists and medics form brigades in the employ of state in dealing with sporting characters in the broadly physical sense, making sure the bodily machine functions and recovers from injury, the issue of mental health remains a fringe worthy matter.

Adjunct Associate Professor Patsy Tremayne, a sports psychologist at Western Sydney University’s School of Social Science and Psychology has made the obvious point that sports figures “don’t like to talk about mental health. It is almost a sign of weakness to mention it.”[4] The external features of the body trump talk about mental wellbeing. Look good, perform, and the rest will follow.

The garden of Australian sport is littered with the broken roses of mental anguish and spiritual strain. Hackett can count himself one of many swimmers who can add their names to a growing club of illustrious and wounded souls, one including Ian Thorpe, Libby Trickett and Leisel Jones.

Thorpe has been brutally frank about his struggle with depression, having been admitted to a rehabilitation facility in 2014 “after being found disoriented on a Sydney street” (ABC News, Feb 18). He was another sporting casualty, having failed to find his post-swimming legs in television, jewellery design or university courses.[5]

Jones, another medal vulture for Australian swimming, contemplated suicide on the bathroom floor of a Spanish hotel in 2011. Brimming with depression at stages of her career, she was equipped with a box of sleeping tablets and a plan for taking her own life. Her then coach frustrated the venture.[6]

Yet sporting writers such as Craddock persist in the illusion that bad boys and girls of the pool and field eventually calm down and become distinguished elders. He observes, erroneously, how sports figures “often lead controversial playing careers then melt into mellow, low-key retirements.” Far from “bucking the trend”, Hackett is conforming to it.

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

Notes:

[1] http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/grant-hackett-plane-scandal-passenger-accuses-swimmer-of-groping-his-chest/news-story/9a6c3a40d277912d9b7ca3a824d70086

[2] http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/grant-hackett-plane-scandal-passenger-accuses-swimmer-of-groping-his-chest/news-story/9a6c3a40d277912d9b7ca3a824d70086

[3] http://www.smh.com.au/sport/swimming/grant-hackett-arrested-after-altercation-on-plane-reports-20160417-go8a0w.html

[4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2015/10/10/mental-health-sport_n_8266914.htm

[5] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-18/ian-thorpe-reveals-mental-health-issues-a-problem-since-teens/7180702

[6] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-06/sherden-drum-interview:-leisel-jones-reveals-depression/6829764

Posted in English
Comments Off on Troubled Waters and the Sporting Dilemma in Australia. The Legend of Grant Hackett

How The American Neoconservatives Destroyed Mankind’s Hopes For Peace

April 18th, 2016 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

When Ronald Reagan turned his back on the neoconservatives, fired them, and had some of them prosecuted, his administration was free of their evil influence, and President Reagan negotiated the end of the Cold War with Soviet President Gorbachev. The military/security complex, the CIA, and the neocons were very much against ending the Cold War as their budgets, power, and ideology were threatened by the prospect of peace between the two nuclear superpowers.

I know about this, because I was part of it. I helped Reagan create the economic base for bringing the threat of a new arms race to a failing Soviet economy in order to pressure the Soviets into agreement to end the Cold War, and I was appointed to a secret presidential committee with subpoena power over the CIA. The secret committee was authorized by President Reagan to evaluate the CIA’s claim that the Soviets would prevail in an arms race. The secret committee concluded that this was the CIA’s way of perpetuating the Cold War and the CIA’s importance.

The George H. W. Bush administration and its Secretary of State James Baker kept Reagan’s promises to Gorbachev and achieved the reunification of Germany with promises that NATO would not move one inch to the East.

The corrupt Clintons, for whom the accumulation of riches seems to be their main purpose in life, violated the assurances given by the United States that had ended the Cold War. The two puppet presidents—George W. Bush and Obama—who followed the Clintons lost control of the US government to the neocons, who promptly restarted the Cold War, believing in their hubris and arrogance that History has chosen the US to exercise hegemony over the world.

Thus was mankind’s chance for peace lost along with America’s leadership of the world. Under neocon influence, the United States government threw away its soft power and its ability to lead the world into a harmonious existence over which American influence would have prevailed.

Instead the neocons threatened the world with coercion and violence, attacking eight countries and fomenting “color revolutions” in former Soviet republics.

The consequence of this crazed insanity was to create an economic and military strategic alliance between Russia and China. Without the neocons’ arrogant policy, this alliance would not exist. It was a decade ago that I began writing about the strategic alliance between Russia and China that is a response to the neocon claim of US world hegemony.

http://www.rense.com/general77/tus.htm

The strategic alliance between Russia and China is militarily and economically too strong for Washington. China controls the production of the products of many of America’s leading corporations, such as Apple. China has the largest foreign exchange reserves in the world. China can, if the government wishes, cause a massive increase in the American money supply by dumping its trillions of dollars of US financial assets.

To prevent a collapse of US Treasury prices, the Federal Reserve would have to create trillions of new dollars in order to purchase the dumped financial instruments. The rest of the world would see another expansion of dollars without an expansion of real US output and become skepical of the US dollar. If the world abandoned the US dollar, the US government could no longer pay its bills.

Europe is dependent on Russian energy. Russia can cut off this energy. There are no alternatives in the short-run, and perhaps not in the long run. If Russia shuts off the energy, Germany industry shuts down. Europeans freeze to death in the winter. Despite these facts, the neocons have forced Europe to impose economic sanctions on Russia. What if Russia responded in kind?

NATO, as US military authorities admit, has no chance of invading Russia or withstanding a Russian attack on NATO. NATO is a cover for Washington’s war crimes. It can provide no other service.

Thanks to the greed of US corporations that boosted their profits by offshoring their production to China, China is moderinized many decades before the neocons thought possible. China’s military forces are moderized with Russian weapons technology. New Chinese missiles make the vaunted US Navy and its aircraft carriers obsolete.

The neocons boast how they have surrounded Russia, but it is America that is surrounded by Russia and China, thanks to the incompetent leadership that the US has had beginning with the Clintons. Judging from Killary’s support in the current presidential primaries, many voters seem determined to perpetuate incompetent leadership.

Despite being surrounded, the neocons are pressing for war with Russia which means also with China. If Killary Clinton makes it to the White House, we could get the neocon’s war.

The neocons have flocked to the support of Killary. She is their person. Watch the feminized women of America put Killary in office. Keep in mind that Congress gave its power to start wars to the president.

The United States does not have a highly intelligent or well informed population. The US owes its 20th century dominance to World War I and World War II which destroyed more capable countries and peoples. America became a superpower because of the self-destruction of other countries.

Despite neocon denials that their hubris has created a powerful alliance against the US, a professor at the US Navy War College stresses the reality of the Russian-Chinese strategic alliance.

http://sputniknews.com/world/20160414/1037981155/russia-china-cooperation.html

Last August a joint Russian-Chinese sea and air exercise took place in the Sea of Japan, making it clear to America’s Japanese vassal that it was defenceless if Russia and China so decided.

The Russian defense minister Sergey Shoigu said that the joint exercise illustrates the partnership between the two powers and its stabilizing effect on that part of the world.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said that Russian-Chinese relations are able to resist any international crises.

The only achievements of the American neoconservatives are to destroy in war crimes millions of peoples in eight countries and to send the remnant populations fleeing into Europe as refugees, thus undermining the American puppet governments there, and to set back the chances of world peace and American leadership by creating a powerful strategic alliance between Russia and China.

This boils down to extraordinary failure. It is time to hold the neoconservatives accountable, not elect another puppet for them to manipulate.

Posted in English
Comments Off on How The American Neoconservatives Destroyed Mankind’s Hopes For Peace

China Says “No Dollars” for New Yuan

April 18th, 2016 by Global Research News

by SuperStation95

In a shocking move likely to crush the US economy overnight, China is refusing to make its new gold-backed Yuan, convertible from or to US Dollars. The new Yuan will be introduced next Tuesday, April 19.

When the International Monetary Fund (IMF) agreed to add the Yuan to the basket of world currencies used for Global Reserves and International Trade, they wanted China to make the Yuan more reliable as a currency. Since then, China has almost un-pegged its Yuan from the Dollar, allowing its value to fluctuate on world markets.

But for years, China has been amassing huge amounts of gold bullion; some have said their appetite for bullion has been “staggering.” And with a new gold-backed Yuan to be issued next Tuesday, the entire world will have a choice of a new currency to use for international trade: The old US Dollar which is backed by nothing, or the new Chinese Yuan, which is backed by gold. Which currency would YOU use?

When this new currency is issued, countries that have been forced to use US Dollars for decades, and have had to keep billions of dollars in their foreign currency reserves, will be free to dump those dollars. But they won’t be able to dump them to China for the new gold-backed, Yuan!

China has reportedly decided “there can be no conversion of gold-backed Yuan to or from US dollars.” What China fears is that many countries around the world will want to trade their reserve US dollars for the new Yuan, leaving China with mountains of worthless US dollars. China already has several trillion in US dollar reserves and does not want or need more.

If news of this decision by China is correct, then countries around the world may just have to decide whether or not they wish to continue trading with the USA at all?

The upheaval this could cause as early as next week, would be staggering.

This is a fast-developing story; check back.

Posted in English
Comments Off on China Says “No Dollars” for New Yuan

Live from Damascus: The Syrian Election Results

April 18th, 2016 by Ken Stone

“Syria’s ruling Ba’ath Party and its allies have won the majority of the votes in the recent parliamentary elections in the country, official results show.

The Syrian electoral commission announced late Saturday that the National Unity coalition, comprising the ruling party and its allies, had won 200 of the 250 seats at the People’s Assembly (Majlis al-Sha’ab).” ~ Press TV

Tuesday’s Syrian election was a vote of confidence by the Syrian people in their government. 5,085,444 voters cast their ballots out of a possible 8,834,994 eligible voters.

The overall participation rate of 58% (virtually identical to Canada’s last federal election) exceeded the government’s expectations in most places but was low in others.

For example, it was over 80% in Homs but only 52% in Tartous. What might explain the uneven results is the history of the war. People who suffered the most from the war, for example in Homs, were probably more grateful for their liberation and more motivated to exercise their political rights than people in Tartous who saw no fighting at all (though they lost thousands upon thousands of sons and grandsons in the war).

Also significant was the fact that over 140,000 refugees returned across the Lebanese border in just one day in order to vote.

And the polling hours in Damascus, which suffered a lot from the fighting, had to be extended until 11 pm to accommodate all the voters.

There were even polling stations set up by the government in recently liberated Palmyra and Al-Qaryaten, though those polls were largely symbolic because the inhabitants of those towns have not yet been able to return to their homes due to widespread destruction, prior to liberation by the Syrian Arab Army.

The voter participation rate is key to this election, more important than the individual candidates who were elected.

Here’s why: you need to understand elections in a constitutionally-created state, in which one party dominates, in terms of a strike vote in a trade union.

It demonstrates continuing confidence in the leadership at a turning point in the struggle. A union would not be satisfied with a strike vote of 58%, going into a strike. And probably the Syrian government would have wished for a higher rate going into the negotiations at Geneva. But it knew from the start that holding the elections under the conditions of war and occupation was a gamble, because there are a lot of eligible voters living outside of Syria right now, living in places besieged by the terrorists, and who have died but not yet been accounted for.

Taking into account these factors, the participation rate would probably have been much higher.

Among our solidarity delegation, we have been pleased that the Syrian authorities did not try to inflate the figures to make the election results appear better than they actually were:

It reinforces our contention that the Syrian government is a credible force in the serious negotiations ahead.

As mentioned, the turning point for Syria is the current round of negotiations taking place right now in Geneva to find a lasting political solution to the crisis.

Today, the Syrian delegation took their seats with a mandate from the Syrian people, whereas the opposition delegation of head-choppers cobbled together at the last minute by the USA and Saudi Arabia have no mandate at all from the unfortunate Syrians who suffer under military occupation in “rebel-held” areas.

No elections were held there. Western governments, such as the USA, have dismissed the Syrian election out of hand, though the participation rate in the last US election was only 48%.

But that’s not to say there weren’t any interesting candidates elected. The sister of a Syrian soldier, Noor Al-Shogri, stood for election as an independent in parliament. Her brother, Yahya Al-Shoghri, was filmed as he was being executed by ISIS terrorists in 2014 in Raqqa. (If you can stomach the summary execution in cold blood of a prisoner of war, you will find the video brazenly posted by the terrorists on Youtube.)

The barbarians demanded that he say, as his dying words, “Long live the caliphate!” He famously refused and declared instead that “It will be erased!”

His last words then became a rallying cry in the national resistance against the foreign aggression. Noor Al-Shogri easily won her seat.

I met an independent candidate in the Old City of Damascus, Nora Arissian, a small Armenian woman with flaming red hair. She came up to me in the Greek Melkite Patriarch’s procession to the polling station and thanked me for Canada taking in 25000 Syrian refugees and then she pointedly added, “We want them all eventually to come home!”

She too won her seat.

The election results were delayed by a couple of days because the Syrian election commission was unsatisfied with the preparedness of eight polling stations in partially-occupied Aleppo. As I understand it, the elections in Aleppo had to be continued on the day following election day.

Some people have asked what is the role of Palestinian refugees in this election. The answer is that Palestinians, ethnically-cleansed in 1948 and after, do not vote in Syrian elections.

The political and social status of Palestinians in Syria is the highest of any Arab country but the Syrian government doesn’t grant them citizenship or let them vote because it doesn’t want to dilute their right under international law, reaffirmed by numerous resolutions of the United Nations, to return to their homes and farms in Palestine.

The fact that the Syrian government has been so adamant about this principle, is one of the main causes of the foreign aggression against the country (and in support of the State of Israel.) So the Syrian government pays a heavy price for its strong support of the Palestinian people.

In turn, the vast majority of Palestinian refugees in Syria strongly support their government, even though many have been made refugees a second time by the invasion into their neighbourhoods of the terrorist mercenaries from over 80 countries.

For example, a fierce struggle is taking place in Yarmouk right now just a few kilometres from where I write, among Isis, Al Nusra, and other terrorist gangs, over control of this former Palestinian neighbourhood/camp, which used to hold a quarter of a million people but is now a devastated ghost town with only a few thousand souls.

It bears repeating that these parliamentary elections were defiantly called by the Syrian government as “an exercise in national sovereignty.”

The point was to show the world, especially those western and Gulf states, who have waged the five-year long war of aggression against Syria, that Syrians are united in the belief that Syrians, and only Syrians, will decide the fate of Syria.

It appears that the gamble paid off.

Ken Stone is a veteran anti-war and peace activist.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Live from Damascus: The Syrian Election Results

Journey to the End of the Night: The Paris ‘Nuit Debout’ Movement

April 18th, 2016 by Gearóid Ó Colmáin

In his novel ‘Journey to the end of the night’ Louis-Ferdinand Céline provocatively described the soldiers who had died in the First World War as ‘idiots’. The French writer was referring to the fact the soldiers had given their lives for a cause that was not their own- a futile slaughter of the poor for the benefit of the rich. In the book’s many pertinent reflections on the human condition, the Céline notes how, in modernity, the street has come to constitute the place of dreams.

“Que fait-on dans la rue, le plus souvent ? On rêve. C’est un des lieux les plus méditatifs de notre époque, c’est notre sanctuaire moderne, la Rue – what do we most often do in the street, we dream. It is the most meditative place of our time, it is our modern sanctuary.”

Since the French government recently introduced legislation reforming labour laws, a new ‘spontaneous’ and acephalous, social movement has taken root throughout French cities- the ‘Nuit Debout- Up All night’ movement. As the title suggests, the social movement is taking place at night time and one of its slogans is ‘Rêve général !’ – general dream, which is a pun on ‘grève générale’-general strike. So, instead of calling for a general strike in order to bring the government to its knees, the activists are calling for dreaming in the streets!

The movement took off after the release on February 23 of journalist Francois Ruffin’s film ‘Merci Patron’- ‘Thank you boss’, a firm critical of French plutocracy.

Although the film criticizes the avarice of contemporary capitalism, it does not treat the relationship between monopoly capitalism, foreign wars of conquest in the service of capital accumulation, class warfare and mass media disinformation.

Nor does Ruffin’s film expose and denounce the complicity of all corporate French media outlets in war crimes and genocide in the Middle East and throughout Africa, through the dissemination of lies and disinformation about the role of Western imperialism in these wars.

There is no mention of the fact that the reason President Laurent Gbagbo of the Ivory Coast was kidnapped in 2010 by French commandos- his country bombed and his character assassinated- was due to the fact that he defied the powerful Club de Paris, the circle of French bankers who control the African neo-colony’s money; Gbagbo had proposed that the Ivory Coast print it’s own currency- a bold move which would have enabled the resource-rich country to build up its own industrial base independent of colonial interests.

Although there is a stand at the place de la Republique claiming to expose the detrimental role of French policy in Africa, there is no real information of what that role is, nor have any of the pan-Africanist intellectuals who have written on the topic been invited to speak and sell their books. The ‘Nuit Debout’ movement is predominantly white and middle class.

Ruffin’s film also fails to point out how French bosses in the cereal industry colluded with terrorism against the people of Libya when they secretly met in with Libyan traitors in Paris in November 2010 to organise the bombing and destruction of Africa’a richest and most democratic country.

The French ruling class are not just guilty of destroying centuries of social gains by French workers, they are complicit in genocide and crimes against humanity. So why is Ruffin silent about that fact?

Ruffin writes for ‘leftist’ publications which supported the NATO-backed ‘rebels’ in Libya- rebels who were in fact Al-Qaeda terrorists in the service of NATO. In 2011 the ‘left-wing’ Monde Diplomatique published an article on Libya declaring that there was no doubt about the ‘brutality of the regime’, in spite of the fact all of the crime imputed to Colonel Gaddafi were carried out by the Takfiri ‘rebels’.

Ruffin and the dishonest publications he writes for are all complicit in the genocide waged by NATO against the people of the Southern Hemisphere states, from the Middle East and Africa to Latin America.

No, none of these uncomfortable realities are depicted in Ruffin’s ‘anti-capitalism.’ Instead, we have ultra-leftist slogans, petty-bourgeois irony and the mindless occupation of a public square by youths, who have neither the education nor the experience necessary to understand the structural reasons and deeper implications of the labour reform they claim to oppose.

The ‘Nuit Debout’ movement is certainly not spontaneous, nor is it grass-roots and acephalous as so many pundits claim.

On the contrary, it is the result of decades of careful policy analysis by US imperial ideologues. Since the undemocratic dissolution of the USSR in, 1991, the United States has perfected a regime change technique commonly referred to as ‘colour revolutions’. The strategy involves co-opting leftist slogans and symbols to serve a right-wing agenda. Lenin and the Bolshevik party had repeatedly denounced Leon Trotsky for utilizing this counter-revolutionary technique both before and after the October Revolution. It has now become a standard tool of US foreign policy.

Pied Piper2 dcb23

The manipulation of youthful naivety and rebellion for the purposes of either overthrowing a foreign government hostile to US interests or creating a ‘left-wing’ opposition movement in imperial countries designed to kill all real opposition- this is a strategy which every would be activist needs to study if he wishes to engage in movements capable of real, social, political and economic change.

The ‘Nuit Debout’ movement is being led by petty-bourgeois, bohemians with little or no understanding of contemporary capitalism. The movement is organized on the same principals as the US backed colour revolutions in Eastern Europe and the Arab Spring- empty slogans, idiotic puns and political infantilism. Although we cannot yet prove it, the use of the clenched fist as the movement’s logo coupled with cretinous slogans, are strongly reminiscent of strategies and tactics of CANVAS, the Centre for Applied Non-Violent Actions and Strategies, a regime change youth training organization close to the CIA.

The ruling class in France have evidently spent more time reading Marx than their would-be opponents. For the objective allies of monopoly capitalism in Europe today are the likes of François Ruffin and the other leading bourgeois leftist ideologue of this movement Frédéric Lordon- both of whom mask the reactionary nature of their pseudo ‘anti-capitalism’ or, to be more precise, their ‘anti-neoliberalism’, with a mixture of convoluted semantics, pseudo-intellectualism and ultra-leftist sloganeering.

There are thousands of real, grass-roots organizations in France, and they get much of their information from independent media such as Meta TV, Cercle Des Voluntaires, Reseau Voltaire and many more. Real proletarian analysis of capitalism is provided by communist organizationssuch as OCF , and URCF. Coherent bourgeois critique of French and EU imperialism is provided by the political party UPR.

The ‘Nuit debout’ activists talk about a ‘convergence of struggle’ yet journalists and activists from these genuinely popular organisations have been forcibly escorted from the Place de la Republique and denounced as ‘fascists’. Antifa is an organisation which purports to fight fascism but spends most of its time attacking all genuine anti-imperialist activists by blackening their name with the label ‘fascist’.

Antifa have been active again in the ‘Nuit Debout’movement where genuine French anti-imperialists such as Sylvain Baron have been forcibly evicted from the square.

This writer repeatedly pointed out in 2011 that the failure of the left to understand the reactionary ideology of the Arab Spring and the role of US agencies in its planning and execution, would have dire consequences for progressive politics. Now, similar techniques are being used throughout the world in order to criminalize real anti-capitalist agitation and create the conditions of military dictatorship. The objective allies of that strategy are petty bourgeois ‘anti-capitalists such as François Ruffin and Frédéric Lordon; these are the phastamagorical, would-be intellectuals who shine in the streets of the nocturnal, metropolitan dream world so eloquently depicted by Céline.

voyage au bout de la nuit eb5e9

The representation of imperialism’s foreign wars of aggression as ‘revolutions’ and ‘humanitarian interventions’, coupled with an infantile advocacy of vacuous concepts such as ‘social Europe’- this is the nefarious role played by these post-modern ‘revolutionaries’, who are the very avant-garde of reactionary imperialism. A malady when this writer denounced it in 2011, pseudo-leftism has now morphed into a serious planetary pandemic. If this form of leftism did not exist, imperialism would have had to invent it. The ‘Nuit Debout’ movement is now spreading throughout the world.Pseudo-leftist media will zealously present this movement as a global painting of Delacroix’s ‘Liberty Leading the People’ when sadly, it is rather more of a sinister version of the Pied Piper of Hamelin.

The soi-disant ”anti-fascists” in this movement denounce as ”fascists” those who expose corporate media lies used to justify the crimes of NATO’s foreign wars-the foreign wars of capital accumulation waged by the same corporations imposing austerity and class war at home; but it is they who are the fascists, it is they who are the enemies of the working class!

Ideological confusion is the great political illness of our time. Céline describes war and illness as the two ‘infinities of nightmare’. One could describe the two contemporary ‘infinities of nightmare’ as the proliferation of wars of aggression and the triumph of capitalist repression due to the political illness of ultra-leftist cretinism, which has taken over the labour movement in the last 30 years. Until our youth emancipate themselves from the pernicious influence of controlled opposition and pseudo-leftist ideology- which turns them into useful idiots of the monopoly capitalism rather than revolutionaries- their good natured activism is tragically destined to precipitate civilization’s journey to the end of the night.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Journey to the End of the Night: The Paris ‘Nuit Debout’ Movement

The Boston Bombing Anniversary: Thirteen Unanswered Questions

April 18th, 2016 by Russ Baker

Here we are, on the third Boston Marathon since the one we will never forget. Two powerful bombs ripped through the assembled crowd, killing Krystle Campbell, Lu Lingzi and Martin Richard, and wounding many others. Later, a policeman was shot to death.

The images are seared into our memories. So, too, is the extraordinary government response: an American city totally locked down while armored vehicles, helicopters, and police in full combat gear patrolled the streets of greater Boston.

Four days after the bombing, the Tsarnaevs were cornered and there was a gun battle. In the end, one young man was dead, and his younger brother badly injured.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, FBI Suspects 1 and 2
Photo credit: FBI

We were told that law enforcement had identified the perpetrators, who had acted entirely on their own. The surviving brother was eventually put on trial, convicted, and sentenced to death.

At the trial, his government-appointed counsel stated that he was guilty, and he himself admitted his guilt, and said that he was sorry. But that is all he said. To this day he has never explained how he and his brother ever became terrorists.

He couldn’t tell us if he wanted to. Since his arrest he’s been held under unusual Special Administrative Measures (SAMs), which prevent him from communicating with the outside world. Strikingly, SAMs have also been imposed on his attorneys. The government maintains that SAMs are necessary to prevent prisoners from inciting others to commit acts of terrorism.

But what others? The FBI insists the two brothers were lone wolves, unconnected to any larger network.

Family members say they were told to keep their mouths shut. And they were warned not to challenge the credibility of the investigation or the prosecution.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s silence suggests that he, too, was told that worse would come if he were to explain what actually happened, and why. That is, if he even knows.

His uncle seemed to think he knew: he fingered the brothers as likely to be the bombers. And what is even more weird, this uncle had married into a prominent CIA family, and they were surrounded by odd characters connected in various ways to America’s national security leviathan.

Certainly, they were not like typical terrorists.They did not blow themselves up, they made no political statement. They did not flee Boston. In fact, they seemed to continue with their normal lives in the hours and days following the explosions — right up to the moment the FBI posted their images and asked the public to help identify them.

What happened after that, and why, remains a mystery. We have been told that the brothers killed an MIT police officer on an empty campus — yet another victim of this tragedy — but if they were his murderers, they still did not flee. The brothers apparently spent the next hour and a half driving, fairly slowly, in circles around the suburbs of Boston, mostly in the company of a man they purportedly carjacked, before they ended up focusing on Watertown, where they appeared to be waiting for…something or someone.

FBI Poster Seeking Suspect 1 Photo credit: FBI

The Boston Marathon Bombing is one of the most astonishing stories of the new millennium, a smaller but no less problematic 9/11, where, again, so much doesn’t add up. And, again, the FBI appears to have played its long-running role as a coverup vehicle — protecting those who apparently have more hold over the Bureau than either Congress or the temporary occupant of the White House.

In the days after the bombing, WhoWhatWhy risked ridicule, marginalization, and worse, to honor the best instincts of journalism. Virtually alone among American news organizations — indeed, news media the world over, which just promoted the problem-riddled official version of events — we kept our heads down, ignored the brickbats and, with few people and limited resources, pressed onward.

The result was the more than 70 stories we published on our site. We hope, if you are not familiar with them, you will take the time to educate yourself about this mass-murder mystery that touches on so many of the central issues of our day.

It is profoundly important that we keep the spotlight on events like these, where so much of the official narrative does not add up.

The Unanswered Questions

1. What was Tsarnaev’s relationship with the FBI/CIA?

What was the true nature of the FBI’s (or CIA’s) relationship with the Tsarnaev family — particularly Tamerlan? Since the beginning, we’ve been seeing more and moreevidence, circumstantial and otherwise, that there is way more to this back story than the government will admit.

The FBI, after claiming it didn’t know Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was forced to admit that it had known him before the bombing — in fact, its agents had been in and out of his house several times over a number of years, and had “investigated” him. There seems no doubt that the FBI was very interested in Tamerlan and his circle of friends — who were exactly the sort of young Muslims typically recruited as informants.

2. Why was Tsarnaev, a potential terrorist, given such freedom of movement?

And what role did the US’s antagonistic geopolitical relationship with Russia play in this tragedy? Tamerlan was waived t hrough both America’s and Russia’s airportsdespite being on the terrorist watch lists of both countries.

3. Why apply SAMs?

Why is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev being held “incommunicado” under Special Administrative Measures even though the government maintains he and his brother acted alone and were not part of a terrorist network? What are the powers-that-be afraid he’ll say to the outside world?

Why harass Tsarnaev associates?

Why did the government go “scorched earth” on all of the Tsarnaevs’ friends, family and associates — harassing, deporting, and in one case shooting to death individuals who the government readily admits had no connection to the bombing? Were they being pre-emptively silenced? Like the Tsarnaev case, the shooting death was full of anomalies, stunning discrepancies, and suppression of inquiry.

4. Were any of Tsarnaev’s friends working for the Feds?

Why were some of the Tsarnaevs’ friends sentenced to years in jail for lying to the Feds, while others were let off scot-free for doing the same thing? In fact, the FBI said one of them lied about “matters of great import.”

5. What happened on April 17 at the courthouse?

Why has there been no credible explanation of the events around the Federal courthouse on the afternoon of Wednesday April 17th? We are told that unfounded speculation about an arrest and a suspect in custody is what caused reporters to converge upon the courthouse. Yet, at least two journalists inside the building were told by court officials (including judges) that a person was expected in court, and that courtroom #18, and an overflow room, were being prepared.

Reports of a suspect in custody were then denied by law enforcement. And half an hour later, the courthouse was evacuated because of a bomb threat. During the “code red” we see a US Marshal’s wagon with an armed footplate-rider enter the courthouse building. Oddly, the existence of a motorcade to the courthouse was acknowledged — but nobody has said what the motorcade was, or why it was headed to the court.

6. Why was surveillance footage of the policeman’s shooting edited?

This is another episode that doesn’t make sense to us.

We were told that M.I.T. surveillance footage proves that the brothers crept up to Sean Collier’s car and shot him. But the film was shot at night, and at such a great distance, it is impossible to even discern the gender of the two figures, let alone their identity. They are tiny stick figures.

But what is really bewildering is that at the critical moment — the film is cut. Then it resumes again when the stick figures have finished their business and are running away. It is unlikely they cut the film at that moment to shield the viewer from gore; it would not have been visible.

In fact all of the supposedly “damning” videos shown in court were of such poor quality they are really not that damning.

7. Why did the carjacking victim give such conflicting stories?

We have been told that the Tsarnaev brothers carjacked a foreign national student, but that story is full of holes too. Why did carjacking victim Dun “Danny” Meng give such wildly conflicting accounts of the carjacking and his subsequent “escape.”

8. Why was the gas station surveillance footage edited?

Why does the gas station surveillance camera footage shown in court appear to contradict Meng’s testimony about what happened in the SUV? He was never seriously cross-examined.

Why was that footage so tightly edited? And why did they remove the video’s time stamp?

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Photo credit: FBI / YouTube

9. What color was the backpack?

How come nobody in law enforcement can seem to get the color of Dzhokhar’s backpack right?

The indictment says it’s black; Dzhokhar supposedly told his interrogators it was brown; but it looks mostly white or light gray to the rest of us. Why has nobody tried to clear that up — or even acknowledge this issue? It happens to concern a major piece of evidence.

10. Why pin the Waltham murders on Tamerlan?

Why were law-enforcement officials quick to pin an unsolved triple murder on Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Ibragim Todashev?

This is especially puzzling since the government quickly reversed itself, once the prosecution got wind that Dzhokhar’s lawyers were exploring a defense strategy that would claim Dzhokhar only participated in the bombing because he was afraid of his murderous older brother and didn’t dare refuse his demands.

The prosecution was never called to account for this startling reversal. Because the government vehemently opposed the defense’s filings to gain access to the relevant documents, the defense attorneys never saw them. They were simply told that the government, contrary to its initial position, had no evidence that Tamerlan Tsarnaev participated in the Waltham murders.

11. Did the brothers have help?

The government never definitively settled where or exactly how the bombs were manufactured, a question that remains unanswered. Early on, numerous experts expressed doubts that the brothers had the expertise to make and precisely coordinate detonation of the bombs.

12. The “After Action Report” — Why did it report so little?

Why is it that the After Action Reports, Inspector General Reports, and the court case itself failed to clear up — or even address — any of these mysteries?

13 The Ultimate Mystery

The Executive Branch Inspector General community has given us a hint of how deep the mystery goes: Even the government’s duly authorized investigators say they are being denied access to what our intelligence agencies are up to.

We will have more to say. And we hope you will be with us — enabling us to stay on the trail.

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Boston Bombing Anniversary: Thirteen Unanswered Questions

Propaganda for a Price: The NED, Reporters Without Borders and the 2016 Press Freedom Index

April 18th, 2016 by Timothy Alexander Guzman

The annual Press Freedom Index produced by Reporters without Borders (RSF) is due out on April 20th according to their official website https://rsf.org/en. The question is what countries will the international Non-Government Organization (NGO) declare the worst for press freedoms? No question Syria would be on top the list as one of the worst due to the civil war along with Washington’s traditional enemies including Cuba, Russia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Venezuela etc. Granted they are problems within every country in the world when it comes to freedom of the press.

However, the U.S. ranked 49th in the 2015 Press Freedom Index by Reporters without Borders (RWB) also known as Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF) due to its pursuit of Wiki leaks founder Julian Assange and the persecution of New York Times reporter Jim Risen in connection with Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer and whistleblower who was on trial and convicted of charges under the Espionage Act for giving Mr. Risen classified government information.

Since then, there have been a number of new cases of government censorship that deserves international attention. For example, the censorship of the documentary film ’Vaxxed: from Cover-Up to Catastrophe’ that was supposed to air in the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City by the Medical establishment who is influential in Washington is an issue Reporters without Borders should consider. Mike Adams, publisher and editor of Natural News wrote an article on the censorship committed by the medical establishment and said

“The censorship of medical truth has reached a fever pitch as books, films and documentaries are now being maliciously attacked and censored in a desperate ploy to prevent the public from learning the truth about cancer, vaccines, antidepressant drugs and more.”

The documentary film is based on the research done by Dr. Andrew Wakefield who discovered a link between the controversial MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) vaccine and the rise of autism in children.Another case was in the U.S. state of Arizona which has banned reporters from the floor who refuse background checks is now required by law. According to the ‘Arizona Capital Times,’ the state house has “banned reporters from the floor who would not consent to extensive background checks.” The report confirmed the move by State House leaders who claim the new law is to keep politicians “safe”:Several media organizations who routinely cover the Legislature, including the Associated Press, the Arizona Republic, the Capitol Times and Capitol Media Services were denied the traditional access after refusing to sign documents allowing House staff to check not just criminal history records but all civil records, driving records and other public records

Arizona’s new law bans journalists for the safety of politicians are an excuse to limit free speech and reporting on corrupt politicians. The Arizona Capital Times went on to say the new law is extreme “but the policy went beyond the checks, listing specific criminal offenses that would automatically disqualify a reporter from having floor privileges, including misdemeanor offenses like trespass.” Does the state of Arizona have corrupt politicians that travel at the expense of Arizona taxpayers? The report mentioned the speaker of the house Republican David Gowan “Speaker David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista, said it was not targeting the media but about keeping lawmakers safe. He cited a disturbance last week, not at the press tables in the secure area of the House but in the public gallery.” Hank Stephenson’s report on state paid travel expenses paints a different story altogether:

Rep. Reginald Bolding, D-Laveen, suggested that the new regulations have less to do with security than with the discomfort of some lawmakers with what reporters have been writing. And that, he said, includes reports on state-paid travel. That is a reference to an extensive story earlier this year by Hank Stephenson of the Arizona Capitol Times about Gowan’s travels at state expense, much of it in the congressional district where he wants to get elected.

Gowan eventually had to repay the House more than $12,000. Ginger Lamb, the paper’s publisher, noted the list of disqualifying crimes like rape and assault also included trespass. And Stephenson has a 2014 conviction for trespass, the result of a fight in Wickenburg. Lamb called the timing of the speaker’s action “peculiar.”

“This new protocol would have an adverse effect on a member of our reporting team that has written several stories that are critical of the speaker’s leadership,” she said in a prepared statement. “I would hope this is coincidence, but past experience leads me to believe otherwise”

Obviously, Mr. Gowan is upset that he had to repay $12,000 out of his own pocket, now he wants to ban reporters from the House floor as payback. The State Press, a local news organization in Arizona published a report titled‘House measure limits free press, free speech, free thought’ which stated “The legislation on its own teeters on the line between a safety measure and censorship. But when you consider that for 34 years, journalists have been granted access to the House floor without a hiccup, it leans closer toward suppression than security.”

The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights has been deemed non-existent in Arizona by restricting journalists in the House floor should allow the U.S. to slip even further down the list in the 2016 Press Freedom Index if RWB is serious about the freedom of the press.

RWB is usually biased towards nations who Washington and Europe deem uncooperative. It is a red flag for an organization that is supposed to be neutral since it’s an international NGO, but geopolitics play an important part when a nation’s freedom of the press is criticized by the West for propaganda purposes. Global Research contributor F. William Endghal wrote an article in 2010 titled: ‘The “Evil Guys List”? “Free Journalism” in the Service of US Foreign Policy: The Role of Reporters without Borders” questioned who is behind the organization:

The most interesting question is not the deeds of Hu Jintao or Putin or Ahmadinejad in the last year in relation to their national press, but rather who is judging these leaders. We might well ask, “Who judges the judges?” The answer is, Washington. Reporters Without Borders is an international Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). According to its website it is headquartered in Paris, France. Paris is a curious home base for an organization that, as it turns out, is financed by the US Congress and by agencies tied to the US government.

If we go to the RWB website to find who stands behind these self-anointed judges of world press freedom, we find nothing. Not even their board of directors are named, let alone their financial backers. Their annual published Income and Expenditure statements give no clue who stands behind them financially

RW B’s former Secretary General Robert Menard admitted that the budget for the organization was provided by “US organizations strictly linked with US foreign policy.” So which U.S. organization is linked with Washington’s foreign policy? The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) of course, which has funded the international NGO who criticizes Washington’s enemies when it comes to the freedom of the press. Endgahl mentions a ZNET article written by Diana Barahona’s in 2006 titled ‘Reporters Without Borders and Washington’s Coups’ on the NED’s funding of RWB which was denied by its executive director Lucie Morillon at the time:

As one researcher found after months of trying to get a reply from NED about their funding of Reporters Without Borders, which included a flat denial from RSF executive director Lucie Morillon, the NED revealed, according to Diana Barahona writing in Znet that Reporters Without Borders received grants over at least three years from the International Republican Institute. The IRI is one of four subsidiaries of NED. An IRI spokesperson has denied IRI funding the RWB

The 2016 Press Freedom Index will most likely keep U.S. rankings in a “not so bad” category to show the international community that they are neutral, but that is just a facade. Governments targeted for “Regime Change” will be on top of the list as the worst for press freedoms including Ecuador, Cuba, Syria, Russia and Iran. The Press Freedom Index serves as a propaganda tool to demonize countries that are not subservient to Washington’s interests. Reporters Without Borders should be seen in the same category as the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists who recently produced ‘The Panama Papers’ and that is a paid propaganda mouthpiece for Washington. RWB has a purpose and that is to provide ammunition to criticize censorship by governments not subservient to Washington for the most sophisticated propaganda machine in modern history, the U.S. mainstream media.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Propaganda for a Price: The NED, Reporters Without Borders and the 2016 Press Freedom Index

The Grim Conditions of Jordan’s Immigration Detention Camps. Blatant Human Rights Violations

April 18th, 2016 by Siraj Davis

I strongly feel my personal experience may append some insight to their efforts. Recently, I and my wife (an Iraqi refugee), were unexpectedly arrested and quickly deported from Jordan -upon orders of the Jordanian Mukhabarat (intelligence)- for my passion in highlighting Syrian refugees’ tribulations and for me reporting labor violations and corruption to the National Centre of Human Rights, Tamkeen, and the Anti-Corruption Commission of Jordan. My labor complaint was in regards to the International Independent School on Airport Road and Sands National Academy in Khelda , Jordan.

It has unfortunately become the norm in the Hashemite Kingdom for indigent migrant workers and others to be booted from Jordan, violating international laws, before their trials commence or labor grievances against employers investigated. This is what occurred to me and my wife. In other words, if employees protest loud enough or their complaint possesses substantial merit, they are discreetly punished via deportation, even though their employers’ failure in abiding by Jordanian Labor Laws, resulted in immigration infractions which consequentially led to such deportation. It is hopeful this publication may provide a closer glance at the conditions of Jordan’s detention camps and deportation process for expats, Human rights NGOs, and those affluent supporting the Hashemite Kingdom’s persistent (media assuaged) violations of international human rights laws.

No Phone Call to Stay in Jordan

The mandatory one phone call – upon arrest- expected in most western nations to prisoners, is out the door in Jordan. While incarcerated within Jordan’s deportation camps, no one – other than those with ‘wasta’ or money- could access the telephone to buzz a lawyer or embassy.I was denied by every single officer from Jabal Shemalia to Tababour to Claa Ali detention centers for an entire week. I was either given a flat emotionless ‘no’ or the tautology of ‘later’. The latter reply, ‘later,’ of course never materialized within the Hashemite Kingdom’s ‘luxurious’ detention camp. However, if deportees submitted to voluntary deportation-prior to seeing an immigration judge- previously forbidden telephone privileges shockingly appear.

The Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan

It is quite simple, yet a cruel process. If you possess no one on the outside to facilitate your departure from Jordan, you are inured in waiting for an immigration judge. You should be prepared to inform your loved ones that over-stay fees are demanded to be paid in addition to travel costs. Thus, if you are estranged from family (as some Muslim reverts ) or an introvert, you’ll be incarcerated for a long period of unknown Rip Van Winkle, amount of time.

Miserable conditions

The conditions at the detention camps are miserably unacceptable. The heatless rooms are dark. On two occasions, I saw cells with four lamps , but only one functioning. The bathroom is an 18th century replica, a hole in the ground with water well beside it. Ventilation is meager and even the whiff of someone’s butt percussion is generously distributed to unsuspecting nostrils. People sleep on plastic mattresses with a thin sheet and rock hard pillows, surrounded by the unclear pitch of deep conversation by others clueless what will occur to them, and moldy decaying walls that stare emotionlessly at you. Although the Middle East is a male-dominated and gender repressive society, female facilities are chivalrously better. As my wife explained, the female prisoners have their own elevated bunk beds.

You are unlucky to be a tenant of the Amman Shemalia detention camp though. It is an ‘equally generous’ concrete sweet built for a capacity of twenty, but one may see fifty humans jammed inside like a rusty can of dead sardines. This crowdedness seems to proliferate animosity and verbal/physical confrontations between prisoner and prisoner and correctional officers (COs) and prisoners. Prisoners also are coerced to catch shut-eye without their mattresses, on top of each others’ feet and chests, while regularly tip-toeing to the bathroom around others’ vulnerable limbs who are helplessly laying on the cold concrete floor. Also medical assistance is non-existent. One obese detainee’s pleas for medical help as he held his palm flat against his chest and collapsed to the floor, went completely ignored. Also, prayer in the Amman Shemalia camp must be performed directly in front of the bathroom, in which I witnessed some vainly protesting this occurrence. In addition, there are is no washing laundry nor hygiene products nor access to a shower or a change of clothes. Bad breath, stinky underarms, lice, and cancerous-like sores distinguish seniority among the knowledgeable and experienced male prisoners. However, the female prisoners are allowed a shower daily and the ability to do their laundry and change clothing.

The glamorous victuals at the Jordanian detention facilities are distributed once in two days. It is comprised of watery soup, old vegetables, and tasteless rice which barely suffices what is necessary for human nutrient intake. However, the female prisoners are given a more varied amalgam of healthy vegetables, bread, rice, and meat for breakfast and dinner, twice a day. Male and female prisoners were administered just a bottle of 1/4 liter water. More bottles, better cuisine, and snacks are available to individuals who possess currency (prisoners maintain money on them while imprisoned). Unlike prison films, these detention camps luckily had no bugs in the chow. Thankfully, bugs have better slop outside the detention camps.

The Bad Correctional Officers

It is pertinent to not generalize because there is good and bad everywhere. And the Jordanian Cos and police are humans as well. Some are honest with you in regards to what occurs at the centers. Others attempt to connect you with the outside world by passing messages. A few even attempt to accommodate you if possible, when in urgent need. Another sneaks outside meals to certain prisoners. There were good Cos and police I met there which I respect tremendously now, and forever. However, there are ghastly ones as well.

While being transported between facilities, I surprisingly witnessed a childish armed officer playfully point his automatic double-handed firearm at one of the handcuffed detainees. I also witnessed two COs mercilessly take turns repetitively slapping a cornered handcuffed Turkish prisoner in the head and face, for the minor infraction of talking back. After this cruel beating, he was –while still handcuffed-thrown back into the holding tank for duration of time. An additional CO aggressively dragged a blond-haired outspoken Jordanian prisoner -who loudly bemoaned for coffee in the early morning- out of the inmates cell. The CO then violently shoved, repeatedly slapped, and like a pugilist, punched him with hooks and straights and uppercuts; while this helpless victim was handcuffed to a chair.

The CO ceased when breathless and exhausted. He then forcefully threw this prisoner out the door to other awaiting officers, who consequentially escorted the injured patient into solitary confinement. In a different incident, I witnessed one inmate remain in handcuffs for two entire days, sleeping in this manner, in consequence to his bold decision to go on hunger strike. I don’t know what his ultimate outcome was because he was unexpectedly and discreetly transferred out. When speaking to other prisoners about the horrible occurrences I witnessed, many retorted with worse horror stories. Eg. One unnamed prisoner was beaten unconscious, handcuffed, and his lifeless body thrown into the bathroom according to witnesses. The sole abuse I suffered were racial slurs against Asians by a CO at Tababour facility and shouts of “Fuck America” by one police man at the Claa Ali center. The aforementioned cases of abuse, of arrogant fear as author Ghassan Kanafani would describe, mostly occurred at the Amman Shemalia detention center.

My wife also witnessed one female Jordanian prisoner severely beaten and stomped by three female guards, and an officer, for the unthinkable dereliction of asking the staff to light her cigarette. One female staff retorted to this prisoner’s query by screaming, in which the prisoner calmly reminded the CO that she -as a human- has some right to dignity to shield her from unreasonable shouting. The pummeling then commenced. At the conclusion of this malaise, the female COs threatened to falsely accuse this inmate of insulting the King of Jordan, if she dared mention what occurred. That same victim a few hours later -while laying bloody on the ground- suddenly began gasping for oxygen in wild convulsions in front of everyone, until unconsciousness silenced her.

Testimonies of Hope

The experience in Jordan’s detention camps was utterly horrible. Yet the resilient in life discover some positive, under such tribulations. I recollect my Clemson University professor’s advice , Professor Lance Howard, to unearth the tiny glimmer of light in any gloomy situation, and nurture it. And I did. I formulated lasting friendships with ‘good’ people who despite suffering pitiful treatment equivalent to that reserved for dangerous felons, were solely guilty of pursuing their dreams of a better life. Some like an engineer Mohammed Bayo, who like me and others, swallowed our self respect to survive. I witnessed Jordanian COs and police on occasions, coerce him to loudly sing and shout chants of praise to the King of Jordan and recite the Jordanian National Anthem, in order to win their approval and avoid a more difficult imprisonment. Conversely, such childish treatment wretchedly failed to coax us into loving the Hashemite government and the King of Jordan. On the contrary, it subconsciously, and perhaps by the purpose of God’s will, permanently etched into our minds the recollection of this horrid Royal treatment and criminal violations of human rights laws with that of the Jordanian government, and the King of Jordan, all as the same.

I beheld these pioneers of human history, migrant workers, vehemently stripped of human dignity and some cruelly abused, denied natural rights accorded to the average human, and lingering in anguish without any glimmering contact to their own loved ones; while patiently awaiting an uncertain outcome in the squalid Jordanian detention camps. Their only crime, the many kind Syrians and Egyptians and Africans and Asians I met. They did not possess sufficient funds to pay for exorbitant immigration or labor fees. Or because they made a single small-minded immoral Jordanian citizen , enraged enough to barefacedly lie and fabricate a charge against them. Or these migrant workers were incarcerated and being deported as a result of punishment by an employer, for wrongly entrusting in a crooked Jordanian government and its superficial laws, when initially filing their own complaints against that employer first. One of the few occasions in the detention camps wherein a zephyr on the pinnacle of this mountain of tribulation cooled my nerves and comforted me, was when I came to the realization that my situation was not an anomaly.

I spoke with many migrant prisoners –who like me- filed official complaints against employers, but as with Arnold Abbot of Ft. Lauderdale Florida who was imprisoned for feeding the poor, suddenly found ‘themselves’ arrested for doing the right thing. My interviews and casual conversations with these victims for a week, abridged a closer revealing glimpse into this Jordanian injustice which synchronously augmented previous accusations by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Tamkeen. I am a believer in both HRW and Tamkeen now!

The palpable testimonies from the casualties of King Abdullah II’s obtuse immigration laws and detention camps touched my heart deeply in an indescribably sad manner. Some of these twice-victimized prisoners-forgotten and unloved,-were under the callous sponsorship of abusive employers who discreetly beat and pugnaciously locked them in tiny apartments, after illegally confiscating their passports. Silence was demanded by employers via threatening their employees with endless imprisonment. Others were capriciously sold off as property or sheep to a different employer without consent, separating dear friends and family. Others were reprimanded with imprisonment and deportation after complaining that their salaries were unpaid for months and even years. Many were refused the very labor contracts assured to them by employers, which inevitably resulted in their imprisonment. One Egyptian was incarcerated because he equally traded insult with insult, against a single Jordanian antagonist. These were not criminals! They were the indigent all of the real prophets of old respected and defended. They were innocent victims crushed within a cold machinery of corruption in Jordan! They were innocuous victims without the heroes and heroines of today, to grant them real justice.

Jordan’s Violations of International Human Rights Laws

King Abdullah’s regime is not the worst amidst the Middle East. Yet Jordan’s cajoling declaration as a staunch ally of Israel and the West doesn’t efface the truth. The Hashemite Kingdom is committing human rights violations with impunity while waving the banner of the War of Terrorism as an excuse. Jordan, is not an ally of humanity in the world. As NGOs as Tamkeen pointed out, Jordan is violating international laws in consequence to deporting migrant workers under incredulous conditions of detention and disgusting treatment, despite pending trials and doing so on the flimsiest of evidence. Contrary to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the UN Convention Against Torture.Additionally, I witnessed approximately ten to twelve Syrian refugees in these camps awaiting deportation which is against recognized international laws opposed to refoulement.My Iraqi wife was one of the deported asylees. Those refugees informed me, as well as other inmates, the deportation of Syrian refugees was a normal monthly routine.

Conclusion

Although I was not allowed to call anyone outside of the detention facilities, Mohammed Bayo , by the grace of God, handed me a telephone in the back of a police transport van.And with the help of others blocking the view of the police, I made phone calls. Certain ‘good’ police worked with my wife to financially arrange my departure. Those were my heroes and heroines. I humbly thank all of them dearly. I also recollect seeing a mentally handicapped beggar in the detention camp. From my arrival to my departure from Jordan, within a period of 5 years, I occasionally saw this man with his hands out at the intersection of the University Street, at the corner of the University of Jordan’s mosque and the street which led to the West Gate of the university. Till this day, I am proud that, unlike many Jordanians who attempted to convince me otherwise, I never refused handing him money, if I had it. I think reconnecting with him in jail was a sign from God. I would be released a week later.

It is pertinent to express my own opinion on King Abdullah II’s detention facilities and immigration laws. I feel that the deportation of migrant workers in Jordan is a discriminatory instrument of unnecessary punishment in Jordan, nothing to do with justice. Employers liberally employ ‘administrative detention’ and deportation- once reserved for state security motivations- as an instrument of repugnant punishment in Jordan. It is not a policy of prudence for Jordan’s future, but in contrast a tool to enforce the dominance of the repulsive racial and political hierarchy based upon the procreation of the progenitors of Jordan’s posterity. Those with exceptional skills, unmatched abilities, and extensive education are unimportant to Jordan and thus the brain drain continues its cycle to the Jordanian peoples’ own detrimental loss. The treatment and conditions of migrant workers in Jordan flirts closely – if not already there – with the demarcation line of slavery. It needs reform desperately and no one should hold the Jordan in any regard, other than outright condemnation and shame.

Notes:

1 Wasta is the word Jordanians use to describe a distinct form of unfair influence by an individual or group, which allows one or many to surpasses normal laws or rules. Examples are bribery, close relationships, tribal names, etc

2 Daily Mail “Drop that plate Right Now” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2821129/90-year-old-man-arrested-feeding-homeless-Fort-Lauderdale-new-law-introduced-bans-people-sharing-food-public.html

3 “Migrant Domestic Workers in Jordan” Huffington Post. Christoph Wilcke. https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/10/12/migrant-domestic-workers-jordan

4 Global Detention Project http://www.globaldetentionproject.org/countries/middle-east/jordan

5 Human Rights Watch Jordan: Vulnerable Refugees Forcibly Returned to Syria https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/11/23/jordan-vulnerable-refugees-forcibly-returned-syria

6 Mohammed Bayo https://www.facebook.com/mohamed.mbayo?fref=ts

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Grim Conditions of Jordan’s Immigration Detention Camps. Blatant Human Rights Violations

IMF and Troika Want Still “More Austerity” From Greece–The ‘Wikileaks’ Revelation

April 18th, 2016 by Dr. Jack Rasmus

Last August 2015, after eight months of intense negotiations with Europe’s Troika financial institutions—the IMF, European Central Bank, and European Commission—the Greek Government capitulated to the Troika’s demands imposing more austerity on Greece and its people in exchange for another $98 billion in additional loans.

The $98 billion did not represent economic assistance to Greece, to stimulate its economy, but was earmarked almost exclusively to pay back interest to the Troika, Europe banks, and Europe investors for prior loans made to Greece in 2012, 2010, and before. But while the Greek people would see little real benefit, they would have to pay the price. In exchange for the $98 billion in new credit, the August 2015 debt restructuring deal required Greece to even further cut pensions, axe more government jobs and cut wages, raise taxes, accelerate the sales of public works (ports, airports, utilities, etc.) to private investors, and to in effect turn over Greek banks to the Troika and its northern Europe banker and investor friends.

To ensure Greece would not renege on the August 2015 deal, it would now also have to submit to vetoes by Troika representatives sent to Greece to oversee virtually all policy decisions made by Greece’s democratically elected Parliament or local governments. The Troika last year thus tightened its grip on Greece both politically and economically to ensure it would receive debt payments from Greece no matter how harsh the austerity terms.

The Greek government may have thought it had a debt deal, albeit a dirty one, last August 2015; but recent developments are now beginning to reveal it was only temporary. Worse is yet to come. The Troika grip on Greece is about to tighten still further, as revelations in recent weeks show Troika plans to renege on last year’s terms and demand even more draconian austerity measures. Leading the Troika attack on Greece once again is the International Monetary Fund, the IMF, one of the Troika’s three institutional partners.

IMF Secret Plans to Impose Further Austerity on Greece

This past April 2, 2016, Wikileaks released transcripts of a secret teleconference among IMF officials that occurred on March 19. In it, leading IMF directors expressed concern that discussions between Greece and the IMF’s Troika partner, the European Commission, on terms of implementing last August’s deal were going too slowly. The Eurozone and Greek economies have been deteriorating since last August. Still more austerity would thus be needed, according to the discussions among the IMF participants in the teleconference. And to get Greece to agree, perhaps a new ‘crisis event’ would have to be provoked.

The original August 2015 deal called for Greece to introduce austerity measures that would result in a 3.5% annual GDP budget surplus obtained from spending cuts, tax hikes, and public works’ sales needed to make the debt repayments to the Troika. But the IMF’s latest forecast for 2016 is that Greece in 2016 would have a -1.5% GDP budget deficit, not a 3.5% budget surplus. And 2015, for which numbers are not yet available, was probably even worse. Getting from -1.5% or worse to 3.5% was thus virtually impossible, according to the IMF discussants on March 19, and therefore additional austerity measures were necessary.

According to the IMF, the additional austerity would have to occur in the form of ‘broadening the tax base’—a phrase typically associated with making households with lower incomes pay more taxes instead of just raising tax rates on the top income households. The IMF thus rejected taxing the rich further, and instead taxing middle and working classes more. In addition, still more pension cuts would also prove necessary, as well as other measures.

The IMF secret teleconference further revealed that the IMF was increasingly concerned that the European Commission, in the midst of discussions with Greece on the details of the implementation of the August deal with Greece, might agree prematurely to grant some kind of ‘debt relief’ to Greece. The IMF was strongly opposed to ‘up front’ debt relief. All talk of debt relief should be postponed for at least another two years, according to the IMF’s secret discussions.

The private teleconference also revealed the IMF was growing increasingly concerned that Greece’s major debt payment to the Troika due this coming July 2016 might not be paid. The default on the payment would come within weeks of a possible United Kingdom exit (Brexit) from the European Union, scheduled for a vote in the UK on June 23, 2016. If the UK exited, and Greece could not pay, it might raise renewed interest—the IMF feared—in a Greek exit (Grexit) as well as a UK ‘Brexit’. The IMF’s March 19 teleconference therefore raised the idea that further austerity should be considered and proposed on Greece and quickly, before the June 23 UK ‘Brexit’ referendum in that country.

The IMF’s April 15, Press Conference

The ‘firestorm’ over the leak of the IMF’s plans for new and more austerity for Greece, prompted public responses by Greece, as well as a clarifying press conference by the IMF’s European directors on April 15, 2016.

Greece’s prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, publicly replied, noting Greece was already undertaking “an ambitious reform of income tax and a major overhaul of the Greek pension system”—the former providing a revenue of 1% of GDP and the pension reform and even greater 1.5% by 2018. With pensioners carrying the greatest burden of the austerity terms, why should the very rich be given relief with more taxation imposed on the middle and working classes by ‘broadening’ the tax base—i.e. making it less progressive, Tsipras inquired?

Wolfgang Schaueble, hard line German finance minister, who led the forces imposing even more austerity on Greece in August 2015, responded that debt relief was “not necessary” and ruled out any debt relief whatsoever for Greece, in 2018 or at any time. Schauble added that IMF refusal to participate in the August 2015 Greek debt deal unless the terms of the deal were changed to suit the IMF (which did not sign the deal as yet), would collapse the 2015 deal altogether.

In the IMF’s press briefing of April 15, 2016 Poul Thomsen, head of the IMF’s European department, responded that the IMF could not participate in the bailout without debt relief in some form, but left the door open as to what debt relief actually meant. Thomsen repeated his proposal to “broaden the tax base” and not raise taxes further on the rich.

Behind the apparent Schauble vs. IMF disagreement is the implication that ‘debt relief’ would require some kind of what is called ‘haircut’ and reduction in interest and/or principal for those investors holding bonds issued by the Troika on Greek debt. That’s what Schauble and European bankers don’t want. The IMF thus assured that debt relief did not require ‘haircuts’.

The Meaning of the IMF’s New Attack on Greece

What the new developments reveal is that fractures are emerging within the Troika and the Euro elites in general over the Greek debt deal of last August, as Europe’s economy continues to falter. New crises have emerged in Europe, including the cost of refugee settlement and the great economic uncertainty associated with the possible UK ‘Brexit’ this June. Europe’s central bank monetary policies are also clearly failing in the face of a steadily slowing global economy.

At the same time, the IMF itself is facing additional challenges supporting an even worse economic crisis in the Ukraine, which it has also committed to bail out but which is collapsing faster than predicted. Meanwhile, on the horizon are growing stresses in emerging market economies that have accumulated $50 trillion in additional debt since 2009, which threaten to lay claims on the IMF in the not too distant future. The IMF is no doubt looking over its shoulder at even greater potential challenges than Greece.

In short, the deteriorating conditions in the global economy are beginning to converge, and the Troika, Europe, IMF are all feeling the heat as the economic temperature rises. Another debt crisis in Greece is inevitable. But it may occur at a juncture at which it appears the least of the economic problems facing the global economy.

Jack Rasmus is author of the recent book, ‘Systemic Fragility in the Global Economy’, Clarity Press, January 2016, and the forthcoming, ‘Looting Greece: The Emerging New Financial Imperialism’, Clarity Press, June 2016. He blogs atjackrasmus.com. This article was published by the author in Telesur Media English Edition, April 17, 2016

Posted in English
Comments Off on IMF and Troika Want Still “More Austerity” From Greece–The ‘Wikileaks’ Revelation

Growing Militarization of the South China Sea, US-China Confrontation

April 18th, 2016 by Brian Kalman

The South China Sea Dispute or Crisis as it has come to be known, is a rather complicated dispute involving many different parties, both directly and indirectly, and that concerns a number of key issues. These concerns include national sovereignty, control of oil and natural gas, fishing rights, and the freedom of navigation on the high seas. It is a matter of argument whether the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has helped resolve some aspects of the dispute or has done more to confuse and exacerbate the situation.

The dispute has reached a point of crisis over the past year, as China has upped the ante in its claims to most of the South China Sea. In 2009, China officially submitted its claims in the region to the UN, what came to be known as the “Nine Dash Line” claim. The Nine Dash Line claim basically asserts that the majority of the entire South China Sea is the historical, sovereign territory of China. In order to reinforce such a claim, China embarked on a rapid and ambitious plan to develop a number of reefs and islands in both the Paracel and Spratly Island chains in 2011. The island development involves a great deal of land reclamation that has created man made islands that China intends to occupy, administer and militarily reinforce.

The island construction efforts have worried the United States, which is wary of growing Chinese influence and ambition in the region. The Obama administration has increased military aid and cooperation with rival claimants in the region and has embarked on a course of military brinkmanship with China. Stressing the desire to maintain freedom of navigation through the South China Sea, a legitimate concern, the U.S. Navy has conducted a series of operations starting in late 2015, where warships have sailed within 12 nautical miles of these island construction operations, as well as fly-overs by surveillance aircraft and B-52 bombers. The USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier strike group was dispatched to the South China Sea in March of 2016, as the United States continues to increase its military presence in the region.

As the United States Navy is repeatedly sent to probe the reaction and resolve of China in staking its claim to sovereignty in the South China Sea over the coming year, it would seem prudent that diplomats and naval strategists study the historical precedent of two naval engagements fought by China in the region in past decades. China and Vietnam fought the Battle of the Paracel Islands in 1974 and the Johnson South Reef Skirmish in 1988. These two naval engagements between rival claimants to the islands had a significant influence on the course of the South China Sea Dispute over the intervening years and has led to the increasing militarization that we are witnessing today. A study of these two events are essential if an understanding of the current state of affairs in the region are to be understood.

I The Battle of the Paracel Islands, 1974

History

Although still mostly uninhabited, the Paracel Islands have changed sovereignty a number of times since the late 1800s. France claimed the islands as part of their colony of Indochina; however, they relented to China’s objections and recognized Chinese sovereignty over the islands at the conclusion of the short Sino-French War of 1884. The Islands were claimed by Japan after their invasion of China in 1931, attaching the Paracels and Spratly Islands to administration of the prefecture of Taiwan, having invaded and claimed that Island as well. France took advantage of this opportunity to once again lay claim to the Paracels as a part of Indochina. By 1941, Japan had defeated the French military and absorbed Indochina into the Japanese Empire. Upon the Japanese surrender in 1945, Nationalist China regained sovereignty over the islands, although the French protested once again over the rightful sovereignty of the Paracels. Upon defeat at the hands of the Chinese PLA, the Nationalist forces of China abandoned mainland China and consolidated in Taiwan. France would later be forced to relinquish its hold on Indochina, and Vietnam would have to fight the United States in a long and costly war before gaining its independence. Split into two countries by the time of the Battle of the Paracel Islands in 1974, it was the Navy of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam) that would clash with China, at that time an ally of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam). When one considers the historical context, it becomes clear why China, Vietnam, and Taiwan all still claim sovereignty over the Paracels.

Paracel Islands

The Naval Engagement

In 1974, when Vietnam was fighting a civil war between the U.S. backed regime in the south and the communist regime in the north, China saw an opportunity to occupy the Paracels, while Vietnam was distracted by more pressing matters. While the naval engagement was fought on January 19th, the situation first developed on January 16th and extended until January 20th. On the 16th, South Vietnamese Navy officers and an American advisor on the frigate Lý Thường Kiệt (HQ-16), discovered a small PLA force occupying both Drummond and Duncan Island while conducting a patrol of the region. The PLA troops were supported by converted (armed and armored) fishing vessels at the time of their discovery; however, it was known that other PLAN warships were in the vicinity. The commander of the Lý Thường Kiệt reported the situation to the South Vietnamese naval command who dispatched additional warships to the area.

The following day, January 17th, a small force of South Vietnamese commandos took up position on Robert Island and discovered that a Chinese flag had been planted on the island, which they promptly removed. The frigate Trần Khánh Dư (HQ-4) arrived to reinforce the Lý Thường Kiệt , while the Chinese Kronstadt Class submarine chasers #274 and #271 arrived on the scene as well. By the 18th, two additional Vietnamese vessels arrived, the Trần Bình Trọng (HQ-5) and the corvette Nhật Tảo (HQ-10). The Nhật Tảo arrived on the scene with only one functioning main engine for the battle that would follow.

Kronstadt Class submarine chaser. These vessels were only of approximately 300 tons displacement

By the morning of the 19th of January, Vietnamese troops from the Trần Bình Trọng landed on Duncan Island and were repulsed by the PLA troops dug-in there, suffering casualties including 3 KIAs before retreating from the island. At this point, two additional Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) vessels had arrived on scene, the T34 Class minesweepers #386 and #389. At approximately 1030 hours the Vietnamese vessels opened fire on the Chinese warships in a naval engagement that would last only 40 minutes, but would see all vessels engaged damaged by enemy fire. The Chinese commanders were able to maneuver their smaller craft skillfully, and engaged and defeated an equal number of larger and more heavily armed adversaries. The corvette Nhật Tảo HQ-10 was immobilized and sunk. The fateful decision to send the vessel to a potential conflict in the first place, with only one working main engine, was an act of criminal negligence on the part of South Vietnam’s naval high command. While the crew was ordered to abandon ship, its captain, Lt. Commander Ngụy Văn Thà decided to go down with his ship.

The ill-fated Nhật Tảo HQ-10 commanded by Lt. Commander Ngụy Văn Thà.

The battle ended when the commander of the South Vietnamese fleet, Col. Hà Văn Ngạc who was in acting command of the frigate Trần Bình Trọng (HQ-5), ordered all vessels to withdraw westward as two additional PLAN Hainan Class submarine chasers , the #281 and #282, were discovered to be closing on the area of the battle at top speed. Additional Chinese warships and aircraft were also inbound from Hainan Island. In effect, the small South Vietnamese garrison on the islands was abandoned and forced to surrender on the 20th after being subjected to bombardment from Chinese aircraft. A PLA force of marines made an amphibious landing on Pattle Island and took over 40 men prisoner, including the American military advisor, all of whom were later released to the International Red Cross in Hong Kong on January 31st.

Lasting Ramifications

The Chinese Navy fought a brave and savage engagement against a force of warships that was far superior in displacement, armor and armament. The Chinese naval forces showed resolve and tenacity in staking their claim to the islands and refused to back down when fired upon by a superior force. The Republic of Vietnam forces were soundly beaten, and when it was obvious that additional forces had been dispatched to the battle by China, they requested assistance from the U.S. Seventh Fleet, which was active in the area. The United States had no intention of becoming more embroiled in a regional conflict that it had recently extricated itself from on an official level, and had no intention of engaging in hostilities with China, a nation that the Nixon administration hoped to improve diplomatic relations with.

The Paracel Islands were effectively occupied by China and sovereignty was enforced by the PLAN. China established a military outpost and surveillance base on Woody Island which has expanded significantly over the intervening decades. China has built a military airbase complete with a 2,700 meter (8,900ft) long runway, hangars for fighters, and armored munitions bunkers in recent years. Two batteries of HQ-9 surface-to-air missile systems were deployed on the island in February of this year, which sent shockwaves throughout the South China Sea. China had made it known that J-11B fighters were deployed to the islands a few months prior to deployment of the SAMs. It is important to note that China has also increased civilian development on the island, including encouraging tourism to the islands amongst its citizens on the mainland. Civilian aircraft and small cruise vessels bring tourists to the tiny islands increasingly. It appears that China is exerting sovereignty over the islands in a number of respects.

II The Johnson South Reef Skirmish, 1988

History

The many claims of national sovereignty over the Spratly Islands are even more muddled and complicated than that of the Paracels. As is the case with the Paracels, the conquests of Imperial Japan during the years of 1931 – 1945 and the civil war within China, have both played a significant role in some nations’ established claims to at least some of the islands. China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and the Philippines all claim some of, if not all of the islands as their sovereign territory. These claims of sovereignty are both historical and legal, in a modern sense, as they pertain to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, 1982).

The Imperial Japanese expansion that occurred between 1931 and 1945 claimed many sovereign territories of nations in the region as well as a number of colonial holdings of a number of European powers. When Imperial Japan was defeated by the colonial powers that had previously held sway in the region, such as the United States, France and Britain, as well as regional resistance movements such as could be found in Vietnam the Philippines, old and new claims were brought forward. In a similar fashion as in the Paracels, an island chain of small islands, atolls and reefs was claimed, conquered, imperially administered in an arbitrary fashion, and then surrendered over a period of fifty years. This led to a host of conflicting claims at the end of the Second World War that continue today.

Fast forward to 1988, after the regional powers of China, Vietnam, Taiwan, the Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia had all ratified the UNCLOS. The UNCLOS established the 12 mile territorial water boundary as well as the 200 mile Economic Exclusion Zone (EEZ) that all signatories must recognize. Quite obviously, many EEZs overlap one another and this reality was understood when UNCLOS was drafted. Mechanisms for conflict resolution and arbitration were also established by the UN to resolve disputes. Matters of national pride and sovereignty aside, oil and gas exploration over the past twenty years have found ample evidence that vast amounts of these resources exist below the seabed in the entire South China Sea region. The desire to claim and control these resources, as well as the marine life resources (fishing rights) in the area have only added pressure on claimants to secure as much of the region as possible. The vast wealth estimated to lie under the seabed of this formerly insignificant chain of uninhabited island and reefs is perhaps the greatest factor that currently fuels the dispute.

In 1987, China was asked by the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) to survey the Spratly Islands archipelago as part of a global oceanographic survey initiative. As part of this effort, it was agreed that China should construct a survey station in the region. In April of that same year, China began construction of a survey station and observation post on Fiery Cross Reef. As construction commenced, Vietnamese forces landed on at least four islands in the vicinity of the Union Bank to monitor the Chinese activities and to reinforce their claim of sovereignty. By the first two months of the following year of 1988, a significant presence of both Chinese and Vietnamese troops and warships in the Union Bank set the stage for a confrontation.

Union Bank in the Spratly Islands and the location of the Johnson South Reef Skirmish of 1988.

The Naval Engagement

Vietnam had established an armed presence on at least four islands and reefs in the Union Bank by the beginning of March, 1988. They have claimed that they were worried that the Chinese forces in the area were moving to do exactly the same, and an effort to maintain Vietnamese sovereignty over the region was necessary. Three small vessels were dispatched to the area by Vietnam, two armed transport vessels the HQ-604 and HQ-605, as well as the landing craft HQ-505. On the 14th of March these vessels began landing troops on Johnson South Reef. They were confronted by no less than three PLAN frigates, the Nanchong #502 (Jiangnan Class FF), Xiangtan #556 (Jianghu II Class FF), and the Yingtan #531 (Jiangdong Class FF).

At approximately 0730 hours, the Nanchong interdicted the HQ-604 landing troops on Johnson South Reef. Which force fired first is still in question, but the opposing forces of troops on the reef exchanged fire at some point. The Nanchong opened fire on the Vietnamese troops on the reef as well as transport HQ-604. The transport was set ablaze and sunk as a result of enemy fire. At approximately 0900, the PLAN frigate Xiangtanconfronted a force of Vietnamese soldiers and the HQ-605 at Lansdowne Reef, where an exchange of fire resulted in the Vietnamese transport being set ablaze and sunk. The Vietnamese landing ship HQ-505 ran aground on Collins Reef at some point during the skirmish and the troops onboard the vessel attempted to hold it against any attempts by the Chinese to occupy the reef.

With all of their vessels out of action, the Vietnamese soldiers gathered around the national flag that they had raised on Johnson South Reef. They refused to surrender and had no means of retreat. The frigate Nanchongopened fire on the Vietnamese troops, who stood exposed on the reef, with 37mm antiaircraft cannons. The brutal act was recorded on a video camera by the crew of the PLAN frigate. The short battle resulted in casualties on both sides, the Chinese suffering 18 wounded and 6 dead, while the Vietnamese losses were at least 70 dead.

Still image from video shot from the Chinese frigate Nanchong showing Vietnamese troops being gunned down while standing on Johnson South Reef

Lasting Ramifications

The immediate and lasting ramifications of the Johnson South Reef skirmish are still being felt today. The brutal fashion in which Chinese forces dealt with the conflict was seen by a global audience when the video camera footage shot from the frigate Nanchong was released. Both China and Vietnam occupied additional islands and reefs in the Spratlys within 48 hours of the incident. Taiwan immediately moved to reinforce its military outpost on Taiping Island (Itu Aba) and dispatched two guided missile destroyers to conduct “exercises” in the area. The Philippines issued an official statement to warn any possible adversaries that they would not tolerate any encroachments on the islands occupied by its forces and promptly reinforced its garrisons in the area with added troops and weapons systems. This did not stop China from occupying Mischief Reef in 1994. This elicited a diplomatic protest by the Philippines within the framework of the United Nations, but no military response from the Philippines. The Spratly Islands sovereignty dispute was injected with a new dose of tension after the deadly skirmish at Johnson South Reef. The militarization of the region which resulted has steadily increased in scope over the intervening years; however, its scale and pace have increased exponentially in the past five years.

The Situation at Present

China has made the decision to solidify its claim of sovereignty over both the Paracel and Spratly Islands through an unprecedented development program that has seen tiny reefs and islands expanded in size through significant land reclamation efforts. Woody Island hosts a resident population of approximately 1,400 people today. Military installations on the island include the recently constructed hangars that can accommodate at least sixteen J-11 fighters, a number or reinforced munitions storage facilities protected by explosive mitigating berms, and an airstrip some 2,700 meters long. On February 17th, 2016, satellite imagery confirmed the presence of two batteries of HQ-9 surface-to-air missile launchers complete with engagement radar and Type 305B AESA acquisition radar.

The only nation to challenge China militarily in the Paracel Islands since that fateful day in 1974 has been the United States. In late January of this year, the USS Curtis Wilbur DDG 51 sailed within 12 nautical miles of Triton Island in a “freedom of navigation” operation. In the closing months of 2015, the U.S. Navy and Air Force have been conducting freedom of navigation sailings and overflights of Chinese claimed islands in the South China Sea. As part of the Obama administration’s “Pivot to Asia”, the United States has been increasingly challenging China’s territorial claims in the region and calling for the recognition of the principle of freedom of navigation in international waters. Interestingly, the United States has no territorial claims in the South China Sea, nor is it a signatory of UNCLOS, unlike all other claimants in the dispute. Not only does the United States not recognize any national claims in the South China Sea, it further more does not recognize the legal legitimacy of UNCLOS.

Woody Island in a recent photo

China has developed the Johnson South Reef into a small island since the time of the bloody skirmish that took place in 1988. Land reclamation and construction have turned a below-sea-level reef into a small island, complete with radar installations, a helicopter landing pad, and vessel docking facilities. It is unknown whether China has deployed any advanced weapons systems to the island. Even more notable than the surveillance base established at Johnson South Reef are the major land reclamation efforts at Fiery Cross Reef, Subi Reef and Mischief Reef. Two of these territories were occupied by China immediately after the naval skirmish of 1988, while Mischief Reef was occupied in 1994. Both reefs have been developed into sizable islands complete with airstrips and docking facilities. China has decided to develop the reefs into significant military installations by which they can exert sovereignty in very real terms over the entire South China Sea.

The pace and scope of China’s island construction operations over the past two years have led to an increased sense of urgency in the capitols of Manilla, Taipei and Ho Chi Min City. The United States has stepped in to assure these rival claimants that China will be confronted both diplomatically and militarily by a rival axis centered on the military might of the United States. The United States seems adamant that no one regional power should control the shipping lanes, oil and natural gas resource, and fishing rights in the South China Sea.

Johnson South Reef today

Chinese land reclamation efforts at Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly Islands August 2014 – January 2015

China’s development of Subi Reef in recent years

Detail of land reclamation and airstrip construction on Mischief Reef

Seeing the writing on the wall, Vietnam has also taken measures to solidify its position in the Spratly Islands archipelago. Vietnam has been fortifying its position on Sand Cay, due east of Taiwan-occupied Taiping Island. Vietnam lacks the economic means and technical capabilities of China, but they are following suit in developing their occupied holdings none the less.

Sand Cay land reclamation and construction from 2011 to 2015

Conclusion

In putting the current state of the South China Sea Dispute into historical context, one must acknowledge the influence of past military engagements fought over sovereignty in the region. The Battle of the Paracel Islands and the Johnson South Reef Skirmish exhibited the willingness of both China and Vietnam to engage in direct military confrontation to ensure their control of territory that they see as inseparable parts of their respective nations. Both nations learned different lessons from these altercations, and these lessons have shaped the wider dispute in the region in the intervening years.

China learned the lesson that it must forcefully and resolutely exert its territorial claims in the region, even if it comes down to a direct military exchange of hostilities. The ruthless murder of Vietnamese soldiers on the Johnson South Reef personifies the Chinese acceptance of just such a course. China has accepted that “might makes right” and “possession is nine tenths of the law” as it continues to solidify its position in the region and aims to reinforce its “Nine Dash Line” claim in the South China Sea. As it continues to develop its holdings in the region and builds a modern and capable naval warfare capability, which far exceeds that of its neighbors, China realizes that time is on its side in resolving the dispute in its favor.

The other claimants in the region all learned a valuable lesson from the Johnson South Reef Skirmish as well. The majority of claimants such as Vietnam, Taiwan, the Philippines and Indonesia have all moved to reinforce their occupied territories in the region. Malaysia and Brunei have decided to be more diplomatic in their handling of the dispute. Malaysia has too much to lose economically from any territorial dispute with China, and Brunei is far too weak to win any military confrontation, no matter how limited in scope.

The influence of the United States, whether positive or negative in nature, cannot be overstated. The United States Navy in the Pacific, under the aggressive and uncompromising direction of Admiral Harry Harris (CDRUSPACOM), ironically the highest ranking Japanese American ever in the U.S. Navy, has conducted a number of freedom of navigation sailings in the region that have increased in tempo over the past 6 months. The USS John C. Stennis CSG is currently sailing through the South China Sea, following in the wake of the USS Lassen that sailed within 12 miles of Subi Reef in the Spratly Islands, and the USS Curtis Wilbur, which sailed within 12 nautical miles of Triton Island in the Paracel Islands. Although the age old concept of freedom of navigation on the high seas must be championed, a purely military solution to this centuries old dispute is doomed to failure. The United States should be marshalling broad international support through diplomatic means, in concert with a resolute military posture, to ensure that freedom of navigation in the region is acknowledged and respected by all nations in the region.

Increasing U.S. brinkmanship may end up colliding with Chinese nationalist resolve in the region, and result in a conflict that will benefit no one. Perhaps the most frightening prospect in the current hyper-militarized atmosphere, is an accident or an independent action by the commander of a warship on either side that could escalate into a military conflict of much larger proportions. As the military forces that are brought to bear increase in number and capability, and the political statements become more bellicose, we must all hope that pragmatism and statesmanship will eventually win the day.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Growing Militarization of the South China Sea, US-China Confrontation

Syrian Parliamentary Elections 2016: National Assembly Dominated by Sunni, Large Representation of Women

April 18th, 2016 by Ziad Fadel

This article dispels the myth that Syria is a sectarian society with a government dominated by the Alawite.

It is worth noting that the wife of president Al-Assad is Sunni.

The vast majority of the seats in the parliament have gone to Sunni. (M.Ch. GR Editor)

DAMASCUS: The Second Legislative Elections are now complete and all votes have been counted as announced by His Honor, Advisory Judge Hishaam Al-Shara’ who heads the High Judicial Electoral Committee.

Once again, SyrPer takes the lead in exposing the lies about Syria’s government and people.

We exposed them last year with our listing of the members of the government and their religion to demonstrate that Syria is ruled by the majority – NOT BY SOME ESOTERIC MINORITY, as claimed by the enemies of the Syrian people.

Today, we demonstrate again the fact that Syria is a multifaceted, mosaic society whose government reflects the character, texture, fabric and make-up of her population.image: http://www.sana.sy/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1-398-660×330.jpg

In the following, we will list the winners in each governorate and indicate their religion or denomination, based on the information received, and we will point out the women who succeeded in garnering a seat in the People’s Assembly. Note that the letter “S” will indicate Sunni.

image: https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/DwclUOt_QgcBr2nXGEHnFA–/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAwO2lsPXBsYW5l/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/afp.com/0d629d5b89d2488f185174590d9c5ef31e6d50e2.jpg

Dr. Assad, the president of the Syrian Arab Republic who is of Alawi stock, votes with his wife, Asmaa (nee Al-Akhras) Al-Assad, who is Sunni. This is the true nature of Syrian society. Like most Muslims in Syria, the Assads are not particularly religious although they respect all faiths.

DAMASCUS GOVERNORATE – SECTOR A:

‘Abbaas ‘Abdul-Kareem Sandooq S

‘Aatif Muhammad Al-Zaybaq S

‘Ahd Saalih Al-Kanj S

Mahaa ‘Ali Shabbeeru FEMALE S

Munaa Ahmad Sukkar FEMALE S

Muhammad ‘Izzaat Muzh-hir ‘Arabi Kaatibi S

Faraj Muhammad Zuhayr Hamshu S

Saamer ‘Abdul-Haadi Ayyoob S

‘Umar Saleem Awsi S

Muhammad Akram Tayseer Al-‘Ajalaani S

SECTOR B:

Ahmad Nabeel Kuzbari S

Haseeb Nadeem Al-Tahhaan S

Muhammad Khayr Ahmad Al-‘Akkaam S

‘Aarif Muhammad Wafaa` Al-Taweel S

Nabeel Muhammad Tu’ma S

Muhammad Basheer Muslim Al-Shurayji S

Maari Shihaada Al-Beetaar FEMALE CHRISTIAN

Muhammad Jihaad Adeeb Al-Lahhaam S

‘Ammaar Khaalid Bakdaash S (Of Kurdish descent)

Sameer Jameel Hajjaar CHRISTIAN

Muhammad Saabir Hamshu S

Muhammad Hammaam Muhammad ‘Adnaan Miswati S

Saamer Muhammad Al-Dibs S

Haadi ‘Abbaas Sharaf S

Tareef ‘Abdul-Majeed Qawtarish S

Khaleel Jurji Tu’ma CHRISTIAN

Anas Ghassaan Zuray’ S

Muhammad Maaher Muhammad Badruddeen Al-Bustaani S

Noor Maar-Al-Dayroos Areesiyaan FEMALE CHRISTIAN

DAMASCUS RURAL SECTOR A:

Georgina Rizq FEMALE CHRISTIAN (And, no, she is not Lebanon’s old beauty queen)

Jamaal Al-Qaadiri S

Muwaffaq Jum’ah S

Ilyaas Muraad CHRISTIAN

‘Imaad Nammoor S

Jameel Al-Jabhaji S

‘Ali Al-Shaykh S

Maajid Haleema S

Shihaada Abu-Haamid S

Muhammad Khayr Naadir S

DAMASCUS RURAL SECTOR B:

Ahmad Zaytoon S

Ziyaad Al-Sukkari S

Raymond Hallaal CHRISTIAN

Muhammad Khayr Saryool S

Hamza Shaaheen S

Usaamaa Mustafaa S

Muhammad As’ad S

Muhannad Zayd S

Muhammad Qibnadh S

__________________________________________________

ALEPPO SECTOR A:

Nuhaa Jaanaat bint Muhammad FEMALE S

Ameera Stifaanu bint George FEMALE CHRISTIAN

Hussein Qarhu bin Fawzi S

Muhannad Al-Haaj ‘Ali bin Muhammad-‘Ali S

Muhammad Rabee’ Qal’aji bin Muhammad Nadheer S

Husaam Qaatirji bin Muhammad Rushdi S

Maaher Khiyaata bin Muhammad S

ALEPPO SECTOR B:

Ma’an Qanboor bin Ibraaheem S

‘Abdul-Majeed Kawaakibi bin Muhammad ‘Aadil S

Salloom Al-Salloom bin Muhammad S

Muhammad Yahyaa Ka’daan bin Muhammad As’ad S

Mustafaa Sa’ad ‘Ulabi bin Ahmad S

Muhammad Jaleel Darweesh bin Abdul-Ghani S

Faaris Shihaabi bin Ahmad S

Najdaat Anzoor bin Ismaa’eel S

Butrus Mirjaani bin Yusuf CHRISTIAN

Jubraayer Raneesiyaan bin Ohaanes CHRISTIAN ARMENIAN

Al-Hassan ‘Ali Al-Hassan Birri bin Muhammad Sha’baan S

Zaynab Khawla Bint ‘Abdul-Sattaar SHI’I FEMALE

ALEPPO RURAL DISTRICT A:

‘Ali Zaydaan bin Aswad S

Jumaanaa Armanaazi Abu Sha’r FEMALE – RELIGION UNKNOWN

Qaassim Hassan bin Muhammad S

Muhammad Al-Jazoori bin ‘Abdullah S

Muhammad Fawwaaz bin ‘Abbaas S

‘Eid Al-Khillaawi bin Khaleel S

Hussein Jaasim Al-Hamad bin ‘Ali S

‘Umar Al-‘Aaroob bin Ahmad S

‘Ali Al-‘Abdu Al-Sattoof bin Mahmoud Al-‘Ali S

Suhayl Al-‘Abdullah bin Mustafaa S

Hussayn Hassoon bin Ahmad S

Faadhil Al-Ka’di bin Hussayn S

Faaris Junaydaan bin Muhammad Noor S

‘Umar Al-Hassan bin Hussayn S

‘Ubayd Al-‘Ubayd Al-‘Absi bin Shareef S

Hussayn Al-Jum’ah bin Al-Haaj Qaassim SHI’I MUSLIM

Fahmi Hassan bin Muhammad

ALEPPO RURAL DISTRICT B:

‘Abdullah Haajji Warda bin Ahmad S

Manaal Al-Shaykh Ameen bint ‘Iydaawi FEMALE S

‘Abdul-Razzaaq Barakaat bin Saalih S

`Alaan Bakr bin Muhammad-‘Ali S

Fahd Ameen bin Muhammad S

Muhammad Al-Batraan bin Hajji S

‘Ali ‘Ali Al-Mustafaa bin Muhammad SHI’I MUSLIM

Ahmad Mir’iy bin ‘Abdul-Salaam S

Naasser Kareem bin Muhammad S

‘Umar Al-Hamdu bin Hussayn Mahmoud S

Hassan Shaheed bin Muhammad S

Mujeeb Al-Rahmaan Al-Dandan bin Moussaa S

Ahmad Al-Hamraa bin Al-‘Ali S

‘Ali Khaleel Bashshaar bin Ahmad S

Khaldoon ‘Uways bin Ibraaheem S

image: https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/12998729_504510773086113_6421084950473745392_n.jpg?oh=dac15c2a92ab6a65bf0e37312ecd891b&oe=577B3CAF

(Auch, von Brigitte Turkmani mit Danken, naturlich)

__________________________________________________

DAYR EL-ZOR: SECTOR A:

Burhaan ‘Abdul-Jabbaar ‘Abdul-Wahhaab S

Ma’an Subhi ‘Abbood S

Muhammad Al-Hassaani Jaadullaah

‘Abdul-Salaam Muhammad Rasheed Al-Dahmoosh S

Hadiyya Khalaf ‘Abbaas FEMALE S

Muhammad Ameen Hussein Al-Rajaa S

Ibraaheem Dahoom Al-Daayer S

Nijm ‘Abdullah Sulaymaan S

DAYR EL-ZOR SECTOR B:

Taahaa Hamida Al-Khaleefa S

Sattaam Mujhim Al-Dandal S

Mahmoud Hassan Al-Hassan S

Muhammad Qaassim Al-Sa’ad Al-Mish’ali S

Hamaadi Shalloof Al-Hassaani S

Muhannaa Faysal Al-Fayyaadh Shaykh Al-Naasser S

_______________________________________________

AL-RAQQA SECTOR A:

Mahaa Muhammad ‘Ali Al-‘Ujayli FEMALE S

Moussaa As’ad Al-Ibraaheem S

Khaalid Muhammad Darweesh S

Khaleel Ibraaheem Al-Kishsha S

SECTOR B:

Ahmad Muhammad Al-Mahmoud Al-Darweesh S

Ismaa’eel Al-‘Ubayd Al-‘Abed Al-Hajju S

‘Abdul-Baasit Hamaada Al-‘Alyawi S

Faysal Ibraaheem Hajji ‘Umar S

___________________________________________

AL-HASAKA SECTOR A:

Hammaad ‘Abbood Sa’eed S

‘Adnaan Muhammad Sulaymaan S

‘Abbood ‘Issaa Al-Shawwaakh S

Hassan Hamza Salloom S

Noor Ya’qoob Durah FEMALE S

Mallool Hassan Al-Hassan FEMALE S

Reem Fawzi Al-Saa’iy FEMALE S

‘Alaa`-Al-Deen Hamad Al-Hamad S

AL-HASAKA SECTOR B:

Hammooda Yusuf Sabbaagh S

Khaalid Satam Al-‘Atiyya S

Riyaadh Ali Taawooz S

‘Abed Hanaan Al-Muhaymeed S

Muhammad Faaris Al-‘Abdul-Rahmaan

Hassan Muhammad Al-Musallit

____________________________________________

HOMS SECTOR A:

Sanaa` Abu Zayd FEMALE CHRISTIAN

Saaji Yunus Tu’ma Tu’ma CHRISTIAN

Muhammad Ma’roof ‘Abdul-Waarith Atmaaz Subay’iy S

Laanaa Laayez Sulaymaan FEMALE CHRISTIAN

Tawfeeq Ahmad Iskandar ‘ALAWI MUSLIM

Muhammad Hassan Ra’ad S

Ma’roof Ghathwaan Al-Dhiyaab S

Faadiyaa Yusuf Deeb FEMALE CHRISTIAN

Saami Qaasim Ameen S

Mish’al Muhammad Al-Hammood S

Hazaar Faayiz Al-Daqs FEMALE CHRISTIAN

SECTOR B:

Jamaal Ahmad Raabi’ah S

Ahmad Kaassir Al-‘Ali ‘ALAWI MUSLIM

Saalih Muhammad Ma’roof S

‘Abdul-‘Azeez Tarraad Al-Mulhim S

Badeeq Burhaan Duroobi S

Jirjis ‘Azeez Al-Shannoor CHRISTIAN

Bashshaa Nadra Yaaziji CHRISTIAN

Muhammad Nizaar Ghaalib Sharfu S

Firaas Shareef Al-Salloom S

Waa`il Ahmad Mulhim S

Mahraan Moussaa Maadhi Unknown

Muhammad Muhammad Saleem Al-Sibaa’iy S

______________________________________________

IDLIB SECTOR A:

Shireen ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Al-Yusuf FEMALE S

Faysal Muhammad Al-Mahmoud S

Khaalid Hassan Al-Dhaaher S

Ahmad Al-Hassan Al-Hilaal S

Ghiyaath Hassan Al-Qutayni S

Ahmad Deeb Qabbaani S

‘Abdul-Waahid Muhammad Razzooq ‘ALAWI MUSLIM

Sameer Muhammad Al-Ismaa’eel S

Muhammad Zaahir ‘Uthmaan Al-Yusufi S

Muhammad Taariq bin Muhammad Da’bool S

Zakwaan bin Muhammad Haseeb ‘Aassi S

Nidhaal ‘Abdul-Majeed Humaydi S

SECTOR B:

Yahyaa Ahmad Haaj-‘Awadh S

Faatima Muhammad Basheer Khamees S

Safwaan Muhammad Qurbi S

Jamaal Sulaymaan Mastu S

Muhammad Talaal Ibraaheem ‘Aatif Hoori S

Muhammad Hussayn Raaghib Al-Hussayn S

________________________________________________

HAMA SECTOR A:

Ghaada Muhammad Ibraaheem FEMALE S

Muhammad ‘Alloosh Jughayli S

‘Abdul-Rahmaan Yusuf Izkaahi S

Salaam ‘Abdul-Qaadir Sanqar S

‘Abdul-Kareem Ahmad Al-Sabsabi S

Faadhil Muhammad Warda S

Maaher Mahfoudh Qaawirma S

Haamid Mahmoud Hassan S

Hussayn Yusuf ‘Abbaas S

Mahmoud Saalih Al-‘Abdul-Salaam S

Badee’ Mahmoud Al-Hussayn S

Jamaal Mahmoud Yusuf (a/k/a Jamaal Abu-Samra) S

‘Abdul-Kareem Ma’aat Al-‘Issaa ALAWI MUSLIM

SECTOR B:

Ayman Muhammad Milandi S

Mahmoud ‘Abdul-Hameed Jookhdaar S

‘Abdul-Kareem ‘Ubayd Al-Baakeer S

Muhammad Ahmad Al-‘Ijji S

Khudhur ‘Abbood Al-Saalih S

Maaher Jabra Labbaad CHRISTIAN

Maazin Ahmad ‘Azzooz S

Dawlaat Salmaan Al-Murshid S

Wadhdhaah Muhammad Mukhlis Muraad S

______________________________________________________

SUWAYDAA` SECTOR A:

Maw’id Muhammad Naasser Unknown

‘Issaam Saalih Na’eem DRUZE

‘Aayda Sulaymaan ‘Urayj FEMALE DRUZE

Nash`aat Ibraaheem Al-Atrash DRUZE

SECTOR B:

Nidhaal Sayyaah Al-Shurayti DRUZE

Mu’een Mu’aadhi Nasr DRUZE

________________________________________________________

QUNAYTRA SECTOR A:

Rif’aat Yusuf Hussayn S

Ayman ‘Aarif Harooq S

Waleed Ahmad Al-Darweesh Unknown

SECTOR B:

Khaalid Khaz’al Khaz’al S

Jaanisette ‘Adnaan Qaazaan FEMALE CHRISTIAN (?)

_____________________________________________________

DER’AH: SECTOR A:

Kamaal Naasser Al-‘Ayyaash S

Naayif Hameed Taalib Al-Hareeri S

Jamaal Hassan Al-Zu’bi S

Fawwaaz Arsheed Al-Jawaabira S

Faarooq Qaassem Al-Hamaadi S

SECTOR B:

Khaalid Moussaa Al-‘Abbood S

Faayza Hassan Al-‘Adhba FEMALE S

Fawwaaz Hussayn Al-Shara’ S

Faysal Shaaker Al-Khouri CHRISTIAN

Riyaadh Hilaal Shutaywi S

_________________________________________________

LATAKIA SECTOR A:

‘Ammaar Badee’ Al-Assad ALAWI

Zuhayr Labeeb Ramadhaan ALAWI

Muhammad ‘Abdullah ‘Ajeel S

Baassim Sulaymaan Sawdaan ALAWI

Sameer Ibraaheem Al-Khateeb S

Iskandar Looqaa Haddaad CHRISTIAN (Iskandar Looqa was General Haafizh Al-Assad’s National Security Advisor for many years)

Mustafaa Ghaazi Khayrbayk ALAWI

Fawwaaz Bahjaat Nassoor ALAWI

Nabeel Jameel Al-Saalih Unknown

SECTOR B:

Maazin Haatim ‘Umraan ALAWI

Ayham Najdaat Juraykoos ALAWI

Fayhaa` ‘Ali Tareefa FEMALE ALAWI

Nizaar ‘Ali Skayf ALAWI

Saamer Ismaa’eel Sheeha CHRISTIAN

Sameer Saami Nusayr ALAWI

Noor ‘Adnaan Al-Shaghari FEMALE S

‘Adnaan ‘Abdullah Al-Dharf Unknown

_______________________________________________

TARTOUS SECTOR A:

Deema ‘Ali Sulaymaan FEMALE ALAWI

Tony ‘Azeez Hannaa CHRISTIAN

Noora Salmaan Hassan FEMALE ALAWI

Khaalid Yahyaa Khaddooj S

Baasil Sulaymaan ‘Issaa ALAWI (He might be the son of the laureled Ba’athis poet, Sulaymaan Al-‘Issa. Maybe.)

Ashwaaq Ayyoob ‘Abbaas FEMALE ALAWI

SECTOR B:

Ayman ‘Abdul-Kareem Bilaal ALAWI

Raami Muhammad Saalih Unknown

Saa`ir ‘Ali Ibraaheem ALAWI

Khayruddeen ‘Abdul-Sattaar Al-Sayyid S

Iynaas Muhammad Khayr Al-Malloohi FEMALE S

Naasser ‘Issaa Sulaymaan ALAWI

Khudhur Muhammad Hussayn S

Posted in English
Comments Off on Syrian Parliamentary Elections 2016: National Assembly Dominated by Sunni, Large Representation of Women

Huge War Games around Scotland: Ooops. “Secret NATO War Games Manual” Accidentally Released by Britain’s Ministry of Defence

April 18th, 2016 by Global Research News

NATO’s “Exercise Joint Warrior” regrouping some 3400 NATO army, navy and air force personnel from 12 NATO countries is ongoing in Scotland. These war games follow those conducted last year in Scotland involving 13,000 Troops, 54 Warships, 70 Planes, as well as Submarines.

Although on a smaller scale compared to last year’ Joint Warrior also held in Scotland, these war games involve a massive deployment of military might. The public has been barely informed.

Unofficially behind closed doors it is understood that these war games (including those in Scotland, The Baltic States, Eastern Europe) are directed at Russia.

Officially of course, they involve a fictitious enemy.

This year, twenty-two war ships, four submarines and more than 40 aircraft will be deployed. “A dozen NATO nations and three partner countries are taking part.”

F-16. Archive picture

The exercise runs until 23 April and will involve submarines, surface ships and aircraft including RAF Typhoons.

Warships and aircraft have already started arriving in Scotland ahead of the start of the training.

This year’s second staging of Joint Warrior, which will also take place in Scotland, will include what the Royal Navy has described as its first “robot wars”.

Unmanned Warrior 2016 will involve drones, including unmanned aerial vehicles and machines that can operate underwater.

Companies that manufacture the weapons and Nato member countries have been invited by the Royal Navy to take part. (BBC, April 17, 2019)

In an unusual twist, Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) accidentally released a secret NATO report pertaining to the war games “with codewords, ciphers, co-ordinates, radio frequencies and a host of other “special instructions” for huge war games under way around Scotland.”

An MoD official mistakenly circulated a manual for planned air operations during major military exercises involving more than a dozen countries. Joint Warrior 161 is currently being played out around Scotland, while Griffin Strike 16 is taking place around the southwest coasts of England and Wales.

The 192-page manual, marked “NATO restricted” on every page, was sent by email to fishing and ferry operators on March 29. They were meant to receive a guide to when, where and how shipping areas might be affected during the exercises.

But instead they were given technical details of aircraft “killbox” target areas, code decryption tables, radio jamming rules and authentication protocols. As well as dozens of codewords, call signs and map co-ordinates, the report includes long lists of phone numbers, email addresses and military facilities. (Herald Scotland, 17 April, 2016)

Michel Chossudovsky contributed to this report

Posted in English
Comments Off on Huge War Games around Scotland: Ooops. “Secret NATO War Games Manual” Accidentally Released by Britain’s Ministry of Defence

Preparing for War with Russia? A Review

April 18th, 2016 by Rick Rozoff

This report by Rick Rozoff was published a year ago.

The Joint Warrior Games April 2016 in Scotland are currently ongoing. Those of April 2015 are reviewed below.

NATO War Games “Joint Warrior” in Scotland 2015: 13,000 Troops, 54 Warships, 70 Planes, Submarines

* * *

The following compilation of articles, reports and press releases from official sources was undertaken by Rick Rozoff, published on Stop NATO.

We have highlighted relevant sections. What this review confirms is that the US and its NATO allies are on an active war footing. US-NATO military exercises, training and planning are being regularly conducted on Russia’s doorstep in Eastern Europe, the Black Sea basins and the Baltic states.

Whereas Russia is not mentioned, these various military initiatives and “defensive” war games threaten the Russian Federation.

They involve the participation of troops from several NATO and NATO partner countries.

What these articles and reports suggest is that Washington is anxious to mobilize military forces within NATO and NATO partner countries without the need to deploy a large number of US troops.

(M. Ch. GR Editor, April 16, 2015)

Iran Calls On China, India, Russia To Oppose NATO Expansion, Missiles

Sputnik International
April 16, 2015

Iran Ready to Cooperate With Russia, China, India to Oppose NATO in Europe

MOSCOW: Iran calls for cooperation with Russia, India and China to oppose NATO’s plans for military expansion in Europe, the country’s Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan said Thursday at a press conference in Moscow.

“We would like to support the idea of developing a multifaceted cooperation between China, Iran, Russia, and India to oppose the purposeful expansion of NATO to the east and placing a missile shield in Europe.”

He emphasized that Iran was ready to begin consultations on the issue to secure stability in the region.

NATO has been boosting its presence in Eastern Europe which has caused concerns from Russian authorities. The process is taking place amid tensions between the alliance and Moscow, following NATO’s accusations that Russia was providing Ukraine’s southeastern militias with military assistance.

Moscow has denied the allegations, while Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov called the alliance’s activity in Eastern Europe “unjustified.”

In February, NATO announced the increase of its Rapid Response Force from 13,000 to 30,000 military personnel, and the establishment of six new command posts in European states close to the Russian borders.

Copyright Sputnik

NATO Expands Air Command and Control System Throughout Eastern Europe

Xinhua News Agency
April 16, 2015

Bulgaria to participate in expansion of NATO Air Command, Control Systemr

SOFIA: The Bulgarian government on Wednesday approved a memorandum for the country’s participation in the expansion of the NATO Air Command and Control System (ACCS), officials said.

According to the memorandum, which was signed in January by NATO, Bulgaria, Albania, Croatia, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, the particular ACCS projects would be determined by the relevant committees of the Alliance, the government said in a press release.

The ACCS projects were expected to be implemented in Bulgaria in the period of 2015-2018, with the total value of around 12 million euros (some 12.68 million U.S. dollars), the government said.

Bulgaria, a NATO member since 2004, has been defending the Alliance’s airspace [sic] by performing NATO air policing duties with its Soviet-made MiG-29 and MiG-21 fighters.

Copyright Xinhua

Ukrainian Crisis: NATO’s Pretext To Contain And Besiege Russia

RT
April 15, 2015

‘Ukrainian crisis – NATO pretext to contain and besiege Russia’

NATO exercises in Europe and its eastward expansion have nothing to do with the Ukrainian crisis, which is used as a pretext to move closer to Russia’s borders in order to contain and besiege it, says international analyst Rick Rozoff.

RT: NATO continues to increase its military personnel in Eastern Europe, carrying out large-scale military exercises with 17 countries taking part. It’s the latest stage of Operation Atlantic Resolve – a series of over 30 war games in Europe throughout this year. What do you think NATO is preparing for?

Rick Rozoff: They are preparing for a direct military confrontation with Russia. I think that’s an inescapable conclusion. Let’s recollect first of all, we have some not even short memory-influenced thinking about what the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is. It was founded 66 years ago this month to be exact, in 1949, with the express intention of containing, confronting, and as need might arise engaging in a military conflict with Russia. Pure and simple. There is no other purpose for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Now in the post-Cold War period with the demise of the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, and of the Eastern Bloc as a whole, far from having dissolved itself, which would have been logical if its intent had been in any way or form of a defensive nature, it instead increased its membership by 12 new countries, by 75 percent. All 12 of those countries are in Eastern Europe, several of them border Russia. And it has always been the express intent of NATO to move up to Russia’s western and to large part of its southern borders and to contain Russia.That’s a purpose for it. So the fact that the Ukrainian crisis has been exploited as the pretense for an acceleration of plans long under way – years, decades under way – for NATO expansion to contain and besiege Russia. There is something we need to be aware of. The NATO expansion in the Baltics, in the Black Sea has nothing to do with the Ukrainian crisis except as a pretext. It has everything to do with plans that were under way for at least a decade or two…

Copyright RT

Lessons Of Afghanistan, Iraq: U.S. Army Europe, NATO Drill For New War

U.S. Army Europe
April 15, 2015

Army Europe senior leaders visit Saber Junction 15
By Sgt. Daniel Cole, U.S. Army Europe Public Affairs

HOHENFELS, Germany: Saber Junction 15 welcomed approximately 20 multinational senior leaders, including Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commander of Army Europe, here, April 15, as part of a distinguished visitor event to showcase the multinational training event.

Saber Junction 15, which includes more than 4,700 participants from 17 countries, prepares NATO and partner-nation armies for offensive, defensive and stability operations.

“Our Soldiers [U.S.] prefer training with partners because we know that is how we are going to fight,” Hodges said…

Saber Junction originally began in 2011 drawing from the lessons learned from operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Saber Junction 15 runs April 1-30, 2015…

Copyright U.S. Army Europe

Ukraine: NATO’s Proxy War Enters Second Year

Interfax-Ukraine
April 15, 2015

One Ukrainian soldier killed, two injured in Donbas in past 24 hours

One Ukrainian serviceman has been killed in the anti-terrorist operation [sic] area in the south-east of Ukraine over the past 24 hours, ATO headquarters spokesman Andriy Lysenko told a press briefing in Kyiv on Wednesday.

“One of our soldiers has been killed and another two have been injured in the past 24 hours,” he said.

“The situation remains unstable…The adversary has been actively using small arms, grenade launchers and mortars. It has fired tanks twice against Ukrainian armed forces’ positions near the village of Peski,” Lysenko said.

No cannon artillery fire has been registered in the past 24 hours, he said.

The region’s flashpoints are the villages of Shyrokyne and Chermalyk near Mariupol, the Donetsk airport and villages along the Bakhmutka road in the Luhansk region, Lysenko said…

Copyright Interfax-Ukraine

Interfax-Ukraine
April 15, 2015

Poroshenko welcomes Canada’s decision to send military instructors to Ukraine

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has welcomed the Canadian government’s decision to send Canadian instructors to Ukraine to train Ukrainian servicemen.

“Up to 200 members of the Canadian armed forces together with military servicemen of other of our international partners will help strengthen the Ukrainian armed forces and the National Guard,” the presidential website reported on Tuesday evening.

Poroshenko described the decision as “another important step by Canada…”

“I am convinced that the strengthening of Ukraine’s defense capability would promote not only peace in our country but also global security in the Euro-Atlantic area,” he said.

Earlier on Tuesday, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and National Defense Minister Jason Kenney had announced their decision to send a group of 200 military instructors to Ukraine. The Canadian servicemen are expected to join U.S. and British military instructors in western Ukraine in early summer 2015 to work there until March 31, 2017.

Most of the Canadian instructors would stay in the town of Yavoriv, Lviv region.

Copyright Interfax-Ukraine

Defense Chief In Estonia: More German Troops In Eastern Europe

Deutsche Welle
April 15, 2015

Germany assures Estonia of NATO backing

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen kicked off a two-day visit to the Baltic states on Tuesday.

In the Estonian capital, Tallinn, she pledged her government’s continued support as the region faces possible military aggression from Russia.

“Your concerns are also our concerns,” von der Leyen told reporters and her Estonian counterpart, Sven Mikser.

All three Baltic states – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – belong to NATO…

The EU has repeatedly levied sanctions on Russia in a bid to force it to halt all cooperation with eastern Ukrainian separatists. However, despite a ceasefire agreement, a lasting peace in eastern Ukraine remains tenuous amid reports of continued fighting…

Copyright Deutsche Welle

Afghanistan: Georgian Troops Serve Under U.S. Marines In NATO War

Ministry of Defence of Georgia
April 14, 2015

The 43rd Battalion completely Transferred Authority

The 43rd Battalion of IV Mechanized Brigade of the Georgian Armed Forces officially transferred authority from the 51st battalion of the V Infantry Brigade.

The ceremony was held at Bagram Air Base. Chief of General Staff of the GAF, Major General Vakhtang Kapanadze attended the event together with the leadership of the Coalition Forces. Major General Kapanadze awarded 10 representatives of Georgian Liaison Team from the U.S. Marine Corps with the MoD service medal “General Kvinitadze” for their role in improving Georgia-U.S. military cooperation.

The leadership of Bagram Air Base, Tactical Group “Solid” and “Georgian Liaison Team” successfully evaluated the mission carried out by the 51st Battalion. Under the official data, the 51st Battalion maximally limited activities form insurgents and promoted to set up more stable and security environment on the ground. The 51st Battalion completed the mission without casualties and is returning to homeland stage by stage…

Copyright Ministry of Defence of Georgia

Estonia’s (American) President Wants Permanent NATO Combat Forces

UNIAN
April 12, 2015

Estonian president calls on NATO to permanently station combat units in Baltic states

Copyright UNIAN

====

U.S. Consolidates New Military Outposts In Eastern Europe

Stop NATO
September 23, 2010

Estonia is “arguably the most exposed country in Europe,” according to President Toomas Hendrik Ilves‘ interview with Britain’s The Telegraph.

Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves believes that the time has come for NATO to deter Russia by permanently stationing combat units in the Baltic states, according to his interview to The Telegraph, published on April 11.…

The Telegraph writes that like the other Baltic states, Estonia does not possess any jet fighters, so it relies entirely on NATO to guard its airspace. Last year, the alliance quadrupled the strength of its Baltic Air Policing Mission – but only [sic] from four to 16 warplanes…

Estonia remains “arguably the most exposed country in Europe…”

Flaming Thunder: NATO Begins Multinational Artillery Exercise In Lithuania

UNIAN
April 13, 2015

M109 Paladin Integrated Management

NATO starts international artillery exercises in Lithuania

International exercises involving troops from Lithuania, Poland, Portugal and the United States have started in the Baltic country Lithuania, Russian news agency TASS has reported, referring to a source in Lithuania’s Defense Ministry.

The exercises, entitled Flaming Thunder, will involve live firing with U.S. Paladin 155 mm self-propelled howitzers at Lithuania’s Klaipeda and Pabradė firing ranges.

Around 450 troops from the four countries will take part…

Copyright UNIAN

Convoy Brings U.S. Paratroopers To Ukraine For Training

U.S. Army Europe
April 11, 2015

Fearless Guardian ground convoy arrives in Ukraine
By Maj. Michael J Weisman (The 173rd Airborne Brigade)

VICENZA, Italy: Paratroopers from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Support Battalion arrived in Yavoriv, Ukraine April 10 via a ground convoy from here to deliver the brigade’s training equipment for Operation Fearless Guardian.

Fearless Guardian is the name for the training of Ukraine’s newly-formed National Guard under the Congress-approved Global Contingency Security Fund. Under the program, the United States will begin training three battalions of Ukrainian troops over a six-month period beginning later this month.

“Ukraine is a strong partner that has participated in exercises and operations with us around the world,” said Capt. Ashish Patel, a planning officer with the brigade. “They’ve asked the U.S. for assistance in providing this capability, and this training will help them defend their borders and their sovereignty…”

“Planning a convoy like this teaches our leaders to think strategically,” said Maj. Antonio Pineda. “Conducting convoy movements from country to country, making contact with allied units to plan the route and escorts, it’s not something you can experience back in the U.S.”

In addition to escorts, allied units in Germany and Poland also hosted the convoy during overnight stops…

Copyright U.S. Army Europe

Scotland: NATO War Games With 13,000 Troops, 54 Warships, 70 Planes, Submarines

North Atlantic Treaty Organization
April 11, 2015

NATO Standing Naval Forces arrive in Scotland for Exercise Joint Warrior

SCOTLAND: Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 (SNMG2) and Standing NATO Mine Counter-Measures Groups ONE and TWO (SNMCMG1, SNMCMG2) ships arrived in Scotland the past two days for a port visit and to prepare for the UK-led Exercise JOINT WARRIOR 15-1…

Exercise JOINT WARRIOR will run from 11-24 April. NATO’s three SNFs consisting of 14 ships will join more than 40 additional warships and submarines and 70 aircraft. In total, around 13,000 personnel from 14 countries are participating in the exercise…

The exercise provides complex coordinated training at the joint level, increasing interoperability between Allied forces and providing valuable experience integrating land, air, and maritime forces.NATO’s Standing Naval Forces will test their anti-air and anti-submarine warfare skillsets, as well as conducting mine counter-measures training in advance of amphibious landings…

Copyright North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Posted in English
Comments Off on Preparing for War with Russia? A Review

Hong Kong Gets New US-backed Party, Funded by Washington

April 18th, 2016 by Tony Cartalucci

2014 Hong Kong Protest

Hong Kong saw the formation of a new “political party,” headed by 19 year-old student Joshua Wong – a young man with no experience and no explanation as to who is funding him or backing him politically.

The party, called “Demosisto,” was described by the BBC in their article, “Hong Kong student leader Joshua Wong forms political party,” as demanding “self-determination” for Hong Kong – an ambition pushed primarily by US and British interests, not the people of Hong Kong.

The BBC would report that:

Mr Wong was a leading figure in the so-called Umbrella Movement in 2014, which aimed to secure greater voting rights for the territory’s residents.
“Street activism is not enough if we want to fight for a better future,” Mr Wong told the BBC.

“We have to enter the system, create a political party and shape the political agenda, in order to drive forward our movement for self-determination.”
Although Mr Wong is too young to run for office, Demosisto will put forward candidates in Legislative Council elections in September.

The BBC is clearly and intentionally omitting obvious questions and answers regarding the new party, “Demosisto,” such as who is funding it, who is backing it, and who really is running it when clearly the 19 year-old Joshua Wong is merely a figurehead incapable of conjuring up a political party from scratch in Hong Kong’s otherwise highly competitive sociopolitical environment.

Obvious Western Proxies

Hong Kong, seized by the British in 1841 and handed back – tentatively – to China in 1997, still suffers from the influence and ambitions of both London and their hegemonic successors in Washington and on Wall Street. The latest manifestation of this influence and ambition was the “Occupy Central” movement that sprung up in 2014 among a milieu of US and British-backed agitators with direct financial and political ties to the West.

The foreign ties driving the protests were quickly exposed despite immense propaganda, denials, and deception from the foreign-funded movement’s leadership. The 2014 “Occupy Central” mobs attracted only a minority of Hong Kong’s population, before finally fizzling out in the face of not government crackdowns, but growing public backlash.

Besides Joshua Wong, other “Occupy Central” leaders including Benny Tai and Martin Lee had obvious and direct ties to the United States government, with Tai’s political and academic activity almost entirely subsidized by the US State Department, and with Lee having literally traveled to Washington just ahead of the protests to speak before the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to lobby for aid he would soon receive.

Image: Martin Lee in Washington D.C. in 2014, speaking before NED ahead of the “Occupy Central” protests.

In the wake of the protests, Joshua Wong, Benny Tai, and Martin Lee would all be invited to Washington by their US sponsors to receive an award from NED-subsidiary, Freedom House.

Freedom House’s own website featured an entry for the event titled, “Freedom House marks its 75th anniversary by honoring three generations of Hong Kong democracy leaders: Joshua Wong, Benny Tai and Martin C. M. Lee.”

What is perhaps most indicative of the deceit propagated by the “Occupy Central” movement and its US sponsors is the fact that despite Martin Lee’s trip to Washington before the protests and his role during them, he and his US sponsors repeatedly claimed he was not involved in the “Occupy Central” movement – only to be recognized for his leadership role during the Freedom House event in 2015 afterwards.

In fact, the US NED itself would post a rebuttal to claims of Lee’s involvement in the protests titled, “The National Endowment for Democracy and support for democracy in Hong Kong,” in which it stated:

While Mr. Lee and Ms. Chan are leading democratic figures in Hong Kong, they are neither leaders nor organizers of the current protests; neither are they grantees of the NED.

Freedom House, however, by inviting him to recognize his leadership during “Occupy Central,” with Lee himself literally carrying one of the symbolic “yellow umbrellas” carried by the agitators during the protests onto the stage with him, thoroughly contradicts NED’s earlier denials.

Between verified funding received by Benny Tai from the US State Department, Martin Lee’s trip to Washington before the protests lobbying for assistance, and Tai, Lee, and Joshua Wong’s pilgrimage to Washington to receive their “award” for their participation in foreign-funded subversion afterwards, the notion that Wong’s new party, “Demosisto,” stands for Hong Kong’s “self-determination” is an absolute absurdity.

Hong Kong’s future, through these three men and the political fronts they lead, is clearly being determined from abroad, and more specifically, by Washington, not by the people of Hong Kong.

It would seem that the West’s return of Hong Kong to the Chinese people was done only begrudgingly, with attempts since then to maintain control over the territory through political proxies.

During the Freedom House event, all three US-backed agitators admitted that their work sought not only to influence Hong Kong, but to serve as a vector for their political movement to make its way deeper into mainland China.

In this wider sense, this means that not only is the West trying to maintain control over its former colonial holdings in Hong Kong, but is also trying to expand this control deeper into China as well. Western ambitions to encircle and contain China has been a matter of stated foreign policy since the “Pentagon Papers” were leaked in the 1970s. Considering the deep, foreign nature of the so-called opposition movement in Hong Kong, the notion of “self-determination” appears to be a parody, not a principle – hidden behind by Western political proxies like Joshua Wong, not upheld by them.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Hong Kong Gets New US-backed Party, Funded by Washington

BRICS Under Attack: The Empire Strikes Back In Brazil

April 18th, 2016 by Eric Draitser

First publishd by Mint Press and Global Research in March 2016, this incisive article provides an understanding of the soft coup in Brazil

Despite all the fancy anti-corruption rhetoric, the assault on President Rousseff’s leftist government is the result of a coordinated campaign by business interests tied to Washington and Wall Street.

The last decade has seen a remarkable coalescing of non-Western nations in both economic and political partnerships. These multilateral institutions have been championed as alternatives to Western organs of political and economic power such as NATO, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank.

From the growth of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union, China’s “One Belt, One Road” strategy to link much of the Eurasian landmass via trade and investment, and most recently the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, many have viewed these developments as essential for the decentralization of global power away from the imperial centers of Washington, Wall Street, London and Brussels.

But perhaps none of the emerging Global South international groupings has been more promising in terms of both public relations and real economic partnership than that of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

BRICS countries account for 46 percent of the world’s population – over 3 billion people, as of 2015 – making it the single largest bloc in terms of human capacity among global alliances. The scope of BRICS, combined with its increasing assertiveness as an economic power unto itself, has undoubtedly ruffled a few feathers in Washington and elsewhere in the West.

It should come as no surprise that major moves have been taken in the last 12 to 24 months to undermine each BRICS member nation and destabilize them through political and economic means. And it is no coincidence that those leaders shown smiling and shaking hands at recent BRICS summits are now either the targets of destabilization efforts and subversion – as in the cases of Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa – or are a target of a military and political charm offensive, as in the case of India. In each case, the United States and its allies benefit significantly from the latest developments.

Brazil in the crosshairs

One of the U.S. empire’s tried and true methods of destabilizing a targeted country is through manufacturing and promoting political scandals and/or political movements that appear oppositional but whose interests, whether consciously or not, align with the ruling establishment in the West. Both of these elements are at play in Brazil, which has been moving toward increased economic, and consequently political, independence in recent years.

A woman shows poster written in Portuguese “There will not be a coup” next to a picture of Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff, during a rally in her support and of former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, in Brasilia, Brazil, Friday, March 18, 2016. Silva has been targeted in an alleged corruption investigation involving the Brazil oil giant Petrobras. (AP/Eraldo Peres)

In Brazil, the government of Dilma Rousseff is facing a major destabilization campaign orchestrated by powerful right-wing elements in the country and their U.S. backers. Under the always convenient banner of “anti-corruption,” millions have turned out in the streets to demand the ouster of the twice-elected Rousseff government on the heels of a series of revelations about alleged corruption pertaining to the quasi-state, quasi-private Petrobras oil company.

According to the allegations, a number of leading political figures, some of whom are connected to President Rousseff and the Workers’ Party, haveskimmed at least 3 percent of the billions in oil revenue from Petrobras, illustrating the still active tradition of corruption in Brazil.

The latest target is former President Lula da Silva, who was forcibly removed from his home in an ostentatious show of force by law enforcement authorities meant to humiliate the 70-year-old founder of the Workers’ Party. Because of his working class background, the former president was seen as the hope and pride of the left in Brazil, and the public removal from his home earlier this month sparked the latest round of protests.

But what — or who — is really behind the soft coup in Brazil?

The right wing is the driving force of the protests, despite any progressive-minded, anti-corruption sentiment being expressed by various segments of the protest movement. Two of the principal groups responsible for organizing and mobilizing the demonstrations are the Free Brazil Movement (MBL) andStudents for Liberty (EPL), both of which have direct ties to Charles and David Koch, the right-wing, neocon, U.S. billionaires, as well as other leading figures of the far right, pro-business neoliberal establishment.

(Click to Expand) The bio of Fabio Ostermann from the Atlas Network website.

(Click to Expand) The bio of Juliano Torres from the Atlas Network website.

MBL is fronted by Fabio Ostermann and Juliano Torres, both of whom were educated in the Atlas Leadership Academy, a satellite of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, which is directly funded by the Koch brothers. EPL is a direct affiliate of the U.S.-based Students for Liberty, a well-known Koch brothers outfit with deep ties to the right-wing political establishment in the U.S.

One of the leading faces of the movement is Kim Kataguiri, a 20-year-old “activist,” who is both a founder of MBL and a leader in EPL. Unabashedly pro-big business, he’s an adherent of the so-called Austrian School of Economics, the economic ideology that advocates total deregulation of the economy in the interests of private business, and a great admirer of Milton Friedman, the father of what is known today as neoliberal capitalism.

Kataguiri and his fellow right-wing activists have been quick to distance themselves from the blood-soaked legacy of right-wing coups in Brazil and Latin America for obvious reasons. Yet they espouse precisely the same economic policies as those enacted throughout the region, perhaps most famously in Chile under the brutal dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, whose economic policies were directly guided by none other than Friedman.

In this March 18, 2015 photo, anti-government protest leader Kim Kataguiri poses for a picture in Sao Paulo, Brazil. (AP/Andre Penner)

Kataguiri explained to The Guardian in 2015:

We defend free markets, lower taxes and the privatisation of all public companies. … In Brazil, the left is still seen as cool by young people. … We want to destroy this idea that if you defend free markets then you’re an old man who is asking for a dictatorship. … Unfortunately, we don’t have any big sponsors. The government and some sectors of the press say that we are financed by rich people. We would have no problem in being financed by rich people.

Unfortunately for Kataguiri, Ostermann, Torres and their colleagues, the truth about their connections to powerful finance capital and business in the U.S. and throughout Latin America is well known. Still, the corporate media whitewashes these connections, presenting the protests as some sort of pure expression of people’s discontent, rather than a manufactured form of political manipulation and destabilization which has seized upon difficult economic times to cynically exploit public opinion. Brazil’s economic downturn over the past two years has made this much easier.

Other influential groups such as VemPraRua (“Come to the Streets”) are directly funded by powerful right-wing business interests inside the country, including Brazil’s richest man, Jorge Paulo Lemann. As Bloomberg noted in a 2013 profile of Lemann:

In the U.S., Lemann is virtually unknown, even though he and his two longtime partners, Marcel Herrmann Telles and Carlos Alberto Sicupira, now control three icons of U.S. consumer culture: Heinz ketchup, Burger King, and, after the $52 billion takeover of Anheuser-Busch in 2008, Budweiser beer. The combined market value of the companies they run is $187 billion—larger than that of Citigroup.

In Brazil, Lemann is a business-class hero. … Worth some $20 billion, Lemann is No. 32 on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, seven slots behind George Soros and three ahead of Carl Icahn.

Meanwhile, the reactionary, pro-U.S. elements inside (and outside) Brazil are particularly angered at the Workers’ Party and, more broadly, the left. This is not because of corruption – though corruption undoubtedly remains a problem – but because of the ascendance to power of political forces representing working class and poor Brazilians.

the North American Congress on Latin America correctly assessed in April 2015: “Don’t believe the right-wing media’s emphasis on corruption—the recent demonstrations are motivated by entrenched elite discontent over expanding economic and political inclusion for the nation’s majority.”

Bringing BRICS to heel

In short, despite all the fancy anti-corruption rhetoric, the assault on Rousseff’s leftist government is the result of a coordinated campaign by business interests tied to the U.S. Washington and Wall Street that see in Brazil a dangerous precedent in which a left-wing government sympathetic to and allied with Bolivarian movements in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and until recently, Argentina, was able to gain power and preside over an economic boom.

A graph demonstrating the correlation between expansion of anti-government sentiment and the stagnation of GDP growth.

Indeed, this point should not be understated — namely, the economic downturn in commodities such as oil which has put the brakes on Brazil’s rapid economic progress.

In fact, recent data shows that the expansion of anti-government sentiment directly correlates to the stagnation of GDP growth, which itself directly correlates to the decline in commodities prices. As many have convincingly argued, the collapse of oil has no doubt been fomented and encouraged, if not directly orchestrated, by the U.S. and its allies in the Gulf in order to target non-Western countries whose economies are tied to oil and gas revenue — Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, and especially Russia.

Essentially, what’s unfolding in Brazil is a multi-pronged effort to destabilize the country via a variety of political and economic means, with the ultimate goal of bringing to heel a key member of BRICS. But it is not the only one.

Brazil is certainly not the only BRICS member facing an offensive by the U.S.-NATO system.

The next article in this series will examine the destabilizing forces reaching into South Africa. Future pieces will examine the growing military relationship between the U.S. and India, as well as the multi-faceted strategies to contain, isolate, and destabilize Russia and China.

Posted in English
Comments Off on BRICS Under Attack: The Empire Strikes Back In Brazil

Sociedade Venezuelana Marcha contra Lei de Propriedade de Moradias

April 18th, 2016 by Edu Montesanti

Ramos Allup deseja mercantilizar mais de um milhão de moradias entregues pelo governo bolivariano. Telegrama secreto norte-americano aponta: “Não apenas a AD [partido de Allup] é extremamente verticalizada, como é ditatorial”. Outras revelações trazidas à luz dos fatos não deixam dúvidas sobre o que está por trás de mais este ataque contra as conquistas sociais na Venezuela, e na própria América Latina

Cidadãos venezuelano dos mais diversos segmentos sociais saíram às ruas da capital Caracas, onde marcharam contra a Lei de Outorgamento de Títulos de Propriedade Privada a Beneficiários da Gran Misión Vivienda Venezuela, aprovada em 28 de janeiro pela auto-denominada Mesa da Unidade Democrática (MUD), maioria oposicionista na Assembleia Legislativa do país.

Tal medida, entre as tantas anti-populares apresentadas pela MUD desde que obteve maioria legislativa em dezembro do ano passado, visa privatizar as moradias criadas pelo governo bolivariano através do programa Gran Misión Vivienda Venezuela (GMVV), que já entregou mais de um milhão de residências, considerado modelo urbanístico mundial.

A moradia de número um milhão foi entregue há 4 meses e meio, em 30 de dezembro diretamente pelo presidente Nicolás Maduro cujo governo, eleito em abril de 2013, entregou 600 mil casas. As outras 400 mil foram construídas e entregues pelo governo de Hugo Chávez, idealizador da GMVV, em vigor desde 2011,

Durante as manifestações deste dia 14, o presidente Maduro afirmou que não deixará de construir casas populares, a que pesem os ataques contra seu governo. “A direita atente a interesses econômicos, disse o presidente venezuelano.

“A mim, ninguém para, continuarei trabalhando para cumprir o legado do líder da Revolução Bolivariana, Hugo Chávez”, disse Maduro.

Maduro cumprimenta manifestantes em Caracas

Lei de Propriedade Privada

Através da Lei de Propriedade Privada, busca-se mercantilizar as moradias a fim de que os proprietários, ao contrário do que ocorre hoje, possam vendê-las nos mercados imobiliário e negro atendendo, desta maneira, aos interesses empresariais.

O governo de Nicolás Maduro tem denunciado, contudo, que a oposição mente ao afirmar que o Estado não emite títulos aos beneficiários do programa – fato constatado pelo giro deste autor pela Venezuela, de ponta a ponta, que inclusive entrevistou família beneficiária do GMVV dentro de seu apartamento (vídeo em Record de Empregos Formais na Venezuela em 20 Anos http://port.pravda.ru/busines/10-04-2016/40755-empregos_venezuela-0/). Junto deste fato, é constatada a invariável e intensa satisfação dos beneficiários, realidade também comprovada pelas próprias manifestações massivas ocorridas no dia 14 por Caracas.

Além do título, o governo entrega também um certificado que indica que a propriedade foi entregue “em venda pura e simples, perfeita e irrevogável”. O que quer dizer que se trata de imóvel de propriedade exclusiva, para evitar a compra e venda que levaria a perder a moradia de muitas famílias,e impediria as ventas especulativas.

O Ministro do Poder Popular para a Habitação e o Habitat, Manuel Quevedo, disse que “eles [opositores] estão interessados no milhão de casas entregues, querem saber onde elas está cada uma dado que representam os bens que querem transferir ao mercado imobiliário”. O ministro Quevedo também ressalta que seu único interesse é a “especulação, inflar a terra excedente” para, assim, aumentar o custo final do imóvel.

Considerado secretamente por Washington “caso perdido”, e um ser “repugnante”, “bruto”, “arrogante” e com caráter ditatorial (leia revelação WikiLeaks na continuação), o presidente da Assembleia Nacional, Henry Ramos Allup do partido Ação Democrática (AD), alega que quem não tiver dinheiro para terminar de pagar pelo imóvel, que seja despejado e o repasse a outra família que tenha condições de arcar com as despesas. Exatamente esta ideia consta na nova lei aprovada pelo frequentador da Embaixada norte-americana com o pires na mão, conforme será abordado mais adiante.

Quevedo afirma que, para que a nova lei tenha validade legal, dever-se-ia, então, revogar todo o compêndio de leis que garantem e apoiam a herança familiar de todos os beneficiários da GMVV criada pelo então presidente Hugo Chávez, em 2011.

Entre essas leis, além da própria Constituição da República Bolivariana da Venezuela, estão a Lei Orgânica de Terras de Emergência e Habitação, a Lei de Regime da Propriedade de Habitação, a Lei contra o Despejo e a Desocupação Arbitrária de Moradias, a Lei Especial de Regularização Integral e Ordenamento da Posse de Terras, a Lei de Regulamentação e Controle das Locações, a Lei contra a Fraude Imobiliária, a Lei de Regime Prestacional do Regime de Habitação e Habitat e, finalmente, a Lei de Determinação dos Preços Justos de Habitação e Imóveis.

Enquanto a lei venezuelana assegura direitos à propriedade privada, no caso da GMVV vale a Garantia de Herança, que não admite hipotecas nem embargos. A Missão estabelece também o conceito de doação no caso de que uma família não tenha condições de custear a habitação, bem como a garantia de subsídios que diminuem o valor do imóvel.

Quém é Ramos Allup

Uma das primeiras medidas “enérgicas” que tomou o deputado de direita, Henry Ramos Allup (no centro da imagem à esquerda), ao assumir a Presidência da Assembleia Legislativa, foi retirar de forma tão autoritária quanto burlesca o quadro do libertador Simón Bolívar da Sala Plenária, produzido em 2012 através de estudos forenses e antropológicos. Para indignação da maior parte da sociedade venezuelana (excluída dessa soma boa parte da elite local).

Insatisfeito, dias dias ordenou que quadros de Bolívar fossem sumariamente removidos de todas as dependências da Casa. Alguma semelhança com personagens bem conhecidos de nossa triste e totalitária história?

É suspeito de ter favorecido o sogro, grande empresário, em licitações de obras públicas quando deputado da chamada IV República, que durou até a chegada de Chávez à Presidência. Época em que a sociedade venezuelana era fortemente reprimida e vivia sob altos índices de pobreza, na IV República não se investigava casos de corrupção envolvendo seus políticos, daí a suspeita sem julgamento nem provas remanescentes.

Um dos políticos mais ricos da Venezuela, Allup foi peça-chave no boicote às eleições parlamentares de 2005, financiado por banqueiros e por meios de comunicação privados (que na Venezuela somam-se 80%, livres para exercer oposição e praticar as maiores mentiras como este mesmo boicote, e o golpe de 48 horas contra Hugo Chávez em 2002). Por ironia do destino, o mesmo Conselho Nacional Eleitoral boicotado por Allup reconheceu, nas três vezes em que recebeu votos para tanto, sua eleição como parlamentar (como ocorre com todos os eleitos, sejam oposicionistas ou não).

Advogado de 72 anos, idolatrado pela mídia corporativa internacional desde que assumiu a Presidência da Assembleia Legislativa no inicio do ano, tido agora como personagem proeminente, corajoso, dono de alta capacidade de articulação, calculista e negociador político por excelência, “temido” pelo governo bolivariano, “redentor” da democracia venezuelana, Allup foi bem traçado por trás das cortinas do teatro político-midiático.

No documento secreto emitido pela Embaixada dos Estados Unidos em Caracas ao Departamento de Estado norte-americano, no dia 17 de abril de 2006, o “diplomata” William Bownfield descreve o então deputado e líder do partido Acción Democrática, Ramos Allup, segundo a visão da Embaixada. E ainda revela a mendicância não apenas de Allup, mas também de outros líderes oposicionistas diante dos funcionários do regime de Washington ali – bem ao estilo das classes dominantes latino-americanas.

O título do telegrama secreto, revelado por WikiLeaks, é Caso Perdido, em referência a Ramos Allup. Considerado pela Embaixada norte-americana um ser “sem imaginação”, “com excesso de confiança e repugnante”, o atual presidente da Assembleia Nacional que aprova medidas impopulares na Venezuela além de bajulado pelo regime de Barack Obama, foi relatado como alguém que xingava, com palavras do mais baixo calão, companheiros parlamentares.

“O principal problema da Acción Democrática tem um nome: Ramos Allup”, continua o telegrama secreto que o tacha ainda de “arrogante” e “bruto”, observando que a “grandiloquência é a principal virtude” de um parlamentar que se apoia em suas “honras obsoletas”.

“Não apenas a AD é extremamente verticalizada, como é ditatorial”. “Sua pequenez se estende aos rivais internos”, diz Brownfield que ainda revela, o que não é nenhuma surpresa: Funcionários AD têm, de forma explícita e repetidamente, procurado fundos e favores da Embaixada. Quando recusados por um funcionário da Embaixada, eles pedem para outro. (…) O ex-deputado da Assembleia Nacional pela AD, Pedro Pablo Alcantara, liga e visita a Embaixada regularmente com pedidos de vistos, bolsas de estudo para amigos, etc. Ele liga para diferentes setores da Embaixada se não recebe o que ele pede.

Nem surpreende que tais catadores de migalhas, lá tal qual cá, combatam com peculiar obstinação as conquistas sociais.

Medíocres Fantoches Ditando Futuro do Povo

Digamos que para razoável entendedor, um único telegrama made in USA basta a fim de compreender exatamente o que está por trás de mais essa medida impopular por parte da MUD, subserviente como sempre aos auto-declarados “excepcionais”, e sem nenhum projeto de governo na Venezuela.

E por que não, é igualmente suficiente para se compreender, por extensão, que forças operam hoje no intuito de derrubar pelos meios que forem possíveis governos progressistas latino-americanos. O maior inimigo da democracia regional é o mesmo; irregenerável, não mudou em absolutamente nada, incompatível com verdadeiras democracias apoiando-se, para executar suas seculares sabotagens, assassinatos e golpes, na ausência de memória, na apatia, na preguiça intelectual, nos medos e nos interesses de seres tão patéticos quanto este inimigo.

Tudo isso subproduto da mídia de desinformação das massas que, por sua vez, insistem em ter a mentalidade pautada por aquela.

Edu Montesanti

________

Edu Montesanti é autor de Mentiras e Crimes da “Guerra ao Terror” (Ed. Scortecci, Brasil, 2012), escreve para o Jornal Pravda (Rússia) e para Truth Out (Estados Unidos)

Posted in Português
Comments Off on Sociedade Venezuelana Marcha contra Lei de Propriedade de Moradias

“Poor” G7 Just Cannot Disarm Yet! “They met in Hiroshima, the First City on Earth subjected to Nuclear Genocide”

April 17th, 2016 by Andre Vltchek

They met in Hiroshima, Japan, in the first city on Earth that had been subjected to nuclear genocide. They were representing some of the mightiest nations on Earth: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States – the so-called Group of Seven (G7). And at the end of their encounter, they called for “a world without nuclear weapons”.

I am talking about the foreign ministers of seven countries with the largest economies on Earth.

Read carefully the names of these countries, one by one! For decades and centuries, the world has been trembling imagining their armed forces and corporations. Lashes administered by their colonial rulers have scarred entire continents, tens of millions were enslaved, and hundreds of millions killed, billions robbed.

Even now, if we all listen carefully, we can clearly hear the victims screaming, in agony: the native people of Canada and United States, the colonized people of Africa, Asia and the Middle East. For centuries, the entire world has been in shackles, on its knees, humiliated, plundered and destroyed.

G7! How many billions of victims from all corners of the world, made those countries so ‘grand’?

To ensure that the pillage could continue uninterrupted, the West together with those “honorary whites” (a term that the South African apartheid regime invented exclusively for the Japanese people) created several aggressive and belligerent pacts, including NATO, calling them, of course, “defensive” alliances. It came as no surprise: remember that in the lexicon of the Empire of Lies, war is called peace, while aggression is always defined as defense. But this I have already described in detail, in my 820-page book “Exposing Lies of the Empire”.

Now foreign policy tsars of the “G7” were standing shoulder to shoulder again, in Hiroshima, of all places, and only a few days after the 71st anniversary of the nuclear blast. Making predictable declarations and self-glorifying speeches.

The weather was good, partly sunny, with excellent visibility. But was the world really able to see through the thick fog of Machiavellian cynicism and lies, dispersed all over the Planet by those grinning rulers of the world?

F15 - overflying Kadena air base

On April 11, 2016, the foreign ministers of the Group of Seven (G7) issued a written declaration on nuclear disarmament:

“We reaffirm our commitment to seeking a safer world for all and to creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons in a way that promotes international stability”.

Seriously? No one around those ministers fell; nobody was seen to be rolling on the floor, shaking from uncontrollable laughter. Obviously, a joke repeated thousands of times loses its luster.

But that was not all. The text of the declaration continued:

“This task is made more complex by the deteriorating security environment in a number of regions, such as Syria and Ukraine, and, in particular by North Korea’s repeated provocations.”

What exactly were we reading? What was between the lines? Were we being told that the United States needs all of its 6,970 nuclear weapons to antagonize Syria and North Korea, while sustaining the fascist regime in Ukraine?

Just to put things into perspective: two Communist countries with nuclear capability have really negligible stockpiles of nuclear weapons, compared to the West and G7. China has 260 and North Korea (DPRK) approximately 15. In comparison, France has 300 and the U.K., 215.

In 2016, the population of China stands at 1.382 million, while that of France is less than 65 million. China has more than 21 times more people to defend, but despite that, France has more nuclear weapons.

The comparison gets even more ridiculous between North Korea and the U.K.

The figures quoted above are the latest “official” statistics, taken from the World Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Report, updated as recently as on March 2, 2016.

It would also be appropriate to recall that North Korea has never invaded any foreign country. Also China (PRC), apart from two brief border clashes, has never been involved in any large-scale military conflict. Not once has it colonized or destroyed a foreign land. Both France and the U.K. have been plundering on all of the planet’s continents, for centuries. Later, in the 20th Century, the United States ‘took over’ the reigns of imperialism from the old and ‘traditional’ European colonialist empires.

One statement is actually correct: there is that deteriorating security environment in a number of regions, but only due to the covert as well as direct aggressions of NATO and the G7 countries.

But it would be even more honest to declare: “We are sorry, we really cannot disarm, because if we would, it would become much more difficult to loot and to control the world.”

Goma, DR Congo - people that are making G7 rich

Before dispersing, the G7 party did what its members enjoy doing the most: lashing at China.

As Reuters reported:

“Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven (G7) advanced economies said they strongly opposed provocation in the East and South China Seas, where China is locked in territorial disputes with nations including the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan… Earlier on Monday, the G7 foreign ministers said after meeting in the Japanese city of Hiroshima that they opposed “any intimidating coercive or provocative unilateral actions that could alter the status quo and increase tensions”.”

The US is habitually implementing that ‘good old’ British ‘divide and rule’ strategy. In Asia, it uses its ‘client’ states, particularly the Philippines, Japan and South Korea to isolate and provoke both China and DPRK. This policy is so dangerous that many here believe that it could eventually trigger the Third World War.

This time, China has fired back, almost immediately. At a news briefing, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang declared:

“If the G7 wants to continue playing a major role in the world, it should take an attitude of seeking truth from the facts to handle the issues the international community is most concerned with at the moment.”

The Western military build-up in the Asia Pacific region, the military maneuvers conducted jointly by the US and South Korea, as well as the continuous militarization of Japan, are definitely some of the topics that are making most of the Asian continent both ‘concerned’ and frightened.

Nuclear Dome, Hiroshima, Japan

Predictably, the DPRK remained the main punch bag of the G7. The ministers never explained exactly why the world should be petrified of North Korea. Such fear should apparently be taken for granted, especially after the long decades of intensive and vicious Western and South Korean propaganda.

But back to the statement of the ministers:

“We condemn in the strongest terms the nuclear test on January 6 and the launch using ballistic missile technology on February 7, March 10 and March 18 conducted by North Korea. It is profoundly deplorable that North Korea has conducted four nuclear tests in the 21st century.”

Of course, building defenses against the combined NATO and G7 aggressions is one of the most deplorable crimes, it calls for capital punishment!

Shamelessly, after spreading verbal toxins, all seven ministers went to the grounds of the monument and museum dedicated to the victims of “Hiroshima A-bomb”.

The Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida led the pack. Under the bizarre leadership of his government, Japan has been doing its absolute best to betray Asia, and to antagonize its neighbors. In the most servile and shameful way, it has fully accepted the Western dictates, increased the volume of its own hysterical propaganda campaign against China and DPRK, and has begun to bolster its military.

Why? Just to please its masters, those ‘noble and superior Westerners’!

By now, Japan is not even what its Prime Minister Shinzō Abe wants the world to believe that it is: a conservative nation governed by a nationalist government.

Japan has no spine, just as it has no foreign policy. It fully takes orders from the United States. And as I was told repeatedly by one of the employees of the NHK: “No major media outlet in Japan would dare to broadcast anything important, related to international affairs, that hasn’t appeared previously on at least one of the major US networks.”

Looking at Japan’s past, “conservative nationalists” used to be, for instance, some of the greatest writers like Yukio Mishima, a man who ended his life in 1970 by committing a ritual suicide, protesting Japan’s unabashed submission to the West. Japan’s Prime Minister Abe is definitely a ‘conservative’, but is he really a Japanese nationalist? He is defending the interests of Washington much more than those of his own country. Perhaps, “honorary white and one of G7 leaders” would be the most fitting term to define him.

Now, according to the official NATO website: “Japan is the longest-standing of NATO’s “partners across the globe”.

It is also one of the nations that are shamelessly plundering the world through its brutal corporations.

***

And so they stood there – seven ministers from some of the most aggressive countries on Earth.

They stood on the turf that was, more than 70 years ago, burned to ashes, in just a few seconds after the nuclear explosion.

They said again and again how much they would like to disarm, how much they would like to see the world free of nuclear weapons.

What they didn’t say was that they never would disarm, voluntarily.

And they never clarified how they actually made it to that exclusive G7 club: because of the unbridled plunder during their colonial history, and because of the modern-day global corporate pillage, as well as their mining and oil “investments”. And of course because of the “world order”, imposed by force and all sorts of weapons, nuclear and conventional, on the rest of the Planet.

Instead of Group of Seven, this pack should be simply called ‘GS’ – the Group of Shame.

The ministers stood for some time in front of the flame burning at the monument to Hiroshima A-bomb victims. They posed for the cameras. Then they went away, sat down at some table, and wrote the official declaration on nuclear disarmament, ‘explaining’ why they cannot abandon their tools of coercion. And that declaration turned out to be nothing more than yet another monumental pile of lies!

Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. His latest books are: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire” and “Fighting Against Western Imperialism”.Discussion with Noam Chomsky: On Western Terrorism. Point of No Return is his critically acclaimed political novel. Oceania – a book on Western imperialism in the South Pacific. His provocative book about Indonesia: “Indonesia – The Archipelago of Fear”. Andre is making films for teleSUR and Press TV. After living for many years in Latin America and Oceania, Vltchek presently resides and works in East Asia and the Middle East. He can be reached through his website or his Twitter.

Posted in English
Comments Off on “Poor” G7 Just Cannot Disarm Yet! “They met in Hiroshima, the First City on Earth subjected to Nuclear Genocide”

“Nuit Debout”: Dawn of a French Style [Color] Revolution?

April 17th, 2016 by Gilbert Mercier

Some call it a phenomenon, others compare it to the failed 2011 Occupy movement, but Nuit Debout has taken the largely discredited French political class, from across the bogus standard left to the far right, by surprise.

Sociologically, it should not be a surprise at all. The backdrop is a sense of deep social malaise, a ras le bol et envie de redevenir vivant (a spillover and wish to be alive again). France, as a society, has been morose and depressed for decades, and the state of emergency imposed in a cowardly panicky haste by François Hollande’s administration since November 2015 has turned the country into a pressure cooker.

In the two weeks since it started on the night of March 31, 2016 at the Place de La République in Paris’ XI arrondissement, Nuit Debout has rapidly spread to other cities in France such as Lyon, Nice, Nantes, Toulouse, etc., as well as to Belgium, Germany, and Spain. It could be the remedy for France’s deep social malaise and the sense of being “hankerchiefs to be used and discarded.” An informed observer can see strong similarities with the Situationist, Anarchist and neo-Marxist groups of May 1968, when France’s last mini-revolution toppled its government. Some are already talking of a 6th Republic, which could be either wishful thinking or the dawn of a new revolution.

The French political class is reacting with a mixture of understanding for the protesters and threats of a brutal police crackdown on Nuit Debout’s activists. The Socialist Party, more simply identified in France by its acronym PS, is ironically labeled the Parti Scélerat (Scoundrel Party) by the Nuit Debout activists, in reference to the party’s sell out of all leftist ideals.

The Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, personifies the hypocrisy of this ruling party. In a statement to the newspaper Le Monde on April 11, 2016, Mayor Hidalgo did not condemn the movement itself but what she qualified as its excesses: “If it is legitimate to dream of another world, it is not so to degrade this one,” said Hidalgo. She delivered almost immediately on her rhetoric by ordering the evacuation of the Place de la République on the same day. The new and improved French police-state apparatus was eager to execute the order and clear up the square. Elsewhere in Paris, five brutal arrests were made, and people were detained without the proper charges, in accordance with the state of emergency’s extraordinary powers, including arrests without probable cause. The repression has not stopped the momentum of the movement.

Most of the mainstream media in France and elsewhere are drawing an analogy between Nuit Debout and the Occupy movement of late 2011, as well as the Indignados actions in Spain.

This is certainly not a coincidence, considering that Occupy largely fizzled and failed for lack of organization and radicalization, just like the Arab spring in the Middle East was hijacked by the West, under United States leadership, to implement regime change policies through fake revolutions in Libya and Syria. The Occupy movement was infiltrated by informants, neutered and more or less dismantled between early December 2011 and late spring 2012 under the instigation of countless little helpers who were paid to hijack the movement. If the Nuit Debout activists follow the tracks of their predecessors of Occupy, the outcome will be the same.

Since 2011, however, throughout the world some elements have greatly changed: the connection between the political class and citizens has reached a breaking point; the notion of elections being a farce has become widespread; wealth concentration and social inequality have reached an unprecedented and unsustainable level; and conflicts and the business of warfare have reached an apex. These factors are fertile ground for the collective quantum leap that is a revolution. As an indication of this shift, a Nuit Debout activist interviewed by the French daily newspaper Liberation said that the movement should consider “a more muscular struggle.”

The mainstream analyses do not take into account the fact that France has a revolutionary tradition. The last revolution that bore fruit was in May 1968 and is probably the greatest influence on Nuit Debout. The May 1968 movement started with students and young people, but it quickly expanded to include all the labor unions, which were then very strong. It grew into an open-ended general strike that froze all activities in the country in all sectors of the economy and eventually led to the resignation of President Charles de Gaulle in April 1969 and extensive government reforms.

It is May 1968′s humorous and irreverent discourse that we find echoed in Nuit Debout’s slogans today. In 1968, for example, we had “Salaires légers, chars lourds” (Light salaries, heavy tanks), and in 2016 we find “Ils ont des milliards, nous sommes des millions” (They have billions, we are millions). Both movements question the essence of political representation as if all social issues are again up for debate in the public square. Just as in 1968, the labor unions are quickly stepping in and joining the students, and like the activists of the May 1968 movement, the Nuit Debout activists are hunkering down for what they call une lutte prolongée (a prolonged struggled).

Nuit Debout envisions an era of social justice and ecological responsibility. This is expressed with humor by a suspension of the calendar, as if the month of March will continue until the revolution is achieved. In the Nuit Debout calendar, this article would be published on March 45, and Christmas will fall on March 300. The Nuit Debout movement exudes a contagious joy, which is a necessary ingredient in the cocktail of every successful revolution. A revolution, after all, must be departure from the status quo. Today’s revolution must displace the suicidal worship of wealth and power to create a joyous culture that is sustainable and celebrates life. The richness of the burgeoning discourse, and the inclusion of cultural elements like cinema and song are good omens for the success of Nuit Debout. On a fine day in March we might again hear an old classic from 1789: “Ah! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira! Les aristocrates à la lanterne….”

Gilbert Mercier is the author of The Orwellian Empire, and Dady Chery is the author of We Have Dared to Be Free. Photographs one and three by Nicolas Vigier; two and five by Titi Photo; six by Georges; and eight by Thierry Ehrmann.

Posted in English
Comments Off on “Nuit Debout”: Dawn of a French Style [Color] Revolution?

Meet Andriy Parubiy, the Neo-Nazi Leader Turned Speaker of Ukraine’s Parliament

April 17th, 2016 by Jon Hellevig

When Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk got the boot and was replaced by the speaker of parliament Volodymyr Groysman, Mr. Andriy Parubiy was appointed in his stead.

This extraordinary event speaks volumes about, not only the Ukraine, but also the present state of affairs in the West and its media, which increasingly adapts its reporting to fit the current geopolitical interests of the masters of the Western universe.

Mr. Parubiy has a biography littered with overt activity as one of the leading figures at the nexus of the Ukrainian ultra-nationalist and outright neo-Nazi movements.

Yet there has not been so much as a squeak from any leading Western politician or the media about the appalling fact that this same Parubiy has now ascended to the respectable position of speaker of parliament of a country with which the EU has signed an agreement about economic and political association. The self-proclaimed guardian of our values, as the EU wants us to regard it, has signed a treaty of political association with a country, where the second highest political position is held by a person who has earned his stripes as a neo-Nazi commander. However, the EU has not always in the past been so indifferent to Parubiy’s activities, as we shall see further down.

Mr. Parubiy commemorating the Ukrainian WWII Nazi leader Stepan Bandera

Andriy Parubiy founded in 1991 the Social-National Party of Ukraine, together with Oleh Tyahnybok, another coup leader and the present leader of the Svoboda party. The name Social-National Party was chosen as a fully intentional allusion to Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party called National Socialist Party. This interpretation has been confirmed by Der Spiegel, Germany’s leading weekly news magazine. True to its historical inspiration, the Social-National Party (SNUP) did not conceal its radical nationalism and its neo-Nazi features.

In a research paper from 2009, Andreas Umland and Anton Shekhovstov characterized the SNUP in these words: “… of these various Ukrainian nationalist parties the SNPU was the least inclined to conceal its neo fascist afﬁliations. Its ofﬁcial symbol was the somewhat modiﬁed Wolf’s Hook (Wolfsangel),used as a symbol by the German SS division Das Reich and the Dutch SS division Landstorm Nederland during World War II and by a number of European neofascist organizations after 1945. As seen by the SNPU leadership, the Wolf’s Hook became the “idea of the nation.” Moreover, the ofﬁcial name of the party’s ideology, “social nationalism,” clearly referred back to “national socialism”—the ofﬁcial name of the ideology of the National-Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP) and of the Hitlerite regime. The SNPU’s political platform distinguished itself by its openly revolutionary ultranationalism, its demands for the violent takeover of power in the country, and its willingness to blame Russia for all of Ukraine’s ills. Moreover, the SNPU was the ﬁrst relatively large party to recruit Nazi skinheads and football hooligans.”

The symbol of the Social-National Party is a modified Wolfsangel of Hitler’s Nazi movement

From 1998 to 2004, Parubiy led the Patriot of Ukraine, a paramilitary organization of the Social-National Party. The Patriot of Ukraine also admitted to its overt racist and neo-Nazi political beliefs and its specialization in promoting political violence as a means to an end (alas, the end, which has been achieved). It constituted a paramilitary wing of the Social-National Assembly of Ukraine (S.N.A.), an assemblage of neo-Nazi organizations and other radical violent groups affiliated with the Svoboda party.

In his role as the commandant of Euromaidan from December 2013 to February 2014, Parubiy was the leader of the military wing of the coup that brought down the democratically elected President Yanukovich and subjected the parliament to a reign of terror. In this capacity, he brought into the Maidan all the neo-Nazi storm battalions that he had fostered under the S.N.A. umbrella. Independent evidence strongly points to the fact that it was precisely Parubiy, who was directly in charge of the Maidan snipers. The case is compellingly put forward in an article in the Global Research. Another convincing write-up on this is provided by Gordon Hahn in The Real “Snipers’ Massacre”, Ukraine, February 2014.

Andriy Parubiy at the Maidan directing people who appear to be snipers heading home from a job well done

After the regime took office in the wake of the coup, Parubiy was appointed to the influential position of head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council. In this role, he was tasked with the brutal repression that swept the country after the Maidan coup. He organized and coordinated the National Guard and other ultra-right, neofascist and neo-Nazi storm battalions like the Azov Battalion, which unleashed the terror in Eastern Ukraine. This would also imply that he condoned the Odessa and Mariupol massacres

With Parubiy and Tyahnybok well established as the leaders of the insurgent fascist movement they abruptly performed in 2004 a rebranding of their various organizations by dropping the most overt allusions to Nazism. A well-informed source, who wishes to remain anonymous, revealed that it is believed that the rebranding was a strategy that their handlers at the CIA had prescribed in order to make the leaders and their organizations more politically acceptable on the Western propaganda front. The Social-National Party changed its name to Svoboda with Tyahnybok at the helm. Simultaneously they abandoned the Wolfsangel logo, but this was done only in regards to the formally adopted logo, in essence, the party continued wielding the Wolfsangel in its gatherings.

Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok in an eerie setting addressing his party congress.

Did the EU not know all this? Or, is this a case of a severe form of institutional amnesia? Let’s see. Turns out that on 13 December 2012 the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the situation in Ukraine (2012/2889). According to this resolution the EU was then “concerned about the rising nationalistic sentiment in Ukraine, expressed in support for the Svoboda Party, which, as a result, is one of the two new parties to enter the Verkhovna Rada; recalls that racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views go against the EU’s fundamental values and principles and therefore appeals to pro-democratic parties in the Verkhovna Rada not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party.”

Yes, in 2012, the EU called for a boycott of the Svoboda Party because of its extremist views, which went against the famous “EU fundamental values”. But today, they have no problem with cheering on Mr. Parubiy, who was the progenitor of Svododa (and much worse things), as he sweeps to power in the EU’s very own political association partner.

What was the Faustian bargain that brought about this change of heart? This is not a rhetoric question, so I will answer it. It is the expediency to enlist the Ukrainian Neo-Nazis and other extremists in their geopolitical shenanigans against Russia.

The former Neo-Nazi leader Andriy Parubiy is now a respected member of the ruling elite, here pictured with the new prime minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Meet Andriy Parubiy, the Neo-Nazi Leader Turned Speaker of Ukraine’s Parliament

Saudi Royals Supported Al Qaeda, Did They Finance the 9/11 Attacks? Saudi King and Princes Blackmail U.S. Government…

April 17th, 2016 by Eric Zuesse

Saudi Arabia, owned by the Saud family, are telling the U.S. Government, they’ll wreck the U.S. economy, if a bill in the U.S. Congress that would remove the unique and exclusive immunity the royal owners of that country enjoy in the United States, against their being prosecuted for their having financed the 9/11 attacks, passes in Congress, and becomes U.S. law.

As has been well documented even in sworn U.S. court testimony, and as even the pro-Saudi former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acknowledged privately, “Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.” She didn’t name any of those “donors” names, but the former bagman for Osama bin Laden, who had personally collected all of the million-dollar+ donations (all in cash) to Al Qaeda, did, and he named all of the senior Saud princes and their major business-associates; and, he said, “without the money of the — of the Saudi you will have nothing.” So, both before 9/11, and (according to Hillary Clinton) since, those were the people who were paying virtually all of the salaries of the 19 hijackers — even of the four who weren’t Saudi citizens. Here’s that part of the bagman’s testimony about how crucial those donations were:

Q: To clarify, you’re saying that the al-Qaeda members received salaries?

A: They do, absolutely.

So: being a jihadist isn’t merely a calling; it’s also a job, as is the case for the average mercenary (for whom it doesn’t also have to be a calling). The payoff for that job, during the jihadist’s life, is the pay. The bagman explained that the Saud family’s royals pay well for this service to their fundamentalist-Sunni faith. Another lifetime-payoff to the jihadists is that, in their fundamentalist-Sunni culture, the killing of ‘infidels’ is a holy duty, and they die as martyrs. Thus, the jihadist’s payoff in the (mythological) afterlife is plenty of virgins to deflower etc. But, the payers (the people who organize it, and who make it all possible) are the Saud family princes, and their business associates — and, in the case of the other jihadist organizations, is also those other Arabic royal families (the owners of Qater, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Oman). However, 9/11 was virtually entirely a Saudi affair, according to Al Qaeda’s bagman (who ought to know).

The report of the threat by the Saud family comes in veiled form in an April 15th news-story in The New York Times, headlined, “Saudi Arabia Warns of Economic Fallout if Congress Passes 9/11 Bill.” It says that the Saud family’s Foreign Minister is “telling [U.S.] lawmakers that Saudi Arabia would be forced to sell up to $750 billion in [U.S.] treasury securities and other assets in the United States before they could be in danger of being frozen by American courts.” The NYT says that this threat is nothing to take seriously, “But the threat is another sign of the escalating tensions between Saudi Arabia and the United States.” While the carrying-out of this threat would be extremely damaging to the Saud family, the NYT ignores the size of the threat to the Sauds if their 9/11 immunity were removed — which could be far bigger. Consequently, this matter is actually quite a bit more than just “another sign of the escalating tensions between Saudi Arabia and the United States.”

Russian Television is more direct here: “Saudi Arabia appears to be blackmailing the US, saying it would sell off American assets worth a 12-digit figure sum in dollars if Congress passes a bill allowing the Saudi Government to be held responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.” (The Saudi Government is owned by the Saud family; so, even that statement is actually a veiled way of referring to the possibility that members of the royal Saud family — the individuals name by the bagman — could be held responsible for 9/11.)

Even immediately in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, there had been some mentions in the U.S. press of the U.S. Government making special allowances for Saud Prince Bandar al-Saud, a close friend of the Bush family (and he was also one of the Saudi Princes mentioned specifically by the bagman), to fly out of the country to avoid being sought by prosecutors. Furthermore, Newsweek’s investigative journalist, Michael Isikoff, headlined on 12 January 2001, “The Saudi Money Trail”, and he reported statements from royal Sauds, that they didn’t really mean for their donations to be going to such a thing as this. (Perhaps those individuals didn’t, but Bandar almost certainly did, because he was the Saud Ambassador to the U.S. at the time of 9/11.) However, now that the U.S. Government is relying heavily upon Saudi money to pay for the U.S. weapons and to help to organize the operation to overthrow Bashar al-Assad in Syria and to replace him with a fundamentalist-Sunni leader, there is renewed political pressure in the United States (from the victim-families, if no one else), for the arch-criminals behind the 9/11 attacks to be brought to American justice. After fifteen years, this process might finally start. That would be a drastic change.

Clearly, the threat from the Sauds is real, and the royal response to this bill in the U.S. Congress reflects a very great fear the owners of Saudi Arabia have, regarding the possible removal of their U.S. immunity, after 15 years.

Prosecution of those people will become gradually impossible as they die off. But a lot more time will be needed in order for all of the major funders of that attack to die natural deaths and thus become immune for a natural reason — the immunity of the grave. The U.S. Government has protected them for 15 years; but, perhaps, not forever.

To say that this threat from the Sauds is just “another sign of the escalating tensions between Saudi Arabia and the United States” seems like saying that a neighbor’s threat to bomb your house would constitute just “another sign of escalating tensions” between you and your neighbor. The passing-into-law of this bill in Congress would actually constitute a change from the U.S. Government being a friend and partner of the Sauds, to becoming their enemy.

Obviously, there is little likelihood of that happening; and, on April 20th and 21st, U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to meet with Saudi King Salman al-Saud. Without a doubt, this topic will be on the agenda, if it won’t constitute the agenda (which is allegedly to improve U.S. relations “with Arab leaders of Persian Gulf nations” — not specifically with Saudi King Salman and with his son Prince Salman).

If President Obama represents the American public, then the Sauds will have real reason to fear: the U.S. President will not seek to block passage of that bill in Congress. However, if the U.S. President represents instead the Saud family, then a deal will be reached. Whether or not the U.S. Congress will go along with it, might be another matter, but it would be highly likely, considering that the present situation has already been going on for fifteen years, and that the high-priority U.S. Government foreign-policy objective, of overthrowing Bashar al-Assad, is also at stake here, and is also strongly shared not only by the Sauds but by the members of the U.S. Congress. Furthermore, the impunity of the Saud family is taken simply as a given in Washington. And, the U.S. Government’s siding with the Sauds in their war against Shia Muslims (not onlyagainst one Shiite: Assad) goes back at least as far as 1979. (Indeed, the CIA drew up the plan in 1957 to overthrow Syria’s Ba’athist Government, but it stood unused until President Obama came into office.)

Furthermore, the U.S. Government is far more aggressive to overthrow Russia-friendly national leaders, such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, and Viktor Yanukovych, than it is to stop the spread of fundamentalist Sunni groups, such as Al Qaeda, ISIS, etc.; and, a strong voice for U.S. foreign policy, the Polish Government, even said, on April 15th, that as AFP headlined that day, “Russia ‘more dangerous than Islamic State’, warns Poland foreign minister”; and Russia itself is, along with Shiite Iran, the top competitor against the fundamentalist Sunni Arab royal families in global oil-and-gas export markets. So, clearly, the U.S. Government is tightly bound to the Saud family. Terrorism in Europe and America is only a secondary foreign-policy concern to America’s leaders; and the Saud family are crucial allies with the U.S. Government in regards to what are, jointly, the top concerns of both Governments.

Consequently, there is widespread expectation that some sort of deal will be reached between U.S. President Barack Obama and the Saudi leaders, King and Prince Salman, and that the Republican-led Congress will rubber-stamp it, rather than pass the proposed bill to strip the Saud family’s immunity.

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.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Saudi Royals Supported Al Qaeda, Did They Finance the 9/11 Attacks? Saudi King and Princes Blackmail U.S. Government…

Bernie Sanders’ Jewish Outreach Director Suspended for Blunt and Honest Criticism of Netanyahu Government

April 16th, 2016 by Anthony Bellchambers

The US presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders has suspended its new Jewish Outreach Director over the tone of her past criticism of Israel, for daring to speak the truth!

‘Simone Zimmerman, a former J Street student activist, was recently hired by the Sanders campaign. She wrote last year on Facebook,

“Bibi Netanyahu is arrogant, deceptive, cynical, manipulative, according to the Washington based Free Beacon.”

She continued:

“F— you, Bibi, for daring to insist that you legitimately represent even a fraction of the Jews in this world, for your consistent fearmongering, for pushing Israel in word and deed, farther and farther away from the international community, and most importantly, for trying to derail a potentially historic diplomatic deal with Iran and thus trying to distract the world from the fact that you sanctioned the murder of over 2,000 people this summer.”

And that neatly encapsulates the truth. It is timely that a Jewish American has dared to stand up to AIPAC to boldly speak the truth and to refuse to be intimidated by the all-too-powerful, Likud Zionist propaganda of the Israel lobby.

Now we need a Jewish Londoner to stand up and be as equally blunt and honest about the Netanyahu government; its hundreds of undeclared WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) and its illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories that continue to violate the Geneva Conventions and international law in its attempt to prevent the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

The world must support the global BDS Campaign to apply economic pressure in order to achieve human rights for 5 million dispossessed, indigenous Arabs. Just as in South Africa against the apartheid regime, ordinary people worldwide must continue to persuade Western governments to apply sanctions to achieve democratic rights for the entire people of former Palestine.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Bernie Sanders’ Jewish Outreach Director Suspended for Blunt and Honest Criticism of Netanyahu Government

The History and Role of Russia’s Airborne Infantry Forces. Review and Analysis

April 16th, 2016 by J. Hawk

This article offers a review of Russia’s Airborne forces which has a bearing on Russia’s capabilities in conventional warfare. It constitutes a Russian perspective on military affairs which we bring to the attention of our readers.

Historical Background

Russia’s airborne forces were an integral part of the Deep Battle doctrine developed in the 1930s, and already in 1936 the large Red Army maneuvers near Kiev featured a brigade airdrop. These units went on to fight with distinction in the Great Patriotic War, usually as ordinary infantry. However, they also participated in a number of airborne operations against the Germans, though the largest Soviet use of airborne forces was against Japan during Operation Autumn Storm in 1945 in Manchuria. Following the war, the Airborne Forces, or the VDV, became an independent branch of service under the command of the legendary General Margelov and developed a sophisticated doctrine and equipment suite which had no equivalent anywhere else in the world.

Post-Cold War

The end of the Cold War has not reduced the VDV’s importance. Rather the opposite: with the end of the bipolar world, the reduction in the size of conventional forces, and the emergence of new threats in the form of ‘Islamic terrorism” and hybrid wars, airborne units’ strategic significance has only increased.

Since any future war will feature fluid front lines and open flanks, the ability to airlift or airdrop a light mechanized brigade or even a division to a crucial part of the theater of war can play a decisive role in the outcome of the entire operation.

Moreover, the VDV are not only a battlefield but also a strategic force. They are ideal for the so-called coup de main operations which preempt enemy moves, and which can be employed in virtually any operational theater where great power interests clash, sovereignty is limited or non-existent, and possession is nine-tenths of the law. Such contested zones today include the Arctic and the Middle East where there are large areas not subject to the sovereignty of any one state. In the future they may also include Ukraine which is facing a distinct prospect of an outright state failure, Transcaucasus, whose countries are facing major internal problems, and also Central Asia which will have to face subversive influences fanned northward from Afghanistan.

The VDV even have a role to play in the ongoing but still fairly tame confrontation with NATO.

Russia versus NATO

While in 2014, the VDV personnel strength was 36 thousand troops, a year later it reached 46 thousand, and by 2018 it is to reach its new ceiling of 72 thousand. By that time the VDV will have five divisions, the 7th, 76th, 98th, 104th, and 106th, each with three airborne regiments, 1 artillery regiment, and 8 thousand troops each, and 5 air assault brigades. Whereas the divisions are mainly intended for long-range strategic operations, the helicopter-mobile air-assault brigades would be used mainly to support Ground Forces operations by seizing key terrain ahead of friendly units advance or dislocating enemy defenses by operating in rear areas or on the flanks of enemy forces.

The numerical expansion is accompanied by equipment modernization. The BMD-4M airborne infantry fighting vehicle has no equivalent in the world, save for China’s, which is based on Russian designs. In the upcoming years the VDV will also receive a number of 2S25SDM-1 Sprut light tanks/tank destroyers armed with 125mm cannon, Zauralets-D 122mm airdroppable self-propelled howitzer, and a range of supporting vehicles. The VDV will also receive an unspecified number of T-72B3 main battle tanks to provide the airborne units with heavy armor capability. Nor is the aerial component being neglected. In addition to the Il-76 fleet modernization program, the Russian Aerospace Forces have launched a program to develop the PAK-TA, the next-generation heavy airlift aircraft.

It remains to be seen where and how the VDV will be used. Ideally, though, they will never see combat action. The very fact of their existence is a factor that has to be taken into account by every other major power, and may well be sufficient to dissuade them from pursuing policies that would result in the winged infantry being sent into action.

Posted in English
Comments Off on The History and Role of Russia’s Airborne Infantry Forces. Review and Analysis

Hybrid Wars, Destabilizing Scenarios and Colored Revolutions: The Balkans, Chechnya and the “Central Asian Spring”

April 16th, 2016 by Andrew Korybko

(Please read Parts I, II, and III prior to this article)

The US’ History Of Regional Revolution Attempts

The most significant destabilizing scenario that could ever occur in Central Asia is an “Arab Spring”-like event that ravages the region and irreversibly upsets its existing political balance. The interesting aspect about this possibility is that it was actually attempted twice before, and furthermore, this was even before the “Arab Spring” ever happened. Before delving into the details and reexamining some overlooked aspects of history, it’s important to remind the reader that the US has always been endeavoring to initiate region-wide transformations of power.

The “Spring Of Nations” And “Balkan Spring”:

The first such success in having this happen was the 1989 “Spring of Nations”, which in retrospect can be seen as the ‘first Arab Spring’, albeit much more peaceful than what transpired 22 years later. The series of events much more closely related to the “Arab Spring” are the Yugoslav Wars, which in their own way were a chain reaction of conventional and unconventional conflicts born out of the 1991 independence movements, otherwise defined by the author as the “Balkan Spring”. Because large-scale, anti-government (as in against the federal center of Belgrade) social movements preceded the outbreak of dirty wars, the Balkan Spring can be defined as the spiritual forerunner of the “Arab Spring”.

The “Soviet Spring”:

Each of these two destabilizing situations – the “Spring of Nations” and “Balkan Spring” – helped to add critical mass to the “Soviet Spring” that some of the Republics (notably the Baltic ones) were already engaged in. The preconditioning effect was to make the territories’ independence feel imminent and irreversible to the entire population (both within the targeted republics and the USSR at large), and craft the feeling that this preordained conclusion was nothing more than a ‘natural’ result of the larger ‘pro-democratic’ processes that just happened to come out of nowhere and sweep across the globe. The American plan proved to be an astounding success by any measure, as the USSR dissolved precisely along the internal boundaries that the US hoped it would. The follow-up step was to try and emulate this process within the newly independent Russian Federation and deal a final death blow to the country that has continually stood in the way of Anglo-Saxon global dominance for at least the past three centuries.

The “Parade Of Sovereignty”

Image: A pro-sovereignty meeting in Tatarstan, 1990.

Still drunk from the post-independence and ‘democratic’ euphoria that had infected it, the new Russian leadership was fooled into going along with something called the “Parade of Sovereignty”. The American advisors that were working with the government during that time succeeded in convincing Yeltsin that he should let the federal constituents receive ‘as much sovereignty as they could swallow’, and this expectedly led to some of them taking it as far as de-facto independence. Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Yakutia, and Chechnya were the most prominent among them, and the first three were considerably well-endowed with oil, gas, and mineral reserves.

Belatedly realizing the strategic trap that had befallen them, Yeltsin and his cabinet worked hard to reintegrate these entities back under the federal umbrella, and after many negotiations and political concessions, they achieved this goal with all but Chechnya. Granted, Yakutia would somewhat reemerge as a different sort of problem in the late 1990s and early 2000s when Mikhail Khodorkovsky tried to turn it into its own fiefdom, but nonetheless, for the Hybrid War scope of this analysis, it can be considered to no longer be of the same type of risk that it was previously (although understood that the nature of the threat had transformed into something different outside the boundaries of Hybrid War).

The Chechen Wars:

As part of the federal initiate to regain full control over the country’s constituent entities, Moscow decided to intervene in Chechnya after the latter refused to reintegrate and insisted that its de-facto independence be legally recognized. Reassessed from the spectrum of Hybrid Wars and recalling the earlier lessons in Europe, the Chechen Wars disturbing exhibit strong shades of the Yugoslav Hybrid War scenario, whereby a mass social movement (the Wahhabism of Chechnya and its subsequent de-facto independence) led to an led to a subsequent Unconventional War. The specific nature of each conflict is different, of course, but the overarching similar that mustn’t be lost on observers is that the militant process of federal disintegration along pre-established administrative boundaries had moved from the Balkans to the Northern Caucasus, and from targeting a much smaller entity to trying to dismantle the world’s largest state.

Approaching the conflict from a larger structural standpoint, it should be seen as no coincidence that the Hybrid War being waged against the Russian Federation came immediately after the failed “Parade of Sovereignty” Color Revolutions that sought to spark the dismemberment process by relatively more peaceful means. In accordance with the strategic continuum being argued in this work, there’s no doubt that the Chechen Wars were supposed to be Russia’s “Yugoslavia moment”, and that the uncontrollable processes that were supposed to be fully uncorked could spread from the North Caucasus springboard and all throughout the rest of the country, resurrecting the “Parade of Sovereignty” under a much more militant banner. This is the real reason why Moscow felt compelled to federally intervene in Chechnya in 1994 and to contain the republic’s chaotic problems in the stalemated aftermath. When Shamil Basayev and his terrorist army invaded Dagestan in August 1999, this posed a clear national security risk for the rest of Russia, and consequently, a second federal intervention was launched to deal with the secessionist-terrorist problem once and for all.

The Strategic Reasoning Behind The “Central Asian Spring”

President Putin made it a hallmark of his legacy to finally bring peace, stability, and development to the beleaguered North Caucasus region (“the Yugoslavia of Russia”), and having succeeded in this gargantuan task, he fully secured the country’s integrity and eliminated the Hybrid War threat to its survival. As a result, the US improvised its strategy of expansive regional revolution to target the vulnerable underbelly of the Russian Federation in Central Asia. The Bulldozer Revolution in Serbia in October 2000 proved the efficiency of the tactical modifications that the US had streamlined to Color Revolution technologies, and it resultantly led to a revived hope in using these means to destabilize Russia.

Bear in mind that the US understood the difficulty in directly doing so inside the country at that point (and plus, they were already progressing in their specialized regime change operation with Khodorkovsky), so it was decided to commence a series of Color Revolutions in the post-Soviet arena in order to ‘box’ the country in with a wall of pro-Western governments along the European periphery and threaten it with a chaotic space of disorder along the Central Asian one. Strategically speaking, even if the Khodorkovsky operation didn’t’ succeed, then the Color Revolution lessons learned in each of these forthcoming battlegrounds could be applied towards crafting a perfected campaign against Russia sometime in the future again.

Looked at in terms of their chronological progression, the three Color Revolutions of the 2000s located in the post-Soviet sphere were: Georgia’s Rose Revolution in 2003; Ukraine’s Orange Revolution in 2004; and Kyrgyzstan’s Tulip Revolution in 2005. Viewed from another angle of understanding, the US asymmetrically attacked Russia’s periphery through the Caucasus, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia by planting pro-American governments in each of these regions. Due to geopolitical specificities, it was unlikely for the events in the Caucasus and Eastern Europe to spread in as contagious and destructive of a fashion as would have in Central Asia, and thus, given the strategic momentum that was obviously building from the three successive and successful Color Revolutions, it can be assessed (as will be argued below) that the events 2005 events in Kyrgyzstan were premised with a regional regime change goal in mind.

The Failed Moment

The Tulip Revolution:

The Tulip Revolution was supposed to be the catalyst that would lead to the definite transformation of the Central Asian region into either a pro-American reserve of ‘-stans’ or the chaotic fulfilment of Brzezinki’s “Eurasian Balkans” theorem, either of which would have been disastrous for Russian national security. The regime change event began in late March 2005 when anti-government assets swarmed the streets of the country’s major cities (in both the north and the south) demanding to invalidate the earlier parliamentary results from the month before.

The situation reached a fever pitch a few days later when tens of thousands of rioters stormed government buildings in Bishkek and President Akayev fled the country for Kazakhstan on 24 March. The speed at which the regime change operation spread and the violence with which it occurred created a new precedent for Color Revolutions, and it would prove to be the general standard for the tactical modifications that would come afterwards (e.g. EuroMaidan).

The Andijan Event:

Image: Andijan after 2005 turmoils.

What’s most striking about the Tulip Revolution, however, is the very real potential that it had for regional expansion. The Andijan Incident that transpired just a little over one month afterwards in neighboring Uzbekistan is commonly analyzed as an altogether separate occurrence, but in reality, it’s intimately tied in with the events that just happened in Kyrgyzstan. While the details are murky, what has generally been established and is widely agreed upon by all observers is that an anti-government manifestation suddenly arose in the Fergana Valley town of Andijan, and that the government reactively put it down with overwhelming force.

The US and its Western allies harshly criticized Tashkent for what they alleged was a “massacre” of ‘civilians’ and/or ‘pro-democratic protesters’, while the Uzbek authorities retorted that had done nothing more than squash a terrorist uprising by Islamic Movement for Uzbekistan and Hizb ut-Tahrir. In the fallout over the event, Tashkent kicked out the American military base that was in the country and briefly began courting Moscow’s support, which importantly agreed with its version of events and stood by Uzbekistan amid the mounting international criticism it was receiving.

Explaining Andijan:

Understanding the strategic and regional context in which it occurred, and coming right on the heels of the regime change success in Kyrgyzstan, it’s evident that Andijan was supposed to be the first step in a Fergana-wide revolt that was supposed to bring Karimov to his knees. The only reason it was halted was because the Uzbek military set a very strong and unforgettable example that struck fear in the hearts of any other conspirators that had yet to rear their heads, and it also sent the unmistakable message to regular civilians that they shouldn’t let themselves be manipulated into become “protesting” human shields behind which the terrorists could hide.

Suffice to say, Uzbekistan has yet to experience a repeat of the Andijan events, but at the same time, the word-of-mouth stories that spread about the government crackdown which collaterally killed an undetermined amount of duped civilians inspired mild levels of anti-government resentment among some elements of the population, who couldn’t comprehend that terrorists would mislead “well-intentioned” people into being their cannon fodder. It’s not to suggest that Tashkent’s terrorist takedown was counter-productive, but that it did have the unintended aftereffect of stoking certain segment’s dissatisfaction with the authorities, as any heavy-handed reprisal is bound to do (no matter how justified or who it’s directed against).

The Second Failure

The “First Mubarak”:

The next attempt at provoking a Central Asian Spring occurred five years later in 2010, once more targeting the geo-critical Fergana Valley. This time around there was a Color Revolution against the color Revolution-imposed leader, President Bakiyev, which quickly spiraled into an ethnic conflict between the Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in the southern part of the country. Whether by coincidence or not, this also occurred in the springtime, too. While it may seem odd that the US would provoke a Color Revolution against its own proxy, the concept actually isn’t as ‘conspiratorial’ as one may initially think.

Image: The US air base Manas in Kyrgyzstan was operational in 2001-2014

Bakiyev penchant for self-enrichment and cronyism was even worse than that of his predecessor, and the flagrancy of his behavior had begun to stir up genuine animosity among the masses. The US doesn’t care what any of its proxies do in their ‘spare time’ so long as they remain loyal to Washington, but Bakiyev’s actions were beginning to endanger the US’ influence in the country, and consequently, in Central Asia as a whole. If a legitimate people’s movement arose and overthrew the government without Washington being able to covertly intervene and hijack the process to promote its own interests, then it would suffer an embarrassing strategic retreat that it might not possibly be able to recoup.

In many ways, this strategic logic resembles the more popularly known case of Egyptian President Mubarak, who the US seemed to suddenly turn against in the opening days of the “Arab Spring” theater-wide Color Revolutions. Just like Bakiyev, it became inevitable that growing resent to Mubarak would manifest itself with the expulsion of American influence when the time was right, which in the Egyptian case would have been the inevitable leadership transition that would have taken place when the elderly statesman passed away (while in Kyrgyzstan’s case it would have been a Color Revolution).

In both situations, however, the common denominator was that the US preemptively deployed the regime change mechanism in order to create a ‘plausibly deniable’ cover that would placate the ‘people’s will’ while the US worked to impose a new proxy onto them. Washington wasn’t successful in Kyrgyzstan (as will be explored), while it temporarily succeeded a year later in Egypt and some of the other “Arab Spring”-targeted countries. Relating to the Central Asian Spring, it’s important to understand that the US had been waiting for an opportunity to reattempt its regional regime change operation, and the “First Mubarak” provided them with a convenient and publicly presentable ‘rationale’. Even if it had not been for Bakiyev’s notorious and well known corruption, the US would have found another reason to stir up social destabilization in Central Asia.

The Central Asian Application Of The “Reverse Brzezinski”:

This brings the focus over to the US’ geostrategic plans in Central Asia and what exactly it was trying to provoke in 2010. The Second Kyrgyz Color Revolution was different from its forerunner in that it had more of a geo-ethnic character, or put more simply, it employed regional and ethnic conflict for devastating effect. The breakdown of law and order saw southern Kyrgyzstan practically seceding from the rest of the country, with the northern region all but powerless to influence events in the Fergana Valley. This created a security vacuum that allowed preexisting ethnic hate to boil over into large-scale violence, and the resultant Kyrgyz-Uzbek clashes led to fears of ethnic cleansing. In total, 400,000 Uzbeks were displaced and 100,000 of them fled into Uzbekistan, with differing reports of between roughly 1000-2000 deaths.

At this moment it’s relevant to speak a few words about the Uzbek minority in Kyrgyzstan, which comprises around 14.3% of the population. The vast majority of them live in the Fergana Valley cities of Jalal-abad and Osh, only a handful of kilometers from the Uzbek border. Their curious placement in Kyrgyzstan and not Uzbekistan is due to the Soviet-era delineation of Central Asia’s borders in the 1930s, which arbitrarily divided internal boundaries irrespective of ethnic grouping. This led to the common situation where many ethnicities were cut off from their titular republic, in this case manifested by some Uzbeks being incorporated into Kyrgyzstan and not Uzbekistan. The strategy here was to maintain a low-scale strategy of tension between the regional entities so that local conflicts would inherently come to necessitate a political intervention by the Union center, Moscow, in managing disputes and continually leveraging its influence there.

Image: Fergana Valley map

Stalin’s Machiavellian ethno-political management was sustainable so long as the Central Asian Republics remained part of the Soviet Union, but after the unexpected breakup that occurred decades later, this state of affairs became a very destabilizing factor in regional relations. Compounding this, the internal migration of more Uzbeks to the Kyrgyz-administered portions of the Fergana Valley during the Soviet period accentuated the ethnic imbalance and created a post-independence situation where some parts of the Republic functioned more like extensions of Greater Uzbekistan than an integrated Kyrgyzstan. Rising nationalist sentiment among the Kyrgyz and Uzbek communities in the decades that followed turned the entire Fergana Valley into an ethnic tinderbox, and the 2010 Color Revolution was the spark that partially set it aflame.

The American goal at the time was for the situation to become utterly unmanageable and chaotic, with the expectation being that the anticipated ethnic cleansing of the Uzbeks would prompt a conventional intervention by either Russia and/or Uzbekistan to restore order. This, of course, wouldn’t have solved anything, and would only have aggravated the situation and become a strategic trap for whichever power tried to stabilize the Fergana. For a moment, however, it looked as if the US was going to get exactly what it wanted, since Uzbekistan seemed overwhelmed with the refugee flood and the interim Kyrgyz government directly asked for a Russian-led CSTO intervention. Thankfully, cooler heads prevailed on all sides. The Uzbek leadership seemingly understood the quagmire risks in intervening, occupying, and predictably, eventually annexing Kyrgyz territory, and Russia called upon a legal clause in the CSTO to abstain from falling into what would have definitely been a Brzezinski-built blunder. The rapid strengthening of the interim government also allowed the domestic authorities to steadily reassert control and stabilize the conditions under which they had originally requested the Russian intervention.

Looking back on it, a lot of luck went into avoiding a larger Central Asian conflagration in 2010, since one major misstep on behalf of any of the state parties could have set into motion a chain reaction of responses from their counterparts, culminating in a regional conflict that would have been disastrous for all. The difference between the 2010 Color Revolution and the one before it comes down to the focus on ethnic warfare, as the 2005 Color Revolution was more of an ideologically motivated regime change design. The events in 2010 therefore attempted to capitalize off of the Uzbek component and demonstrated that the US had been studying the region in-depth so that it can craft a more effective strategy of destabilization. As chance would have it, its plans went awry at the very last moment and the sought-after Russian and/or Uzbek intervention never materialized, but it came dangerously close to happening and would have fundamentally offset the multipolar world at precisely the moment that it needed to be unified the most.

Regional-Strategic Context:

With the knowledge of hindsight, the Second Central Asian Spring (the events of 2010) may have been purposely timed to coincide with the “Arab Spring” a year later in order to unleash maximum geopolitical destabilization against the multipolar centers of Russia, China, and Iran, the indirect but main targets of each regional regime change operation. If a ‘successful’ Central Asian Spring would have preceded the “Arab Spring”, then it’s easy to imagine just how offsetting this would have been for the multipolar world. There would have been no way for any of the Great Power targets to have simultaneously confronted these challenges. The chaos that would have taken root in the geostrategic space between each of them would have been unprecedented, and importantly, Iran, the geopolitically most vulnerable of the three, would have essentially been flanked on both sides by evolving Hybrid Wars.

Recalling the international context of 2010-2011, Iran was still seen by many as the US’ most hated foe, and barely a week went by without unconfirmed reports that the US, Israel, and the Gulf States were planning a conventional attack against it. The tension between Washington and Tehran is therefore well-noted at the time, so it’s presumable that both regional Hybrid War scenarios (Central Asia and the Mideast) were predicated on destabilizing and eventually overthrowing the government in Iran. It was only the year before in 2009 that the US initiated the “Green Revolution” against Iran, so it’s obvious that it was already toying with the idea of asymmetrical regime change strategies. Pertaining to that event, the lesson that the US learned was that failed Color Revolutions must be succeeded by an Unconventional War (which didn’t happen in the case of the “Green Revolution”), so in a strategic sense, the failed regime change in Iran helped the US perfect its strategy for the “Arab Spring”.

Image: Peter Ralph’s programming map

In a reimagined reality, if Iran would have fallen sometime between 2009 and the present, then the entire space between North Africa and Central Asia would have been reorganized, potentially with the Mideast divided along the identity lines of Ralph Peter’s infamous “Blood Borders” map. To put it another way, Brzezinski’s “Eurasian Balkans” would have made the jump from being a theoretical strategy to a law of reality, and its basic tenet of identity conflict and subsequent state fragmentation would have been validated as an undeniable driver of geopolitical events. Analyzed from this vantage point, the second failed Central Asian Spring takes on a completely new understanding, being seen as part of a coordinated and timed trans-regional regime change operation (the largest ever in terms of its geographic scope) and not a one-off ‘accidental’ destabilization. The most unsettling thing about the two Kyrgyz Color Revolutions and the failed attempts to initiate a Central Asian Spring is that the socio-political vulnerabilities associated with them have endured into the present and have even been qualitatively strengthened to an extent, and it’s thus more likely than ever that the US will try to give it a third try sometime in the future.

To be continued…

Andrew Korybko is the American political commentator currently working for the Sputnik agency. He is the post-graduate of the MGIMO University and author of the monograph “Hybrid Wars: The Indirect Adaptive Approach To Regime Change” (2015). This text will be included into his forthcoming book on the theory of Hybrid Warfare.

FOR PREVIOUS CHAPTERS:

Consult the Korybko Archive on Global Research

Hybrid Wars 1. The Law Of Hybrid Warfare

Hybrid Wars 2. Testing the Theory – Syria & Ukraine

Hybrid Wars 3. Predicting Next Hybrid Wars

The Slow Bleed: Fukushima Radiation Five Years On

April 16th, 2016 by Vincent Di Stefano

The melt down of three nuclear reactors at Fukushima in the wake of the earthquake and tsunami of 11th March 2011 seems to have quietly slipped out of our collective awareness – as quietly as the cauldrons of radioactive elements that were once within the active cores of the reactors invisibly bleed into the groundwaters and seawaters of the region. This event has become yet another minor detail in the distorted mosaic of ruin that mirrors the latter days of a civilisation in free-fall.

Arnie Gundersen is looking a little weathered these days. He has just returned from a five-week long speaking tour of Japan. He spent much of that time in the company of many whose lives have been indelibly seared by the Fukushima catastrophe. What he reports is unlikely to appear in the mainstream media, but such has ever been the case when it comes to the hidden machinations of big government and big business.

What Gundersen has to say is worth closely attending to. As a nuclear engineer, he has been deeply involved in the American nuclear industry for over four decades. He has a special interest in the design and safety of containment structures and holds a patent for a nuclear safety device. He has also managed and coordinated nuclear projects at 70 nuclear power plants in the US and is a former nuclear industry senior vice-president. He knows the industry well, particularly its toxic underbelly.

Arnie Gundersen served as an expert witness in the investigation of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, and found that releases of radioactivity from that particular event were 15 times higher than the figures published subsequently in a government report. He is no stranger to the prevarication and deceit that have too often accompanied statements made by the nuclear industry and its government supporters.

Gundersen has been an active critic of the nuclear industry for over two decades. More recently, he has co-authored a Greenpeace International report on Fukushima. He was among the first North American commentators to speak publicly and forcefully on the implications of Fukushima in the days and weeks after the meltdowns. And since that time, he has been tireless in his efforts to provide an informed narrative of developments at Fukushima and their consequences for both the inhabitants of Japan and on the global community.

Arnie Gunderson reports that the Japanese Government continues to put the interests of Japanese banks and power companies ahead of the safety of its people. Within a short time of the Fukushima meltdowns in 2011, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) who were in power at that time arbitrarily raised the “acceptable” limits of radiation exposure twenty-fold: from 1 millisievert (mSv)/year – the maximum dose recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection – to 20 mSv/year. In 1998, over a decade beforehand, Rosalie Bertell presented the findings of a number of independent studies published in peer-reviewed journals, including the British Medical Journal and the Journal of the American Medical Association that showed unequivocally that radiation doses as low as 2.5 mSv/year were associated with significant increases in the incidence of leukaemias and myelomas, and cancers of the pancreas, lungs and female reproductive organs in nuclear industry workers.

As Japanese medical practitioners begin to encounter the effects of radiation exposure in their patients – particularly children – the government now refuses to pay doctors who record a diagnosis of radiation-induced sickness in their patients. This will come as no surprise to those who followed the actions of the Soviet government and later, the Russian, Ukraine and Belarus governments in their concerted suppression of medical reports dealing with the consequences of radiation exposure on the lives of their citizens after the Chernobyl meltdown.

Rearranging the Deck Chairs

Image: Temporary housing for Fukushima evacuees

Over 100,000 people are still not able to return to their homes in Fukushima prefecture since the meltdowns. In a disturbing disclosure, Gundersen reveals that many of the evacuees have received virtually no information regarding the issue of radiation exposure either from the Japanese government or from TEPCO, the operators of the Fukushima power plant. The subsistence stipend that they have received since being evacuated will cease in March 2017. Considerable pressure is being put on former residents by the government that they now return to Fukushima and tough it out regardless of the ongoing contamination. Many have grave concerns regarding the effects of such a move on the future health of their families.

Image: 30 Million Bags of Radioactive Debris

Another remarkable aspect of the present situation concerns the manner in which highly contaminated materials – which include radioactive soil, leaves and other debris – have been dealt with. Thirty million tons of such debris has so far been gathered from throughout the Fukushima prefecture. Much of this is now stored in over 9 million large plastic bags scattered throughout the affected areas. Three years after being filled, the bags have started to disintegrate and nobody seems to know what to do nextsince their contents need to be kept isolated for at least another 30 years. One favoured option is to incinerate them. This would certainly decrease their number, but would inevitably result in the further dispersion of radioactive elements in aerosol form around Japan.

There are clearly some who still hold to the old but ultimately banal adage that, the solution to pollution is dilution.

Image: Contaminated Water Storage Tanks at Fukushima

Dwarfing the problem of solid wastes is the ongoing leaching of radioactive elements from the melted reactor cores into groundwater and seawater. For the past five years, between 200 and 500 tons of groundwater flow through the reactors every day as a result of multiple cracks in the containment structures. Some of this water has recently been diverted away from the reactors, but an estimated 150 tons of groundwater continue to flow through the reactors daily. This irradiated water inexorably flows on, steadily bleeding into the northern Pacific. Furthermore, 700,000 tons of highly radioactive water salvaged from cooling operations since the meltdown is presently stored in massive tanks that now pepper the reactor site. More are being built as contaminated water continues to accumulate.

The Tragic Absurdity

It is common knowledge that engineers will be busy for the next 30 to 40 years in their efforts to put the lid on the cauldron of radioactivity that seethes in the reactor basements at Fukushima. Meanwhile, the Pacific tectonic plate continues its own inexorable movement beneath the continental Okhotsk plate on which Japan sits creating the conditions for future mega-thrust events like that which shook the region on 11th March 2011. The unspoken terror is that it could all turn again in the blink of an eye.

Despite what has happened at Fukushima, the Abe Government is determined to restart Japan’s nuclear reactors that were all shut down after the 2011 earthquake. Widespread anti-nuclear protests throughout Japan have been ignored and three nuclear power plants in Kagoshima and Fukui prefectures have been restarted since August 2015. Over the next year, a further six to twelve reactors are slated to resume operations. Business reigns as usual.

There are many who proudly insist on riding the nuclear beast regardless of the human and environmental consequences. They insist that this is the way of the future and a “necessary” solution to the problems of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and an ever-accelerating movement towards numerous tipping points which include ocean acidification, loss of polar albedo effects due to melting of polar ice, and the bubbling up of vast new wells of methane gas from the melting of northern permafrost and sea-floor deposits. In the immortal words of Edwin Arlington Robinson, what folly is here that has not yet a name?

Arnie Gundersen’s Report

The video clip below presents an interview between Arnie Gundersen and Margaret Harrington recorded soon after he returned from a recent speaking tour of Japan. The first 25 minutes of the interview offers deep insight into how the worst industrial accident in the history of humanity has affected the people of Japan, and how the Japanese government now increasingly serves the interests of power companies and their financial backers rather than those of its own people. Arnie Gundersen is unambiguously clear regarding the nature of what has gone down in Fukushima in this presentation. And the moral abandonment of both the Japanese government and TEPCO in the downplaying of the present and future consequences of the meltdown are not lost on him.

The second half of this clip offers a detailed review by Gundersen of the developments at Fukushima over the past five years. A separate high-definition version of the second segment can be accessed here.

Arnie Gundersen on CCTV: Nuclear Free Future: Fukushima at 5 and the Vermont Yankee Shutdown: What Do They Mean from Fairewinds Energy Education on Vimeo.

Vincent Di Stefano is a retired educator and practitioner of natural medicine and author of “Holism and Complementary Medicine. History and Principles” (Allen and Unwin, 2006). He remains committed to exploring the nature of healing at personal, social, spiritual and environmental levels and maintaining a watching brief on the turbulent currents that course through the present times. He periodically posts on the blog-site “Integral Reflections” through which he can be contacted.

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Slow Bleed: Fukushima Radiation Five Years On

Endless War is on the Drawing Board: Hillary Clinton Throws Women “Under Bus” for Corporate Cronies

April 16th, 2016 by Robert Barsocchini

Hillary wants us to ignore the dream of MLK and judge her not by the content of her character, but by her gender. These are some of the reasons why:

In the 1990s, with Hillary Clinton as First Lady and “partner in power” of Bill Clinton, the US supported the efforts of oil company Unocal to cooperate with the Taliban to build a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan. Meetings were being held for that purpose up to September 11, 2001. There was also a telephone company interested in Afghanistan.

Unocal’s pipeline project would have brought natural gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan by crossing through Afghanistan.

Unocal CEO John Imle estimated that the company spent between $15 and $20 million on its Central Asia gas pipeline (CentGas) project, including on efforts to lobby the Taliban.

Unocal also equipped the Taliban with advanced technologies, such as satellite phones.

“…Unocal –– had very close relations with the Taliban. They took their leaders on junkets to their home bases, they gave them substantial help in the form of office equipment, and they gave medical treatment to many of their leaders. Unocal set up a training school for the Taliban in Kandahar.”

“[W]hen a Clinton official was reminded that the Taliban persecuted women, he said, “We can live with that.”

A “strong campaign [was] waged by rights activists in America, particularly the Feminist Majority led by Eleanor Smeal and Mavis Leno, which lobbied Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright very fiercely to stop the Unocal project and come out against the Taliban’s repression of women. [But] the Clinton administration viewed the Taliban’s rise favorably… [because, in addition to other strategic reasons] the U.S. wanted to build this pipeline. There was a lot of support from the Pentagon and the State Department for the Unocal effort.”

The result of the campaign? Silence from Hillary Clinton as her oligarch cronies courted, supported, and coordinated with the Taliban.

Mysteriously,

“…as it became clearer that Taliban policy-makers were beginning to lean toward Bridas [a non-US oil company] by late 1997, the Clinton administration responded by suddenly paying heed to human rights/women’s rights groups who had been protesting Taliban conduct for the past two years.”

This is, as Professor Deepa Kumar illustrates, “colonial feminism”: pretending to care about women’s rights, human rights, etc., when it serves the purposes of imperio-terrorism.

“In November 1997, after years of relative quiet, Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright publicly condemned the Taliban’s treatment of women… [but] it was only when absolute [US] control of that oil was challenged that the Taliban regime was openly discredited…” (ibid.)

“[In] August 1998, … the US embassy bombings in East Africa (attributed to Usama bin Laden) prompted [Bill] Clinton to… call for the Taliban to expel Bin Laden. Interestingly, the latter’s presence in Afghanistan since 1996 had not stalled the courtship of the previous years” (ibid).

The US had also been sanctioning Pakistan, but Bill removed the sanctions to befriend Pakistan so the planned pipeline could run through its territory to the coast. (ibid)

In 2001, Hillary finally criticized one US citizen for “supporting” the Taliban: John Walker Lindh, a former US soldier who was tortured in US custody (see here). Clinton made this statement long before his trial, itself a major ethical violation (also committed, for example, by Obama against Chelsea Manning). Research indicates that this poor soldier is the only person Hillary the elitist has condemned as a “traitor” for association with the Taliban. She not only does not condemn, but goes out of her way to support, US government officials and corporate executives who, on record and openly under her husband’s regime, supported and worked with the Taliban, and in fact she made efforts to do so herself.

…

Afghanistan had been stable in the late 1970s and had featured strong women’s rights, until the US, as it did in Nicaragua and many other places, assembled a proxy army to conquer the country. After intentionally contributing towards the deaths of about two million people (a high US official, Brzezinski, said the US wanted to give the USSR, which was backing the stable Afghan government, “its Vietnam”) and helping to bring the Taliban to power, including through printing propaganda, and then, when the Taliban was uncooperative, pushing it out of power and killing thousands, the US got an agreement from the newly US-installed Karzai dictatorship to build gas pipelines running from Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, to Pakistan’s coast. More info here.

For this next phase of the pipeline endeavor, Hillary Clinton, now secretary of state, offered her personal guarantee of US government backing to Chevron to increase Chevron’s credibility in pursuing the Afghanistan gas pipeline project, while she publicly advocated for a massive increase in the US invasion of Afghanistan. During her tenure, the US increased its presence from 30,000 to 100,000 militants or more, killing thousands in the process.

“…both Chevron and Exxon-Mobil … expressed interest in TAPI [the pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan].” However, Turkmenistan wanted a firm signal that the US government was committed. That signal came from Hillary Clinton. The president of Turkmenistan received “a letter backing Chevron’s project from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”(Wall Street Journal)

After Clinton guaranteed US government backing for Chevron to build the pipeline, Obama sent his own personal letter to the president of Turkmenistan, backing Chevron and “emphasizing a common interest in helping develop Afghanistan and expressing [his] support for TAPI [pipeline] and his desire for a major U.S. firm to construct it.” (WSJ)

The Taliban later came back to prominence, and Hillary Clinton again tried to work with them to push through the pipeline deal.

…

Considering her record of plutocratic terrorism against Afghanistan and identical record against Libya (which is revealed in leaked emails) and numerous other countries, is it any wonder that Hillary has always supported US genocide against Iraqis, who live in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world?

Robert Barsocchini is an internationally published author who focuses on force dynamics, national and global, and also writes professionally for the film industry. Updates on Twitter. Author’sessay ‘The Agility of Tyranny: Historical Roots of Black Lives Matter’.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Endless War is on the Drawing Board: Hillary Clinton Throws Women “Under Bus” for Corporate Cronies

Syrian 2016 Elections Defy US and NATO “Regime Change” Agenda

April 16th, 2016 by Ken Stone

Damascus: Today, the members of the Second International Tour of Peace to Syria were offered the privilege of accompanying the Patriarch of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church as he went to vote in the Syrian parliamentary elections.

Gregorious III, the spiritual head of millions of Catholics all over the world, told us, in an audience before he invited us to join his procession, that the Syrian elections today were very important.

In fact, he declared they represented “a challenge to the world” to recognize that, despite the covert machinations of certain western and Arab countries against Syria, Syrians are united in the pursuit of peace.

He offered a prayer for Syrians, using the motto, “One people, one country!” Furthermore, he indicated that today’s elections, if successful, could be a model for other countries in the Arab world, similarly beset by foreign meddling.

Image: Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch, Gregorios III

The patriarchal procession left the 19th century Greek Melkite Catholic Church and wound its way through the narrow, cobblestone streets of Old Damascus to the Armenian Catholic Church, where it was met by priests of that church. Together in the chapel, after exchanging some ecumenical greetings, the whole procession then departed to the school next door where the polling station was located.

There was quite a crowd who came to vote and witness the voting, which was conducted in secret behind a white curtain. The patriarch posed a long time, poised with his ballot in hand, over the ballot box for many flash photographs. There was applause and a murmur of satisfaction when he finally dropped his ballot into the box.

Gregorious III was not the only person in a defiant mood about today’s parliamentary elections. The Syrian government itself calls the elections “an exercise in national sovereignty.” It called for these elections the same day that the agreement was signed between the US and Russia some weeks ago for a partial cessation of hostilities in Syria.

At first, all the great powers opposed the Syrian government’s initiative for parliamentary elections, because there was no mention in the Geneva l document of 2012 that elections could be held in Syria before the talks to establish a transitional government were completed.

Just today, the US State department dismissed the Syrian parliamentary elections as “not representing the will of the Syrian people”, even before the results were in (though where the US government derives its authority to pronounce of the validity of elections in other countries escapes me.)

At first, even the Russian government was not fully onside with the calling of parliamentary elections in Syria. However, just yesterday, in a meeting with Argentinian diplomats, Sergei Lavrov indicated that he did not want to see a “void” in government in Syria.

So the Syrian government moved pre-emptively to fill that void, by holding elections, just as it fills the void by continuing the regular functions of government such as cleaning the streets and paying the salaries of civil servants

So what does a Syrian parliamentary election look like?

When we left the hotel this morning, there were small groups of young people in the streets wearing similarly-coloured clothing and handing out quarter-page flyers. These groups of uniformly handsome young men and attractive young women (no accident, I assume) were representing the various lists contesting the elections.

They pressed the leaflets into the hands of anyone and everyone who would take them, even us foreigners. The flyers contained the names of all the candidates for election in Damascus from each slate. Sometimes, the flyers were only on behalf of a single candidate. It reminded me of trade union elections at national union conventions back in Canada.

On the walls of the buildings along the narrow streets were plastered hundreds upon hundreds of election posters. Over the streets were strung banners showing small and large groupings of well-dressed candidates representing each slate. Clearly, the 250 parliamentary seats were being hotly contested.

Image: Xinhua News Photo: Two Syrian women walk past posters of candidates. Damascus

On every corner were uniformed soldiers armed with assault rifles. Now, if we had an election in Canada under the watchful eyes of the military like this, we would feel that we were close to fascism. Not so here. After five long years of war, the Syrian people welcome the presence of their army.

After all, just several kilometres away, in neighbouring Ghouta, all kinds of terrorist mercenaries hold the population hostage and in terror. Until just three months ago, these foreign-backed terrorists had been lobbing mortar shells on Damascus virtually every single day for five years.

They timed their attacks to coincide with rush hour in the mornings to achieve the maximum kill of working people and at 12:30 pm every day just as school children were coming out of school. Many were killed and wounded. However, after their leader, Zahran Alloush, was killed in a Syrian Army drone strike, the mortars fell silent.

So, the Syrian Arab Army soldiers were manning checkpoints and guarding public buildings precisely to give Damascenes the confidence that they could come out on the street without facing suicide bombers and car bombs.

It worked! Not a single terrorist incident took place in Damascus today. And our guide informed us that tomorrow armed soldiers would be few and far between on the streets of Damascus.

Our tour guide led us past dozens of polling stations over the course of our tour of the historic sites of Old Damascus that day. In the Old City, the polling stations were never more than two blocks apart, which is far more frequent than in Canada.

We actually went inside five different polling stations, which were staffed mostly by women. And here’s how those little quarter-page flyers work their magic:

When a voter (of eighteen years or older) enters the polling station, he or she must produce the government-issued ID card. His or her name is then dutifully entered into a register and the voter is given a ballot and an envelope.

The ballot has spaces to enter the 29 names of candidates who are contesting the seats open for election in Damascus. The voter may go behind the white cloth screen and fill in as many as 29 names or as few as one.

Or, he or she may take one of those little flyers containing the candidates’ names of one particular slate, put it into the envelope, and then proceed to drop the envelope, containing the blank ballot and slate list, into the ballot box.

Or, the voter can strike out any names on the flyer containing the slate’s list that he or she doesn’t like and put the envelope, with the blank ballot and the amended slate list, into the ballot box.

After casting the ballot, the polling clerk dips the index finger of the voter onto a pad of indelible ink so that he or she can’t vote more than once.

Having worked on many Canadian elections, I can attest to the fact that Syrian elections are different from Canadian elections. But that doesn’t mean they don’t represent the national will, as claimed by US State Department.

After all, with the Canadian first-past-the-post system, the representation of political parties in the House of Commons in Ottawa bears little resemblance to their share of the popular vote. And, in Canada, we have, in effect, a two party system. Only the big business-friendly Liberals and Conservatives have ever held power in our country in 150 years.

In Syria, the system works this way: out of 250 seats in the Syrian parliament, 170 are allocated to the ruling Ba’ath Party and its allies in the National Progressive Front.

The remainder are open for grabs to anyone who holds only Syrian citizenship, is over 18, and has no security issues (is not actively fighting with one of the terrorist groups).

In this election, there were an incredible number of 3000 candidates for all 250 positions. Why? Because there is a good salary and lots of perks for MP’s in Syria (just as there are in Canada). There were so many candidates, in fact, that 7000 candidates became discouraged and dropped out of the running before today’s election.

It will take up to a week to count all the ballots.

Meanwhile, Syrians were not shy to share their enthusiasm for these elections. I interviewed a number of them, men and women, in my statistically-insignificant exit polling. One middle-aged man told me,

“These elections show the world that Syrians – nobody else – will determine the future of Syria!”

Another young first-time voter indicated that she felt it “her national duty” to participate in the elections. A young man declared his belief that these elections would speed up the peace process.

A young woman said she felt the elections would bring a better life to Syrians. I asked if she meant that “better life” would include Syrian women. She replied it would include “all Syrians.”

Still another young first-time voter, when asked by me what the world would think of these elections, said:

“It doesn’t matter what they think. It is up to Syrians to decide for themselves.”

I agree with the voters and the patriarch. The Syrian government acted boldly and wisely. It scheduled parliamentary elections under the constitution of 2012 so that it could come to the table in Geneva in two days (April 15, 2016) armed with a fresh mandate from the Syrian people to negotiate on its behalf.

The representatives at Geneva of the armed opposition have never submitted themselves to the test of an election in any of the territories of Syria they have invaded and occupied. Their only mandate derives from the arms, technical help, and money that flows to them from the USA, Israel, UK, France, and the Gulf despots through Turkey and Jordan.

In fact, the Syrians unlucky enough to have lived in the “rebel-held” areas voted with their feet about their terrorist overlords. The vast majority of them fled, either to other countries, or to government-held areas. Damascus and Latakia, for example, have doubled and tripled their populations due to internally-displaced persons.

While we wait for the results of today’s elections, members of the Second International Tour of Peace have been granted an audience with the Syrian Minister for Reconciliation.

I will share the insights we glean from him about the process of arranging truces, evacuating foreign fighters, offering amnesties, reabsorbing former opposition fighters into Syrian society, and bringing home refugees in a report shortly.

Ken Stone is a veteran anti-war and peace activist.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Syrian 2016 Elections Defy US and NATO “Regime Change” Agenda

Nauru: A “Processing Centre” and Detention Camp for Refugees to Australia

April 16th, 2016 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

It sounds tedious, but the point is no less awful. Nauru has ceased being a country, a state of any worth. It has assumed value as only one thing: a (non)processing centre for asylum seekers and refugees Australia does not want. A camp designed for criminalising rather than exempting; for condemning rather than assessing, has become the cruellest exemplar of modern treatment and disposition to the refugee.

The result of animalising humans has predictable outcomes. Disturbance and desperation is sowed. In June 2015, news emerged from the Nauru detention centre of “suicide pacts” made by various individuals. According to Natasha Blucher, a social worker engaged at the centre, “There was a single adult female… there was a group of teenage girls, there was a group of fathers, there was a group of mothers.”[1]

Along with fellow social worker, Michelle Groeneveld, reports were made about conditions of profound dehumanisation. Inmates, noted Blucher, tended to be identified by their boat IDs. In other cases, a grotesque overfamiliarity was exhibited by camp guards keen for sexual quarry and congress. “They would say things like, ‘hey baby, come and sit on my knee’.” The overall strategy in this environment, argues Blucher, is one of conscious cruelty, one of not wanting to extend the hand of comfort.

The response by officials in Canberra was to sack such figures as Blucher and Groeneveld, both having been in the employ of Save the Children. Their dismissals constituted a form of retribution against those deemed allies of the refugees. Such eye-witnesses to camp cruelty had been nuisances from the start. Their removal was done with purpose.

Another tactic has also been used of late to crush the refugee spirit. In one particular case, an individual was charged for having attempted suicide. A statement from the Nauru government of April 12 revealed the dark, even anachronistic absurdity:

“Noting that the charge is uncommon but nonetheless remains a criminal offence, the defendant pled guilty after being charged with Attempted Suicide contrary to section 312 of the Criminal Code 1899 following a disturbance at Nibok Lodge on January 21, 2016.”[2]

The language of the document is brutally directed against deterrence, using an old law to enforce a modern yet primeval circumstance. The term “refugee” is mentioned in the headline, only to vanish before suggestions of opportunistic criminality.

“Written submissions were made by the Prosecutor to impose a custodial sentence of between one and two months to deter other would-be-offenders who resort to self-harm to avoid lawful actions against them or to get what they want.”

Attempts at suicide are thereby treated as undermining, and destabilising weapons. This conforms, at least, to a notable historical trend: the efforts by authorities to punish the individual who dared resort to taking away the living essence of oneself.

To keep one’s life going in circumstances of cruelty would be the greatest achievement of State, church or authority. To have that person take his or her life would be an admission of defeat on the part of those keen to possess, and control, that life.

By no means was this always the case. Histories on suicide show an array of social reactions to the phenomenon of taking one’s own life. The response of those in European antiquity were less inclined to abhor the act. The taking of poison, be it via medical means or that of an animal (a snake being popular), are dominant motifs, often encouraged by powers and authorities.

The modern response to tendencies to suicide in the Nauru detention centre is to render it pathological, to make it a product of psychic disturbance deemed inherent in the “manipulative” refugee. You are not permitted to take your life – that would be an indulgence, an exaggeration of circumstances.

The steps were already being taken by State authorities in the nineteenth and then twentieth century, periods which saw the entire medicalization of suicide as a form of degeneracy. This did not go unchallenged, with French sociologist Émile Durkheim suggesting that acts of suicide had to be seen as social facts, conditions initiated by environment and history. His 1897 study was notable in suggesting four types of suicide, with fatalistic self-murder the outcome of circumstances of extreme regulation and discipline.

The march of the medical brigade on this was, however, irrepressible. The person willing to take his own life was deemed sick, a disturbance to be monitored and controlled. The mental asylum in due course met the refugee asylum, and in the modern detention centre we see titanic encounters between the forces that control life, and the autonomy of the inmates themselves.

Such ruptures in life are not seen as the torturous circumstances of privatised security, rapacious guards, and Australian governments keen to reduce humanity to refuse that just might turn suicidal. Suicide, attempted or otherwise, remains one of the last frontiers of human freedom.

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

Notes:

[1] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-29/desperate-nauru-refugees-formed-‘suicide-pacts’:-social-worker/6581906

[2] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CgCwOt8UsAIs5Jb.jpg

Posted in English
Comments Off on Nauru: A “Processing Centre” and Detention Camp for Refugees to Australia

The Japanese Government Spreads Misinformation On North Korea’s Rocket Launch

April 16th, 2016 by Taoka Shunji

The Illusion of Japan’s “Missile Destruction Order”

The Japanese government has described the North Korean rocket launched on February 7 as “a long range ballistic missile disguised as a satellite launching vehicle.” Even after it was confirmed that a satellite was in orbit it has kept that rhetoric. As the Japanese public, as well as journalists, generally lack knowledge of missiles, they are easily manipulated by government misinformation.

One example of recent Japanese psychological war was the deployment of the Patriot PAC3 (anti-missile missiles) to Miyako and Ishigaki islands, southwest of Okinawa. In response to North Korea’s prior announcement of the satellite launch, the Japanese government issued a “ballistic missile destruction order” to the Self Defense Forces. Three Aegis destroyers were deployed in the Sea of Japan and the East China Sea. Also land-based Patriot PAC-3 batteries were put on alert in the Tokyo metropolitan area and in Okinawa’s main island. In addition, PAC-3 fire units were dispatched to two remote islands of Okinawa prefecture because the anticipated trajectory of the North Korean “missile” was close to those islands. But if the launch proceeded as planned, the altitude of the rocket would be more than 400 km above the islands. There is no legal basis for shooting down a rocket flying in outer space, which is outside of Japanese territorial air space. Furthermore, PAC-3 cannot reach such a target, as its maximum altitude is a mere 15 km.

Japan’s Defense Ministry claimed that PAC-3 could hit the North Korean missile if it was falling into Japanese territory due to malfunction. However, in ballistic missile defense, interceptor missiles are launched toward the future position of the target which is flying at a speed of more than 20,000 km per hour. The trajectory of a malfunctioning rocket would be irregular and unpredictable, so its future position cannot be calculated and PAC-3 missiles cannot be launched.

Image: C-3 missile batteries in Tokyo

It would not be impossible to intercept debris such as rocket engines free-falling into the atmosphere. However, one cannot be certain whether breaking up such objects into multiple fragments would make the islands safer or more dangerous. In any case, the deployment of useless weapons to these islands appears to have taken place because there were plans to deploy surface-to-ship missiles and garrisons in the area. The incident was likely used to instigate fear among islanders and thereby gain their support for these plans.

In 2009, 2010, and 2013, South Korea launched satellites from the Naro Space Center facing the Tsushima Strait using Russian-made engines, succeeded on the third attempt. As the Naro Space Center’s longitudinal position is approximately three degrees east of the North Korean launch site in Tongch’ang-ri, the satellites flew close to the Okinawan main island posing a slightly higher danger in case of malfunction. In 2010, the rocket exploded 132 seconds after launching and its remains fell approximately 350 kilometers north of Okinawa. A consistent policy to prepare for falling debris from malfunctions would have necessitated destruction orders in these instances as well.

Instigating Fear to Increase Defense Spending

On February 7, newspapers and television stations reported on “North Korea’s missile launch.” However the Joint Space Operations Center of the U.S. Strategic Command announced approximately two hours after the launch that two objects had been launched into orbit, one being a satellite and the other the remains of the third stage rocket. While at first the satellite continued to rotate and there was speculation that it was out of control, a U.S. defense official later told the press that the rotation had stopped but did not clarify whether or not radio signals were being emitted.

Image: Japanese Self-Defense Force Battleship Atago with Aegis Guided Missile Combat System

On December 12, 2012, too, North Korea had successfully launched a satellite into orbit, but radio signals were not emitted perhaps due to failed communications equipment. Before the recent launch, North Korea reported to the International Maritime Organization that debris from the rocket was projected to fall in the same areas as the 2012 launch. From this, one could infer that North Korea was planning to launch a satellite into orbit in a similar fashion. I answered to this effect when asked by the media. The Japanese Defense Ministry surely understood this as well.

After the previous satellite launch, the Japanese government and mass media made a great uproar while giving only minimal coverage to the successful launch of the satellite. As a result, people in the mass media were unaware of this latter fact. This time as well, almost all the major media parroted the government announcement of the “missile launch,” a situation reminiscent of Imperial Headquarters announcements in the Second World War.

In reality, the Taepodong-2 rose to approximately 500 kilometers and its third-stage rocket accelerated horizontally to put the satellite into orbit. If the third-stage rocket also continued its ascent like a ballistic missile, it would follow a parabolic trajectory and fall on Australia. Japanese newspapers apparently found it difficult to change their stance and write about the North Korean “satellite.” They instead opted for awkward terms like “object” or “cargo” in orbit. American media, on the other hand, continued to use the generic term “rocket” which could apply to both ballistic missiles and satellite launching vehicles before and after the launch-a more accurate and safer expression.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 2087 of January 23, 2013, after the previous satellite launch, demanded that North Korea “not conduct any further launches that use ballistic missile technology, nuclear tests or any further provocation.” As both the satellite launch and the hydrogen bomb test of January 6 clearly violated this resolution, the Japanese government and mass media did not need to fabricate a “missile launch” to criticize North Korea. The loud emphasis was likely a technique for increased missile defense spending.

Japan has already spent 1.35 trillion yen on ballistic missile defense and is planning to replace the SM-3 Block 1 interceptor missiles (1.6 billion yen per missile), eight of which are estimated to be on board each Aegis ship, with the larger and higher performing Block 2 type whose unit cost is estimated to be more than double. The number of Aegis ships (200 billion yen per ship including missile system) will increase from six to eight. Some have raised doubts about the astronomical expenditures for these upgrades, as their purpose is not limited to the defense of Japan, but is also for intercepting higher-flying ballistic missiles aimed at targets such as Guam, Hawaii, and the US west coast. As it is necessary to have taxpayers fear ballistic missiles to quell such doubts, recognition of the “satellite” must have been an inconvenience for the government.

The Differentiation of Rocket Technology

It has become common for media to remark: “The technology for ballistic missiles and rockets for launching satellites is basically the same. The only difference is whether they carry warheads or satellites.” However, if we follow the same logic we can say: “The basic technology for fighter jets and passenger planes is the same.”

In the 1950s, when Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) and satellites emerged, the Soviet Union succeeded in launching Sputnik-1, the world’s first satellite, using its ICBM SS6. Later, the U.S. also launched satellites using Atlas and Titan I ICBMs. However, these ICBMs at first required hours of preparation before launch including the loading of liquid fuel, making them vulnerable to first strikes and limiting their military value. After being abandoned for some years, they were reused for satellite launches. Satellite rockets did not evolve into ICBMs.

In the 1990s, Russia again used its ICBM SS25 to launch satellites. The objective was to earn foreign currency by using missiles decommissioned by the Strategic Arms Reduction Talks to launch foreign states’ satellites. Only small satellites could be launched by these missiles.

In the past fifty years rocket technology has progressed, resulting in the divergence of ballistic missiles and satellite rockets. With ballistic missiles, rapid launching capability is indispensable. They should also be compact and mobile to allow for deployment in silos, aboard submarines, or on vehicles to increase their survivability.

Image: North Korean missile Launch, 7 February 2016

On the other hand, satellite rockets do not need to be launched at a moment’s notice or be hidden from reconnaissance satellites. Their size continued to grow for the launching of large satellites from fixed launch pads. For example, the current US ICBM Minuteman III is 18 meters in length and weighs 35 tons. Japan’s H2A satellite launching rocket is 53 meters in length and weighs 445 tons. The Space Shuttle weighed more than 2,000 tons.

Satellite rockets normally use liquid fuel for their larger thrust. Missiles for military use tend to avoid liquid fuel because of the long preparation time required in favor of solid fuel, which allows for instant launch and is easy to maintain. Russia, China, and other states that fell behind in this technology have used cumbersome storable liquid fuel. However, they have shifted to solid fuel in recent years.

The Taepodong-2 (30 meters in length, 90 tons in weight) that North Korea used for its recent launch was launched from a plainly visible launch pad on the coast after more than two weeks of assembly and loading of liquid fuel. If such a leisurely procedure was taken during wartime or in high-tension conditions, it could be easily destroyed by air attacks or other means. Similarly, Japan’s H2 rocket that cannot be launched instantly cannot be used as a military missile.

The differentiation of North Korea’s rocket technology has not progressed to the extent it has in the U.S. However, it is evident that the regime is developing a military missile of a different series. The Musudan (12 meters in length, 12 tons in weight), based on the SSN-6 missiles on the former Soviet Union’s Yankee-class nuclear ballistic missile submarines and carried by 12-wheel mobile launchers, is believed to have the ability to emerge from tunnels and be launched in approximately ten minutes. As all Japan falls within its range of over 3,000 kilometers, this is a real threat. In the 2012 parade, a larger version of this missile, on a 16-wheel launcher and measuring 18 meters and weighing 40 tons, was displayed. The U.S. gave it the code name of “KN-08” and is concerned that it is an instantly launchable mobile missile with a range of 9,000 kilometers. If a test launch of this missile were to take place, it would be a true “firing of a long-range missile,” but Japanese people have become so habituated to the government’s cry wolf type announcements of “missile launches” that they may regard it simply as “another launch.”

This is a revised version of an article that appeared in the Okinawa Times on February 24, 25, 26, 2016. Translation by Kenji Hasegawa.

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Japanese Government Spreads Misinformation On North Korea’s Rocket Launch

Ten Reasons Why Bill and Hillary Clinton Do Not Deserve a Third Term in the White House

April 16th, 2016 by Prof Rodrigue Tremblay

“Few things are more dangerous than empires pushing their own interest in the belief they are doing humanity a favor.” -Eric Hobsbawm (1917-2012) British historian, June 10, 2003

“It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq…” -Bill Clinton (1946- ), The neocon-sponsored Iraq Liberation Act, signed by President Clinton into law, in 1998

“I’m going to ask for his ideas, I’m going ask for his advice, and I’m going use him [former President Bill Clinton] as a goodwill emissary to go around the country to find the best ideas we’ve got, because I do believe, as he said, everything that’s wrong with America has been solved somewhere in America.” -Hillary Clinton (1947- ), during a debate on January 17, 2016

“I’ll tell you how good our military is doing under [former CIA Director] Michael Hayden and people such as this. We’ve been fighting wars in the Middle East for 15 years, 18 years. We were in for four or five trillion dollars; we don’t know what we’re doing; we don’t know who we’re fighting; we’re arming people that we want on our side, we don’t know who they are.

When they take over a country, they’re worse than people they depose.” -Donald Trump (1946- ), in a response to a public letter by establishment national security so-called ‘experts’

Polls indicate that most of the 2016 U.S. presidential candidates, with a few exceptions, have more than 50 % negative ratings. Also, poll after poll, after poll show that most Americans are dissatisfied with the way things are, and some are even outspokenly “angry” at the current situation. The polls also indicate a high degree of polarization.

That may also explain why two of the leading presidential candidates this year, Democratic Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump, are both proposing anti-establishment and populist policies to get the United States out of its current rut.

On the domestic front, each, if elected, would advance economic policies designed to assist the American middle class, which has been decimated after nearly thirty years of economic and financial globalization and from so-called “trade deals” which have mainly benefited large corporations and mega banks, because they are essentially “investment and financial deals”, before being bona fide “trade deals”.

On foreign policy, both would like to extricate the U.S. from costly wars abroad that have been going on for so long. Most of these wars have been the pet projects of pro-Israel neoconservatives (shortened to neocons), inside and outside the U.S. government, ever since the latter de facto took over American foreign policy, after the end of the Cold War, in 1991.

It is indeed well documented that prominent neocons became very influential during the Bush I and Bush II administrations, in 1989-1993 and in 2001-2009. Many people remember how characters such as Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, …etc. used different tactics to push the United States into a never-ending imperialistic war, branded as “preemptive wars” in the Middle East, beginning with an unprovoked military aggression against Iraq, in 2003.

But, even if this has been less publicized, neocons have also played important roles in the Bill Clinton administration (1993-2001) and in the current Barack Obama administration (2009-2017), in promoting a series of wars abroad, especially in the Middle East and in Europe, and in sowing the seeds of financial crises at home.

Since Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has publicly declared that she intends to consult with her former-president husband, if she becomes president, it is of paramount importance to know what this means. Indeed, the question can be raised as to the likelihood that a Hillary Clinton’s presidency could be, in fact, some sort of a third term for the Clinton couple in the White House.

I have previously identified three major crises, which have their origin during the Bill Clinton administration.

Let us summarize them here and add a few more:

1-The de facto rekindling of a Cold War II with Russia

History will record that President Bill Clinton broke a promise made by his predecessor, President George H. Bush, that the U.S. government would not expand NATO into Eastern Europe, if Russia were to disband the Warsaw Pact. As we know, during his 1996 reelection campaign, on October 22,1996, President Clinton thought to be to his political advantage to promise an enlargement of NATO to include Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia. Nobody realized at the time that this heralded the beginning of a new cold war with Russia.

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders.

What is less well known is the fact that Ms. Hillary Clinton, when she was State Secretary in the Obama administration, appointed a prominent neocon, Victoria Nuland, wife of leading neocon Robert Kagan, to the post of Spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State. Ms. Nuland was promoted to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs a few years later, in May 2013, in the same Democratic administration of Barack Obama. Previously, she had served as the principal deputy foreign policy adviser to Republican Vice President Dick Cheney in the George W. Bush administration, and later as U.S. ambassador to NATO.

Ms. Nuland is considered to be the key person in charge of provoking Russia into a Cold War II. (This is an indication that in Washington D.C., one can go easily from a Republican administration to a Democratic administration, provided one belongs to the neocon brotherhood).

2- The Clinton administration engineered the demise of the United Nations in 1998-1999

President Bill Clinton played a major role in undermining the credibility of the United Nations when he decided, in 1998 and in 1999, to enter the Kosovo War in Yugoslavia without an explicit mandate from the U.N. Security Council, as the 1945 U.N. Charter mandates. This was a very dangerous precedent.

Only a few years later, his successor, President George W. Bush invoked that precedent to launch the 2003 Iraq War, again with no outright mandate from the U.N. Security Council. Therefore, it can be said that President Bill Clinton bears an obvious responsibility for the current international state of anarchy, considering that the United Nations, for all practical purpose, has been sidelined in favor of NATO, to pursue U.S.-led imperialistic wars, which are waged outside of the international legal framework of the United Nations Charter and even in opposition to the Nuremberg Principles, which define military aggression as a crime against peace.

In 1991, few people anticipated that the collapse of the Soviet Union would eventually bring about the collapse of the United Nations, which has de facto been reduced to the same influence that the old League of Nations had before World War II.

3- Bill Clinton Sowed the Seeds of the 2008 Subprime Financial Crisis in 1999

On November 12, 1999, President Bill Clinton signed into law the Republican-sponsored Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which effectively removed the separation that previously existed under the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 between investment banking, which issue securities, and commercial banks that accept government insured deposits.

Before 1999, the Glass-Steagall Act made it illegal for a bank holding FDIC-insured deposits to invest in anything other than government bonds and similarly low-risk vehicles. With his signature, however, President Clinton allowed largely unregulated super large banks and large insurance companies to engage in risky financial practices, as they are known to have done historically and as it should have been expected. The banks and insurance companies’ new financial products collapsed, and that led to the devastating 2008 financial crisis.

While Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has said that he would fully reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act, his opponent, former Secretary Hillary Clinton, has said that she would not reinstate the banking law, preferring instead to rely on measures to better control so-called shadow banking.

4- The 2003 Iraq War Began in 1998: President Bill Clinton’s Iraq Liberation Act of 1998

On February 19, 1998, a group of prominent neocons (Robert Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, John Bolton, Richard Perle, …etc.) anxious to get the United States involved in wars in the Middle East, wrote an open letter to President Bill Clinton. They were offering him a strategy for “the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power” in Iraq.

President Clinton did not immediately go to war to please the neocons, after all he was nearing the end of his term, but he did sign the Republican-sponsored Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, on October 31, 1998, stating that “It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq….” That law opened the door for an American-led war against Iraq.

Indeed, President George W. Bush, in search for bi-partisan support for his planned war against Iraq, cited President Clinton’s Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 as a basis of support for the Congressional Authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq of October 2002. We can say that President Bill Clinton set the U.S. government on a warpath against Iraq as early as 1998, and he therefore must share some responsibility for the disasters that have since resulted from that war.

5- Hillary Clinton’s Own Personal War of Aggression in Libya, (with false and misleading claims, and resulting in a huge refugee crisis)

President Barack Obama was reluctant to duplicate George W. Bush’s disaster with his military invasion of Iraq in 2003. That is why, in 2011, he hesitated to launch a new American war of aggression, this time against Libya, even though neocons inside and outside his administration were pushing hard for such a war. The latter country, headed by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, had the misfortune of having been singled out in the neocons’ grand plan as one of the Arab countries the neocons wished to overthrow and to destabilize the entire Middle East, using for that purpose the U.S. military to do Israel’s heavy lifting.

At the time, two heavyweights in the Obama administration, vice president Joe Biden and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, were both adamantly opposed to getting the U.S. government and its military involved in another neocon-inspired ‘regime-change war’ in the Middle East. That wasn’t counting on the neocons’ main ally, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Indeed, Hillary Clinton overcame the Biden-Gates’ formidable opposition to a U.S. military intervention in Libya by persuading a weak President Obama that Libyan President Gaddafi had a supposed plan to carry a “genocide” against his own people and that the U.S government had a “responsibility to protect” to avoid such a “genocide”, no matter what international law said. There is a dictum in French that “he who wants to kill his dog accuses him of having rabies”!

Such a proposal was in conformity with the precedent created by her president husband, Bill Clinton, who bombed Yugoslavia under similar circumstances, outside of international law, in 1998 and in 1999. It was also ironic that the President would side with her, considering that Barack Obama himself had campaigned against candidate Hillary Clinton in 2008, arguing that she had endorsed Bush’s 2003 Iraq-war policies.

Hillary Clinton (C) gestures with Libyan soldiers upon her departure from Tripoli, October 18, 2011.

In 2011, the demonized Gaddafi government was indeed fighting some groups of rebels, supported by outside powers, who wanted to overthrow his government, but the claim of a planned “genocide” was greatly exaggerated.

After the U.S. intervened in Libya along with a few European nations, some rebel groups succeeded in capturing Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, on October 20, 2011. They sodomized him, and they murdered him and his family. Chaos ensued and Libya is still to this day a failed state run by groups of Islamic fanatics, besides creating millions of refugees fleeing their devastated land.

Hillary Clinton took full credit for creating the political mess in Libya, when she appeared on a TV interview and bragged with the boast, “we came; we saw; he died!” Her neocon advisers had told her that she would be remembered as having implemented some sort of a “Clinton Doctrine”! If creating a human catastrophe counts as “experience” in a résumé, then candidate Clinton is undoubtedly ‘qualified’ to become U.S. president. Her lack of basic human empathy is evident.

6- Hillary Clinton: Proud Candidate of the Establishment 1%

As professional politicians, Bill and Hillary Clinton have become the richest political couple of all times. In 2012, their combined net worth was in excess of $112,000,000.00. In contrast, Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders had a net worth of only $420,000.00. There is not a shadow of a doubt that the Clinton political family belongs to the 1% and even to the 0.1% of American taxpayers. Politics has been a most rewarding industry for them.

It is therefore no surprise that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is by far the establishment’s favored choice. Neocons find her a most reliable ally. If she becomes U.S. President, they will be able to continue and even accelerate their over-all plan for the Middle East. There would be joy in the land!

In contrast, presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are both considered outsiders who oppose neocon-inspired American involvements in foreign wars and who favor fundamental domestic reforms. Democratic candidate Sanders, for one, backs aggressive social-oriented policies while Republican candidate Trump proposes to reign in industrial and financial globalization that has resulted in the lost of millions of well paid American jobs, when U.S. corporations began investing and moving their installations and their profits abroad.

In the case of Hillary Clinton, the entire Democratic primary system is biased and the dice are loaded, since some 719 so-called unelected “superdelegates”, representing party officials and organizers, sitting Democratic senators and representatives, lobbyists …etc., stand to tip the balance in her favor, as the establishment candidate, even if Bernie Sanders were to obtain a majority of the people behind him during the primaries. The superdelegate system was adopted in the 1980s to give the Democratic establishment a definitive advantage in determining the party’s presidential nominee and, if need be, to cancel the choice of the people.

Of all the 2016 U.S. presidential candidates, none is more pro-establishment than Hillary Clinton, and none more associated to that establishment and the mess the latter has created over the last quarter of century.

7- Hillary Clinton’s Eagerness to Launch “Regime change” Wars and Create Chaos in other Countries

Belligerent Hillary Clinton appears to be a John McCain in a skirt. As a U.S. Democratic senator from New York (2001-2009), she enthusiastically supported President George W. Bush’s 2003 illegal Iraq War.

In her many thousand personal emails containing state secrets and sent to friends when she was U.S. Secretary of State, (possibly an illegal act), and discussing American foreign policies with outsiders, Hillary Clinton indicated on numerous occasions her willingness to use the U.S. military to fulfill Israel’s objectives in the Middle East. In one revealing email of hers, for example, and sent in the spring of 2012, she spelled out her views very clearly:

“The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad…

For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries. What Israeli military leaders really worry about —but cannot talk about —is losing their nuclear monopoly…

Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted…

In short, the White House can ease the tension that has developed with Israel over Iran by doing the right thing in Syria.”

There is no doubt that if and when candidate Hillary Clinton becomes U.S. president, she will be more than willing to use the United States military to do the heavy lifting and go to war so that a foreign country, Israel, could fulfill its political objectives in the Middle East. This is surely an important enough issue to warrant a discussion during a presidential election.

8- Hillary Clinton’s Close Ties to Wall Street and Special Interests

While candidate Bernie Sanders is mainly financing his campaign with small donations from supporters, and while candidate Donald Trump is self-financing his campaign, candidate Hillary Clinton has principally relied on large contributions from professional lobbyists and large corporations and mega banks. Citigroup Inc, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley are among her top contributors.

This should raise red flags as this could mean that she could naturally be more inclined to act in favor of big corporations and mega banks, before being the president “of the people, by the people and for the people”, in President Lincoln’s words.

U.S. financier and politician Simon Cameron (1799-1889) used to quip, “An honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought”. Indeed, considering the importance that big money has taken in American politics after the 2010 ‘Citizens United’ (5-4) decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, stating in effect that for profit ‘corporations’ are breathing people and that the use of ‘money’ is speech, the issue of how those who control huge amounts of money can influence the results of elections cannot be swept under the rug.

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is the only Democratic candidate accepting donations from federal lobbyists, corporate interests and super Political Action Committees (PACs), and even indirectly from foreign donors. Any candidate to high office who primarily relies on big money to be elected should be held accountable.

9- Hillary Clinton’s Responsibility in Ambassador Stevens’ Assassination and the Entire Benghazi Disaster

There were two scandals in the Benghazi Disaster, and Secretary Hillary Clinton was involved in both of them.

The first was that, on September 11, 2012, U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith were left unprotected, in a hostile environment, by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. And what is worse, before they were attacked and killed by Islamic militants in the diplomatic consular compound, they had requested and had been denied that assistance. Hillary Clinton has taken responsibility for the lapse in security.

The second scandal is the fact that Secretary Hillary Clinton had seemingly accepted that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya be merged with the CIA’s covert operations in that country, thus placing the State Department personnel in harms way. As early as March 2011, Ambassador Stevens had been named the first liaison with the Libyan opposition made of Islamic rebels, to whom the CIA was channeling weapons and providing tactics to overthrow the Libyan government.

According to investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, “The [U.S.] consulate’s only mission [in Benghazi] was to provide cover for the moving of arms. It had no real political role.” And those arms and weapons were not only supplied to Islamic rebels to overthrow the Libyan government of President Gaddafi, they were also smuggled into Syria to other Islamic rebels in their attempt to overthrow the government of Bashar al-Assad.

This is a very murky affair considering that all those covert operations were illegal under international law, and this casts a long shadow on Hillary Clinton’s record and ‘experience’.

10- Hillary Clinton is Publicly Committed to U.S.-led Imperial Wars, Especially in the Middle East

In her 2016 speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), on March 21, candidate Hillary Clinton stated clearly her intentions to push the United Nations aside when she declared, “I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties to impose a solution [to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict], including by the U.N. Security Council.” In a similar speech during the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania, in April 2008, when she was also a presidential candidate, she went as far as to declare, that to defend Israel, “If I’m President, we will attack Iran… We would be able to totally obliterate them.”

Only a political psychopath could make such an outlandish statement to annihilate a country of 80 million people. That frame of mind should disqualify any person running to become American president. Her Democratic opponent at that time, candidate Barack Obama, accused Hillary Clinton of sabre-rattling and pointed out that this was the kind of language used by the George W. Bush administration.

Hillary Clinton has all the credentials as a pro-perpetual war candidate. That is probably because she adopts the self-serving and dangerous myth of American Exceptionalism. In her biographical book ‘Hard Choices’ and in various interviews, she has proclaimed her belief that “America remains the ‘indispensable nation.’ ” This is a dangerous posture by politicians who control nuclear arms. The history of the 20^th Century and the rise of Nazi Germany should teach any democratic leader to refrain from brandishing the superiority of their nation over others.

For example, candidate Hillary Clinton is still on the record as supporting a U.S. imposed no-fly zone in Syria, similar to the one she advocated in Libya, in 2011, with disastrous results, since Islamist terrorists have taken over that country. It seems that Hillary Clinton has learned nothing from the Libyan fiasco she created. That shows very bad judgment.

Conclusion

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), said, in 2015,

“Hillary Clinton is a neocon, [because] she supported the war in Iraq, in Afghanistan…

If Hillary Clinton is president, we will be back at war in the Middle East.”

Considering Hillary Clinton’s numerous hawkish statements over the years and her dismal record at the State Department, the question whether she is, or she is not, a neoconservative should be squarely put to her to be answered in a proper forum. From her statements, there is no doubt that candidate Hillary Clinton would be a pro-perpetual war American president. This is a perspective that Democrats and the American electorate in general should ponder.

Even more fundamentally, perhaps, considering the questionable legacy that President Bill Clinton left behind during his two presidential terms, in 1993-1997 and in 1997-2001, and considering that the former president is most likely going to be a close adviser to his wife, if she becomes president, Americans should ask themselves if they want to support the Clinton couple for a third term (2017-2021) in the White House.

Economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book “The Code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles”, Please visit the book site at: http://www.thecodeforglobalethics.com/ and his blog at: http://www.thenewamericanempire.com/blog.htm To write to the author: [email protected]

Posted in English
Comments Off on Ten Reasons Why Bill and Hillary Clinton Do Not Deserve a Third Term in the White House

Myanmar’s Political Transition: Aung San Suu Kyi “Non-Democratic Democracy”

April 16th, 2016 by Tony Cartalucci

Myanmar’s political transition is being hailed by Western politicians, special interests, and its media as “historic” and a new beginning for “democracy” in the Southeast Asian nation.

However, even before Myanmar political opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s party rose to power, the facts contradicted the fiction Western politicians and pundits had spent decades crafting. Even before elections, global awareness around Suu Kyi’s failure to condemn violence against the nation’s Rohingya minority had been growing.

Articles like the Guardian’s “Why is Aung San Suu Kyi silent on the plight of the Rohingya people?,” would point out that:

[Myanmar’s] opposition leader appears to be cowed by her need to dampen ethnic tensions and win votes from an electorate in the thrall of Islamophobia

So too has awareness been growing regarding the fact that some of Suu Kyi’s staunchest supporters were directly involved, in fact, leading the violence against the Rohingya. Despite attempts to portray these supporters as actually “opponents” of Suu Kyi and her political party, it is already becoming clear that Suu Kyi is rewarding them by targeting their enemies and allowing them to more openly indulge in their violence now that they are in power.

Suu Kyi’s Non-Democratic Democracy, and Inhumane Human Rights…

After the elections, Suu Kyi was banned from holding the presidency because of her numerous ties to foreign interests including her previous marriage to a foreigner and her having children with foreign citizenship – British citizenship no less – Britain being Myanmar’s former colonial master. Despite the ban, Suu Kyi pledged to “rule above” the president, a man she hand-selected to serve as her proxy.

The Guardian in its article, “Aung San Suu Kyi unlikely to take seat in Myanmar government,” inexplicably attempts to explain (emphasis added:

The democracy champion, who spent 15 years under house arrest and is the daughter of the nation’s revolutionary hero, has vowed to be “above the president”, fuelling speculation over her role in the country’s first democratically elected government in more than five decades.

The Guardian never makes it clear how an unelected leader vowing to rule “above” an elected president constitutes a “democracy champion” or the country’s “first democratically elected government in more than five decades.” Clearly those who were elected are not actually leading the nation, and instead of democracy, Myanmar has been given a poorly-crafted, admittedly disingenuous stand-in for it.

Such a move to illegally rule “above” the elected president can only be interpreted as a direct contravention of both the principles of democracy and the rule of law. Suu Kyi and her political party have decided to observe these principles and laws when convenient and advantageous, and trample them when they become obstacles.

Compounding these already alarming developments is Suu Kyi’s treatment of political prisoners. She is being lauded by the West for releasing over 100 political prisoners – mostly her own foreign-funded supporters – while arresting and jailing her opponents.

The Associated Press in its article, “Myanmar frees over 100 political prisoners, but jails 2,” reports that:

More than 100 political prisoners in Myanmar have been freed under an amnesty ordered by the country’s new de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, as her first official act.

AP then notes that:

The move was praised by human rights advocates, but a jarring note was struck when two peace activists the same day Friday were each sentenced to two years with hard labor for activities bringing them into contact with an armed ethnic rebel group that has been battling the central government…

…Both are also Muslims, a minority that has faced increasing pressure and violence in recent years in overwhelmingly Buddhist Myanmar.

These two jailed political prisoners are undoubtedly only the beginning. Despite attempts to portray Suu Kyi’s political party and the xenophobic, racist, bigoted “saffron” movement that supports her as “adversarial,” jailing and otherwise legalizing oppression and even genocide against the Rohingya and other “undesirables” is the clearest indication yet that such an adversity does not exist.

Suu Kyi, her political party, and her supporters, even before taking power, have dealt with opponents with the same degree of intolerance and violence as they have accused the military-led government of. Suu Kyi’s “saffron monks” regularly raid Rohingya villages and refugee camps committing mass murder and arson while the faux-monk’s political networks regularly campaign for stripping Myanmar’s Rohingya population of the few remaining rights they have left, while barring efforts to give them full citizenship despite many having lived in Myanmar for generations.

Suu Kyi’s obvious and expanding crimes against the people of Myanmar will only continue. Her party’s policy, beyond rhetorical pandering to “democracy” and inviting in foreign corporations to buy-out and run the country for her, is in fact, not a policy. As the people of Myanmar continue to suffer under political and economic instability, opposition against Suu Kyi will grow, and with it will come increasing intimidation and violence to suppress it.

In reality, the only thing that has changed for Myanmar is the fact that it is no longer associating primarily with its Asian neighbors, but is instead gravitating toward Wall Street, Washington, London, and Brussels – the centers of power who for decades have funded Suu Kyi’s political movement and her various supporters. The promise of “democracy” and “self-determination” dangled over Myanmar’s head is a promise it will never realize so long as Myanmar’s government is beholden to and representative of foreign interests, rather than the interests of the people it was allegedly “elected” to represent.

In a wider, geopolitical context, the transformation of Myanmar into a Western proxy has serious implications for the region, allowing it to become a hub for destabilization against its Southeast Asian neighbors and China. The fact that Suu Kyi is already guilty of or associated with egregious human rights violations documented but kept under wraps by Western “human rights” fronts, means that at any time should Suu Kyi’s loyalty to her foreign sponsors falter, so will the West’s ability to keep her image as a “democracy champion” intact. Like her counterparts in Riyadh, another nation bent into servile obedience to the West with its own atrocities used as blackmail against it, Myanmar begins this new chapter of its collective history bound to the will of its former colonial masters.

For the West, it really is “progress” for them. For Myanmar, it is a step 68 years backwards.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Myanmar’s Political Transition: Aung San Suu Kyi “Non-Democratic Democracy”

Myanmar’s Political Transition: Aung San Suu Kyi “Non-Democratic Democracy”

April 16th, 2016 by Tony Cartalucci

Myanmar’s political transition is being hailed by Western politicians, special interests, and its media as “historic” and a new beginning for “democracy” in the Southeast Asian nation.

Articles like the Guardian’s “Why is Aung San Suu Kyi silent on the plight of the Rohingya people?,” would point out that:

[Myanmar’s] opposition leader appears to be cowed by her need to dampen ethnic tensions and win votes from an electorate in the thrall of Islamophobia

Suu Kyi’s Non-Democratic Democracy, and Inhumane Human Rights…

The Guardian in its article, “Aung San Suu Kyi unlikely to take seat in Myanmar government,” inexplicably attempts to explain (emphasis added:

The democracy champion, who spent 15 years under house arrest and is the daughter of the nation’s revolutionary hero, has vowed to be “above the president”, fuelling speculation over her role in the country’s first democratically elected government in more than five decades.

The Associated Press in its article, “Myanmar frees over 100 political prisoners, but jails 2,” reports that:

More than 100 political prisoners in Myanmar have been freed under an amnesty ordered by the country’s new de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, as her first official act.

AP then notes that:

The move was praised by human rights advocates, but a jarring note was struck when two peace activists the same day Friday were each sentenced to two years with hard labor for activities bringing them into contact with an armed ethnic rebel group that has been battling the central government…

…Both are also Muslims, a minority that has faced increasing pressure and violence in recent years in overwhelmingly Buddhist Myanmar.

For the West, it really is “progress” for them. For Myanmar, it is a step 68 years backwards.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Myanmar’s Political Transition: Aung San Suu Kyi “Non-Democratic Democracy”

Selected Articles: How America backed the ISIS Takeover and Destruction of Palmyra

April 16th, 2016 by Global Research News

How America backed the ISIS Takeover and Destruction of Palmyra

By Prof. Tim Anderson, April 15 2016

As explosions from detonated mines continued in the background a Syrian general confirmed in some detail an ugly truth: Washington and its close allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel backed the ISIS takeover and destruction of Palmyra.

My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide

By Jim Miles, April 15 2016

Reading a work that would obviously be very pro-Israel sets up an anticipatory set of expectations and Michael Oren’s account of his term as Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Ally – My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide, certainly met those…

Blood and Money: US Tycoons, Charities and Israel’s Settlements

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, April 15 2016

Last month, Bassem al-Tamimi and 35 other Palestinians and Palestinian Americans sought legal services to take a range of charities, firms and tycoons in the US to court in what will be a $34.5bn law suit. Their argument is personal,…

US Corporate Tax Cheats Hiding $1.4 Trillion in Profits in Offshore Accounts

By Patrick Martin, April 15 2016

A report issued Thursday by the British charity Oxfam found that the 50 largest US corporations are hiding $1.4 trillion in profits in overseas accounts to avoid US income taxes, much of it in tax havens like Bermuda and the…

Syrian Elections Prove Again That Washington And Its Presstitutes Lie Through Their Teeth

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, April 14 2016

Today (April 14) Syria held parliamentary elections at 7,000 polling stations, keeping the voting open an extra five hours to accommodate the massive turnout. All were allowed to vote, even displaced Syrians from the two provinces still terrorized by Washington…

Posted in English
Comments Off on Selected Articles: How America backed the ISIS Takeover and Destruction of Palmyra

Military Escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh, on Russia’s Doorstep

April 15th, 2016 by South Front

Armenia’s Ministry of Defense revealed numbers of the casualties in the recent escalation in Nagoorno-Karabakh. The report says the country lost 15 officers, 34 soldiers, 11 volunteers and 2 soldiers from the reserve. 1 officer is missed in action. Azerbaijani Defense Ministry spokesman, Vagif Dargahli, stated the Azeri side lost 31 military servicemen. It’s clear that this number is downplayed. The Azeri military stormed and seized strategic high grounds around Seisulan, Talish, Madagiz under heavy fire. According to experts, the Azeri casualties should be between 400 and 500 fighters. Some military sources say 600.

Meanwhile, Azeri media are justifying the solution of the conflict by force, almost openly. Such glorification of the escalation points at its initiator.

Kazakhstan’s President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, supported Azerbaijan’s actions strengthening rumors about the personal animosity between him and Serzh Sargsyan. Separately, Kazakhstan vetoed the idea to hold the meeting of the premiers of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) in Yerevan. Turkey’s President also supported the Azeri actions and held a series of meeting with his Azeri and Kazakh counterparts demonstrating the solidarity.

In turn, the US present a [fake] policy supporting Armenia in the recent escalation in order to force a wedge between Armenia and Russia which should be careful to avoid the regional conflict and save the influence in South Caucasus. US-sponsored Armenian media have been fueling anti-Russian speculations.

The recent developments showcase a new attempt to increase the conflict to a regional level by the US which is interested to purge a strategic Russian military base from Armenia. On one hand, the US thrusted Aliyev forward to the conflict through Turkey. On the other hand, US diplomats condemned the escalation and supported the Armenian media campaign. In this situation, Russia is the main player which is interested and makes steps to keep the peace in South Caucasus.

As any territorial conflict, which includes an ethnic factor, the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is unique. Indeed, it can’t be compared with a clear situation like for example Crimea which also found itself incorporated in a newly appeared state after the fall of the USSR. The Nagorno-Karabakh territory has faced a bloody civil conflict and the nations involved in it have a long history of engagement in the region.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Military Escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh, on Russia’s Doorstep

My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide

April 15th, 2016 by Jim Miles

Reading a work that would obviously be very pro-Israel sets up an anticipatory set of expectations and Michael Oren’s account of his term as Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Ally – My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide, certainly met those expectations.

In fact it exceeded them, providing an analysis of the relationship that when parsed throughout the work perhaps says something somewhat different than was intended. Or maybe not, as one method of his critical writing involves simply denigrating the person/argument that is not in agreement with his own.

Those words – “deluded…lunacy…chicanery…duped…” et al simply avoid the necessity of having to actually counter another’s argument. As the writer, I am sure the same format would apply to what is written below.

What I will not deal with here are the many ‘interpretations/narratives’ that can so readily be countered by reference to other Jewish Israeli historians and researchers who have contributed immensely to global understanding of the situation in Palestine beyond what is provided by the mainstream media – Jeff Halper, Never Gordon, Miko Peled, and Shlomo Sand to pick just a few. Outside the realm, one of the strongest modern historians is Ilan Pappe with several excellent works concerning the history of Israel/Palestine.

Tribal affinities and democracy

One of the first surprises of the book is its reference to the Jewish tribe: Oren refers to “my tribe, the Jews;” is inspired by an Irish song “Where is my Tribe;” equates the U.S. and Israel saying “we still belonged to the same tribe;” later he refers to “a sense of tribe” in relation to military power, territorialism, and nationalism. Tribalism had for me up to now been a derogatory term used to describe the various autocratic/monarchic governments of the Arab world such as in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and of course the Saudi tribe ruling the Arabian peninsula (mostly). It tends to be equated with “primitive cultural practices,” a term dear to Canada’s neoconservative government as it tried desperately for re-election (big no to that).

To hear it used as a positive by Oren was illuminating, especially in its latter utterance associated with military, territory, and nationalism. It is antithetical to the idea of democracy – maybe not within a tribe, but certainly to those considered the ‘other’ to be feared and to oppress in order to maintain the tribe. Including the U.S. as part of the tribe is also illuminating as the U.S. is the largest backer politically, militarily, and economically of the Jewish tribe in Israel.

Yet for all its rhetoric and hubris, the U.S. is far from democratic. Certainly they talk about it a lot, they are constantly in electioneering mode, they have elections and all the fixings of democracy, and they fight many wars around the world on the pretence of establishing democracy from the barrel of a gun. Simply to observe the farcical absurdity of the electoral college process, to look at the gerrymandered electoral maps, to list the millions of dollars in donations made by corporations and the uber-rich (Adelson, Koch brothers, et al), to watch the politicians kowtowing to the manipulative AIPAC group, to understand how the financial-political-corporate military worlds intertwine, all make it obvious that democracy – ”people power” – does not truly exist. As cited by Oren, even Obama admits “Democracy is about more than elections.”

Red herrings

A reading of the Jewish authors mentioned above readily dispels the idea of Israel as being a democracy. It introduces one of the red-herring methods of discounting an argument. A red herring argument is “something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences towards a false conclusion.”

At one point, to which I will return more strongly later, Oren says that Israel is not apartheid because it has Arab Knesset members, and Arab IDF personnel. It becomes an irrelevant argument in the same manner of saying there is no racism in the U.S. because Obama is black and they have black military personnel. It is simply a null argument. Apartheid cannot be democratic (see below).

Red herrings are also associated with conjecture. When discussing “the removal of the deranged Gaddafi” Oren slips into pure conjecture asking “If Gaddafi had not surrendered his centrifuges and were now surrounded in his bunker with nothing left but a button…would he push it?” Well, who knows really, as the “NATO intervention” (read CIA special ops, U.S. backed) did away with him. The implication in my mind is that yes, Israel would push their own nuclear button.

When the Israelis attacked the Mavi Marmara in international waters, Oren says, “The sheer mass of these critiques astounded me.” He then heads off into a red-herring argument about “the accidental killing of fourteen Afghani women and children by U.S. forces that same week hardly merited a mention in the American press.” The statement demonstrates a naive ignorance of U.S media – which I doubt as Oren was born and raised in the U.S. and is obviously not ignorant of it – or it simply serves to divert the argument away from the Israeli attack. Of course the U.S. media would not play up the Afghani ‘accident’ as the press is mainly controlled by a few corporate conglomerates with their associated military business interests.

The same argument continues a few pages later with Oren arguing that the U.S. “did not apologize for killing Pakistani troops along the Afghan border….” What? What happened to the wedding party? No apologies there either.

To join this barrel of red herrings, Oren dismisses the suffering of the Muslim population in the West Bank, “if Israel’s policies since 1967 were so suffocating [why] had the West bank’s population at least tripled?” I don’t know, perhaps lack of family planning and health facilities, perhaps the poverty as their is a direct corelationship globally between poverty and birth rate, both items related to an oppressive military governance regime. Perhaps “suffocating” under a military regime increases the physical and psychological necessity to procreate….? If anything, from global health statistics, Oren’s observation supports the very idea that the people are indeed “suffocating.” Prune a tree (olive or otherwise) and it bears many more fruit.

Another surprise is Oren’s diversion into the USS Liberty incident in the 1967 war. He uses it as a red-herring position with the Pollard spy case. Oren writes, “I had scrupulously researched the Liberty incident and ruled it a tragic mistake in which Israeli forces reasonably believed the vessel was hostile.” Ouch! If that is scrupulous, it gives the word a bad name as except for the “official” U.S. position there is much evidence – that I will scrupulously avoid here – indicating that it was an intentional act of murder in international waters. Official U.S. positions are not noted for being accurate and reflective of the truth.

Don’t pick on us – we’re superior

A theme within Israel’s narrative, in general and in this work, is the wonderment and concern that everyone is picking on Israel when so many other bad things are happening around the world. There are two sides to this: first it is another red herring style argument used to distract from what Israel is doing; secondly, it “means, simply, that Israel is subjected to scrutiny and standards imposed on no other foreign nation.”

For the first idea, an argument that people are not paying attention to what China is doing in Tibet does not negate what the Israelis are doing in Palestine. To argue that any other country is also doing what Israel is doing never negates the acts perpetrated by Israel against the Palestinians. In relation to the second comment about standards and scrutiny, it ties in the whole relationship with the U.S. and the rhetorical claims by both countries about how ideal they are.

It starts early in the book as Oren says, “In addition to a spiritual affinity unrivaled by that between modern nations, Israel and the United States are akin in their commitment to democracy.” Democracy, as seen above, and as will be discussed more below, is mostly grand rhetoric wrapped around institutions embedded with financial/corporate/military relationships. But more than that, it ties the two countries together in their most grandiose of claims: “This is the story of an alliance that was and, I unreservedly believe, will remain vital for both Americans and Israelis, and beneficial to the stability of the world.”

Certainly it is beneficial to Israel and the U.S., but perhaps not in the way expressed by Oren, but it is certainly not beneficial to the stability of the world. The relationship between the countries is essentially one of Israel as a U.S. military outpost. What little stability has been established in the world outside the realm of U.S. imperialism has generally been destroyed by that imperialism by either covert or overt military means combined with financial-political control through the various “Washington consensus” establishments such as the IMF, World Bank, the Bank of International Settlements et al established after WW II.

What really outlines the narrative/mythology of these two states is that of their indispensability, their higher moral standing, the descriptors of the most ‘moral’ army in the world, that both countries are necessary to establish a stable peaceful world. Oren says of the duopoly, “…we needed each other. And the world – especially Israel’s calamity-prone corner of it – needed us, too.” Later he says, “The world needed them united.” Ironically while arguing against the indispensable U.S. world view, “that the United States was created not only for its own good but for the good of humanity,” he simply reinforces the concept of both nations viewing themselves as being saviours of mankind, being respective “lights upon a hill.”

Now combine these two strands: the claims for superiority in law and morals with the dissimulation of wondering why we are being picked on. There could be various reasons, but the hubris and arrogance of both entities leads naturally to a careful critical examination of claims. Anyone claiming superiority, a stronger moral position, is bound to undergo more scrutiny. After all, who cares about a bunch of black Africans killing each other in the Congo, or the Indian subcontinents ongoing rebellions and oppression, or the Filipino genocide in East Timor, being just a bunch of coloured people in far away places, savages hacking each other to death (in all these cases involving directly or indirectly the U.S. and allies).

It could also be that Israel is being picked on not just as Israel but because of its perceived and acknowledged relationship with the U.S. in its drive towards global hegemony, and particularly in the Middle East its drive towards control of oil resources (and thus the petrodollar) while using Israel as its military outpost. This imperial role is a role that Israel accepts even though Israel has moved beyond that with it’s individual military dominance of the region.

Outpost Israel

Not an outpost? Then why this: “Israel furnished airstrips and ports to American forces, and warehouses for prepositioning nearly a billion dollars in U.S. military gear.” And this: “the allies remain militarily bound.”

Inadvertently Oren hints at one of the main reasons why the ‘outpost’ had help to establish itself saying, “oil, of course, and not Israel, was America’s Middle east priority.” Why not establish an outpost that “afforded the United States in intelligence sharing, weapons development, and high tech. Israel’s indispensable role as America’s sole democratic and unreservedly pro-American ally in the Middle East….”

Yes, oil is the raison d’etre of U.S. intrigues in the Middle East, not because of the need for supplies, but mainly to guard the pricing of oil in U.S. dollars in order to sustain the U.S. as the global reserve currency, thus allowing the U.S. to keep printing dollars backed by nothing in order to continue its attempted global military “full spectrum dominance” to be realized. Israel has used this, and used it wisely for its own purposes.

Oren openly admits of this relationship. Writing in Foreign Policy magazine he “refuted the charge that Israel was no longer a strategic asset to the United States.” In his closing passages he writes more of this:

“I remain convinced that the U.S.-Israel relationship is essential to both countries interests, It assures a modicum [remember this word] of Middle East stability and sends a message of American dependability to the world.”

And more:

“…the presence of an American ally at the world’s most strategically crucial crossroads, deploying an army more than twice the size of Britain’s and France’s combined, cannot be undervalued….the United States will remain inextricably linked to the Middle East, bound to the region both by the profits and threats it generates [remember these words].”

I believe Oren is saying much more than he realizes here about the true nature of the U.S.-Israeli alliance, especially when the argument devolves to his biggest fear, that of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement.

Apartheid is not democratic.

Along with the indispensability and moral memes prevalent in U.S./Israeli political rhetoric, the word “democracy” is pushed at every opportunity, almost as if to deny the reality that it does not exist (tell a lie often enough and people will come to believe it). Within Oren’s work is a strong revealing attitude towards apartheid that has a direct impact on the ideals of democracy.

When discussing his attempts to answer all questions as “all students deserved to be treated respectfully…and made a point of choosing those who – telling by their dress or demeanor – were likely to be the most contentious.” Grand idea, almost eloquent, except for two questions he considered not kosher (Oxford Eng.: fulfilling requirements of Jewish law). So how could a question not fit the requirements of Jewish law? It is outlawed as it reflects a serious flaw in the representation of the Jewish state as democratic.

Yet Oren does respond to apartheid as noted above with the reference to Arabs in the Knesset and IDF, and as I critiqued with the comparison to racism not existing because of a black president and black military personnel. He continues with another red-herring asking “Has Israel put six million Palestinians in gas chambers?” Well no, but neither did South Africa, and South Africa is the real arbiter of what defines apartheid – it is their word after all, connected directly to their experience.

Several aspects of apartheid are to be noted here. One is that it is obviously non-democratic. Secondly it is part and parcel of imperial/colonial-settler movements and has been used successfully in some areas of the world, but was overcome in South Africa.

As part of the heritage of the British colonial system, the three main progeny of the empire – the U.S., Australia, and Canada – all successfully used a system of apartheid, of ethnic cleansing and genocide in order to establish their dominant British white culture. [1] The aborigines of Australia, the First Nations of Canada, and the indigenous natives of the U.S. all have been killed, pushed aside, placed on reservations, and continuing to this day are suffering from current events – racialized schooling, government control of finances, the slow legislative erosion of their access to resources in their home territories. South Africa was a part of this colonial heritage. (There, satisfied? I’m not singling out Israel.)

Apartheid was an official South African policy, copied in part from the success that Canada had in removing its native populations from the land and its resources.

“None other than the architect of Apartheid itself, racist Prime Minister, Dr. Hendrick Verwoerd…emphatically states as far back as 1961 that ‘The Jews took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived their for a thousand years. Israel like South Africa, is an Apartheid state.’ “ [2]

As for Israel,

It is instructive to note that in its conduct and methods of repression, Israel has come to resemble Apartheid South Africa at its zenith – even surpassing its brutality, house demolitions, removal of communities, targeted assassinations, massacres, imprisonment and torture of its opponents, and aggression against neighbouring states. [3]

To quote Netanyahu, as cited by Oren, “If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck….”

Fear of Apartheid

Questions relating to apartheid are truly not kosher, as of July 2011 the Knesset passed a Bill for the Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott. So while it is not ‘kosher’ in Israel, Israeli law is not international law, meaning that in the U.S. it is within the law to ask the question, as it is elsewhere in the world. The reason Oren objects to the question is because of the recognition of its impact:

Terrorism could not defeat Israel, only stain the Palestinians reputation and divert global attentions from settlements [remember these words]. But a policy designed to isolate, deligitimize, and sanction Israel could bring about its downfall.

Where conventional Arab armies and terrorists had failed to achieve their goal of destroying Israel, BDS aimed to succeed by devastating Israel’s economy and isolating its citizens internationally.

The truly frightening part for Israel is that it is a citizen’s initiative that has a proven track record. In other areas of the world – the U.S. and its sycophantic allied governments readily use BDS to weaken economies in attempts to change governments and impose their neoliberal corporate governance. South Africa however remains the penultimate example of the effectiveness of the BDS movement that counter-prevails against government oppression.

The recognition of apartheid defines the government as non-democratic, one of Israel’s oft repeated standard claims. A state that uses apartheid cannot be democratic at the same time. Ironically, the more Israel protests against BDS and the definition of apartheid, the more it raises questions and the more is revealed about Israel’s position vis a vis Palestinians.

Fear of peace

Another factor that seems to come into play is the militarized nature of the Israeli state, both in the manner in which it controls the Palestinians, but also in its corporate military economy. This ‘miracle’ economy is supported by billions of U.S. dollars, and is sought after by many nations around the world. The high tech instrumentation, the security technology, and the field tested armaments and crowd control techniques are sold to monarchs, dictators, and nominal democrats with equanimity.

Now review those points where I bracketed, ‘remember these words’. They all indicate the need for Israel and the U.S. to maintain the militarized nature of the economy and of the politics in order to keep their economic interests successful and thus to maintain power over as broad a spectrum of global activities as possible.

Settlements? War and terrorism are good diversions. A “modicum” (Oxford Eng.”: a small quantity …of truth] of stability? Certainly we would not want a lot of stability as that would not do well for the military industries, and it also helps in creating the fear factor within the citizens of the country.

The big idea however is that the U.S. is “ bound to the region both by the profits and threats it generates.” Profits – quite a revealing term. There are several for the empire.

Foremost is simply that, profits. Wars are good for the U.S. economy as its major contributor to GDP, the major component of its budgets are militarily related. A ring of chaos (an empire of chaos as per Pépé Escobar) serves the purpose of maintaining wars, as well as maintaining control of resources, and restraining and containing with the goal of destabilizing Russia. The penultimate goal as noted above by Oren, is oil and its relationship with the petrodollar. As long as the Saudis keep their agreement to sell oil in US$ many of their transgressions will be forgiven and hopefully forgotten.

Indeed, in this aspect, the Saudis are direct allies with the U.S. and Israel. While exporting militant jihadis that destabilize other countries after the U.S. has destroyed their governments and civil infrastructures (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria among many others), they are also buying billions of dollars of military equipment and maintaining the percolating discontents of the region against the empire.

Iran is a big part of Oren’s experience in Washington and plays a similar role. A hyped fear of annihilation (Oren recalls his U.S. schooling and the fear inducing nuclear drills when he had to duck and cover under his school desk, as if that would stop a nuclear explosion…!) from supposed Iranian nukes helps control domestic civilians while maintaining the militancy needed to support the economy and provide excuses to invade Gaza and Lebanon. [4]

The threats, unexplained by Oren, should be clear from the above. The threats are to the domestic economy of the U.S. A great deal of fear was created by the “new Pearl Harbor” of the 9/11 attacks (another item I will ‘scrupulously’ avoid detailing, other than to say the official version is a complete sham, especially to anyone with a basic knowledge of the laws of physics), again all in support of the military-corporate industries and their control of global resources and global economies. The terrorist threats have been mainly diverted and transferred through NATO ally Turkey to Europe, again to be perceived as an item of destabilizing a region in order to control it (economically, and politically, vis a vis trade with Russia).

Peace

Israel is a de facto unitary state, with recognized apartheid structures under a militarized economy and social structure. Peace would stop the creation of more settlements. Peace ultimately means the cessation of “negotiations” for the now impossible two state solution. Peace can only arrive by negating the ethnic cleansing and apartheid policies of the government. Peace, according to UN Resolution 194, would mean that Palestinian refugees could return home. BDS is a peaceful means to that end.

Oren’s work, Ally, has met expectations of the Israeli perspective, but also includes some insights that perhaps he would not have wanted to emphasize or even reveal. That perspective is marred by conjecture and misleading arguments that do not stand up to scrutiny. The truth that neither Israel nor the U.S. are really the partners seeking peace and democracy peeks from between the fine sounding rhetoric of these two allies.

Notes:

[1] As a side issue, Oren references Churchill many times in relationship to Netanyahu. This inadvertently tells more truth than perhaps was intended. Churchill may have been the right man for the right time – being WW II – but he was also a racist, supported the British Boer war (a race war if there ever was one), and supported aerial bombing of poison gases in Iraq against the “brown savages” in the 1920s.

[2] cited in Why Israel? The Anatomy of Zionist Apartheid – A South African Perspective. Suraya Dadoo and Firoz Osman. Media Review Network, Melville, South Africa 2013.

[3] Ibid, p. xxii. Also highly instructive is another South African oriented production, the video documentary , Roadmap to Apartheid, (2012). See review [here]. See also Utopia, (2013) John Pilger’s documentary of Australia’s aboriginal genocide and apartheid.

[4] But note their reticence after Russia stepped in to assist their long time ally Syria. It makes one wonder what Putin said to Netanyahu on his visit to Moscow. Israel has been strangely silent on its relationship with ISIS and al-Qaeda in Syria (although providing medical support to their fighters) and has not said anything that I can note concerning Russia’s interventions against the terrorists.

Posted in English
Comments Off on My Journey Across the American-Israeli Divide

The ‘Credibility’ Illusion. Iraq, Syria, Ukraine: “Sticking with the Lie”

April 15th, 2016 by Robert Parry

What surprised me most about the Iraq War wasn’t how wrong the expectation of happy Iraqis showering American troops with flowers was or even how badly the war would turn out – all that was predictable and indeed was predicted. But what I didn’t expect was that the U.S. government would ever admit that there were no WMD stockpiles.

I assumed that the U.S. government would do what it usually does: continue the lie to protect its “credibility.” Because that is what “credibility” has become, powerful institutions and people maintaining the aura of being right even when they’re completely wrong.

There is even a national security argument to be made: If the U.S. government must justify its actions to the American people and the world with propaganda themes, it can’t simply admit that previous ones were lies because then it would lose all “credibility.” The next time, the public might not be as open to the propaganda. The people might catch on.

And that would present a problem to the U.S. government, which feels it needs the approval or at least the confused acquiescence of the American people and to a lesser extent the world before charging off to war or starting some expensive confrontation with a foreign power.

Image: President George W. Bush announcing the start of his invasion of Iraq on March 19, 2003.

So, in a sick kind of way, it makes more sense to stick with the lie and rely on a corrupted mainstream media to hold the line. Anyone who dares challenge the falsehoods then can be discredited or marginalized.

That’s why I was surprised when the U.S. government admitted that there were no WMD stockpiles in Iraq and no active nuclear-weapons program, either. I was expecting that President George W. Bush’s team would assemble some buckets of chemicals found at Baghdad swimming pools – pile them up in front of a credulous media – and announce, “we got here just in time!”

After all, the U.S. government rarely corrects its misstatements and outright lies, no matter how significant they may be. For instance, there’s never been a formal admission that the Gulf of Tonkin claims, which launched the Vietnam War, were false.

On a smaller scale, I encountered something similar when I was covering the U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983. The Reagan administration massively exaggerated the discovery of some useless World War I era rifles in a musty-smelling warehouse to claim that the little Caribbean island was about to be transformed into the hub of terrorism for the Western Hemisphere.

As absurd as the claim was, it worked well enough amid a well-staged propaganda campaign complete with American students kissing the tarmac when they returned to the United States and members of Congress waving around some Grenada government contracts — in Russian.

Dig in the Heels

We are now seeing similar dig-in-the-heels strategies regarding Syria and Ukraine. Though I’m told that U.S. intelligence knows that the Obama administration’s propaganda is no longer operative on the 2013 sarin gas attack outside Damascus and the 2014 shoot-down of the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in eastern Ukraine, the storylines won’t be retracted or corrected.

Image: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. (Photo credit: Fabio Rodrigues Pozzebom / ABr)

To do so – to say that President Bashar al-Assad’s forces weren’t responsible for the sarin attack and that the Russians weren’t behind the MH-17 catastrophe – would destroy the propaganda narratives that have been useful in justifying the shipment of arms to Syrian rebels and the launching of a new Cold War against Moscow.

If the American people and the world public were informed that they had been misled on such sensitive topics – and that the real guilty parties might include people getting American support – that could devastate U.S. government “credibility” and disrupt future plans.

Therefore, mounting evidence that Assad didn’t cross President Obama’s “red line” against using chemical weapons on Aug. 21, 2013, must be brushed aside or forgotten.

In a classic show of cognitive dissonance, The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg recently reported that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Obama that U.S. intelligence had no “slam dunk” evidence of Assad’s guilt. But Goldberg then continued his long article on Obama’s foreign policy as if Clapper’s warning never happened and as if Assad were indeed guilty.

Since then, major American columnists writing about Goldberg’s article have simply ignored the Clapper revelation, which tended to confirm earlier reporting at some independent Web sites, including Consortiumnews.com, and by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, who traced the sarin to a likely operation by Islamic radicals aided by Turkish intelligence. But those Assad-didn’t-do-it reports were almost universally ignored, except for the occasional ridicule.

The problem for the columnists – and for the rest of Official Washington’s insider community – was that Everyone Who Mattered had already declared as flat fact that Assad crossed Obama’s “red line” with the sarin attack. So what would happen to their “credibility” if they admitted that they were wrong again, since many also had been famously wrong about Iraq’s WMD?

Plus, who could force these Important People to face up to their own misfeasance and malfeasance? Does anyone expect that Secretary of State John Kerry, who sought war against Syria in retaliation for the sarin attack, will retract what he claimed repeatedly that “we know” about Assad’s guilt? What would that do to Kerry’s “credibility”?

Kerry also was on the front lines pointing the finger of blame at Russia for the MH-17 shoot-down on July 17, 2014. He rushed off to the Sunday TV shows just three days after the tragedy over eastern Ukraine that killed 298 people and made the case that Moscow and the ethnic Russian rebels were to blame.

A source who had been briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts in that same time frame was telling me that it was already clear to them that an element of the Ukrainian military was responsible. But hanging the slaughter of all those innocents around Russian President Vladimir Putin’s neck was just too tempting – and served U.S. propaganda needs to get Europe to join in economic sanctions against Russia and to let the U.S. government rev up a new and costly Cold War.

Going Dutch

But those U.S. propaganda desires have put the Dutch in a difficult spot, since they are leading the investigation into the crash which departed from Amsterdam and carried many Dutch citizens en route to Kuala Lumpur. Part of the Dutch problem is that Dutch intelligence has confirmed that the only Buk or other anti-aircraft missiles in eastern Ukraine capable of hitting a commercial airliner at 33,000 feet belonged to the Ukrainian military.

Image: Quinn Schansman, a dual U.S.-Dutch citizen killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on July 17, 2014. (Photo from Facebook)

Recently, the Obama administration also had to decide how to respond to a letter from Thomas Schansman, the father of the only U.S. citizen killed in the crash, Quinn Schansman. In a letter dated Jan. 5, 2016, Schansman asked Secretary Kerry to release the radar and other evidence that he claimed to have in summer 2014 that supposedly showed where the missile was fired, a basic fact that the Dutch investigation has yet to nail down.

One of the many anomalies of the MH-17 case was Kerry’s assertion within three days of the crash that the U.S. government had precise information about the launch but then has left Dutch investigators struggling to figure out that detail for nearly two years.

On July 20, 2014, Kerry appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and declared,

“we picked up the imagery of this launch. We know the trajectory. We know where it came from. We know the timing. And it was exactly at the time that this aircraft disappeared from the radar.”

At a news conference on Aug. 12, 2014, Kerry made similar claims:

“We saw the take-off. We saw the trajectory. We saw the hit. We saw this airplane disappear from the radar screens. So there is really no mystery about where it came from and where these weapons have come from.”

Image: U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Aug. 30, 2013, claims to have proof that the Syrian government was responsible for a chemical weapons attack on Aug. 21, but that evidence failed to materialize or was later discredited. [State Department photo]

As the months wore on – passing the first anniversary of the crash and then after last October’s inconclusive report by the Dutch Safety Board – Thomas Schansman finally reached out to Kerry directly with his Jan. 5 letter. More weeks and months passed before Schansman received Kerry’s reply on March 24, although the letter was curiously dated March 7.

The letter offered no new information as Kerry stuck to the old story. Recently, I was told that a possible explanation for the delay in the letter’s delivery was that a discussion was underway inside the Obama administration about whether to finally come clean about MH-17 even if that would clear Russia and the ethnic Russian rebels and shift the blame onto a rogue or poorly disciplined unit of the Ukrainian military.

But the decision was made to stand pat, the source said, explaining that otherwise “the narrative would be reversed,” throwing the U.S.-backed Ukrainian government on the defensive and negating some of the propaganda advantages gained against Russia.

Plus, if the U.S. government admitted that it had played such a cynical propaganda game, which also smacks of obstruction of justice by giving the actual culprits nearly two years to make their escape and cover their tracks, there would be a loss of “credibility” in Washington.

Apparently, it made more geopolitical sense to keep the heat on Russia and then to lean on the Dutch authorities to fit their investigative findings around the needs of the NATO alliance. That is, after all, how the U.S. government usually operates. It’s also why I was so surprised that the truth finally was told about Iraq not possessing the WMD.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon andbarnesandnoble.com).

Posted in English
Comments Off on The ‘Credibility’ Illusion. Iraq, Syria, Ukraine: “Sticking with the Lie”

Interview

Notes

The Unanswered Questions

1. What was Tsarnaev’s relationship with the FBI/CIA?

2. Why was Tsarnaev, a potential terrorist, given such freedom of movement?

3. Why apply SAMs?

Why harass Tsarnaev associates?

4. Were any of Tsarnaev’s friends working for the Feds?

5. What happened on April 17 at the courthouse?

6. Why was surveillance footage of the policeman’s shooting edited?

7. Why did the carjacking victim give such conflicting stories?

8. Why was the gas station surveillance footage edited?

9. What color was the backpack?

10. Why pin the Waltham murders on Tamerlan?

11. Did the brothers have help?

12. The “After Action Report” — Why did it report so little?

13 The Ultimate Mystery

I The Battle of the Paracel Islands, 1974

II The Johnson South Reef Skirmish, 1988

Conclusion

Brazil in the crosshairs

But what — or who — is really behind the soft coup in Brazil?

Bringing BRICS to heel

Global Research Publishers

Books Available From Clarity Press

Global Research E-Books

Global Research Authors