© AP Photo/ Khalid al-MousilTurkey Drags NATO into Quagmire as Iraq Threatens Military Retaliation

By Sputnik, January 02 2016

Iraq’s readiness to take military action against Turkey if Ankara fails to withdraw its troops from Iraqi territory has increased the possibility of NATO involvement on the side of Turkey and its territorial ambitions, reported the German press on Thursday.

Dorit-RabinyanIsrael Bans Novel Featuring Palestinian-Jewish Romance, Threatens ‘Jewish Identity’

By Philip Weiss, January 02 2016

Israel takes another step down a very dark path. Here is the news from Haaretz today: Israel Bans Novel on Arab-Jewish Romance From Schools for ‘Threatening Jewish Identity’ Israel’s Education Ministry has disqualified a novel that describes a love story…

syria-bombing-510x283Syria is the Middle East’s Stalingrad

By Andre Vltchek, January 02 2016

Day and night, for years, an overwhelming force has been battering this quiet nation, one of the cradles of human civilization. Hundreds of thousands have died, and millions have been forced to flee abroad or have been internally displaced.

syrianarmy2-510x309Video: Strategic Advance of SAA Forces against ISIS Rebels in Southern Syria, Supported by Russian Air Strikes

By South Front, December 31 2015

In  Dara’a province, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and the National Defense Forces (NDF) with the Russian Air Forces’ support are advancing in the town of Sheikh Miskeen clashing with the Free Syrian Army’s “Southern Front Brigades”.

netanyahuincongressIsrael and Its Lobby Lose the Iran Deal All over Again, in News of Damning Wiretaps

By James North and Philip Weiss, January 01 2016

The Wall Street Journal scoop [tells us] that the Obama administration spied on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu during the Iran Deal negotiations so as to counter his efforts to sink it. The wiretaps reveal that Israeli officials were up to their necks in the US political process; they “coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts.”

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Middle East Update. Syria, Iraq, Israel and Turkey.

The Health Impacts of Fluoridated Water. “Shaky Science”

January 2nd, 2016 by Washington's Blog

One of our pet peeves is when erroneous groupthink persists even in the face of contradictory evidence.

As shown below, water fluoridation is based on very shaky science.  And yet – despite the science – the big dental associations in the U.S. and other countries continue to push it as safe and effective.

The Guardian reported last week:

Health experts are calling for a moratorium on water fluoridation, claiming that the benefits of such schemes, as opposed to those of topical fluoride (directly applied to the teeth), are unproved.

***

Stephen Peckham, director and professor of health policy at Kent University’s centre for health service studies, said: “Water fluoridation was implemented before statistics had been compiled on its safety or effectiveness. It was the only cannon shot they had in their armoury. It gets rolled out, becomes – in England – policy and then you look for evidence to support it.

“The fat debate [whereby fat used to be the big enemy in food before that was revised] is an example of evidence getting built up to support a theory. It’s a dental health policy that’s got up a head of steam and people have been reluctant to see it criticised.

You can’t really confidently say that water fluoridation is either safe or effective.

Newsweek reported last June:

You might think, then, that fluoridated water’s efficacy as a cavity preventer would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But new research suggests that assumption is dramatically misguided; while using fluoridated toothpaste has been proven to be good for oral health, consuming fluoridated water may have no positive impact.

The Cochrane Collaboration, a group of doctors and researchers known for their comprehensive reviews—which are widely regarded as the gold standard of scientific rigor in assessing effectiveness of public health policies—recently set out to find out if fluoridation reduces cavities. They reviewed every study done on fluoridation that they could find, and then winnowed down the collection to only the most comprehensive, well-designed and reliable papers. Then they analyzed these studies’ results, and published their conclusion in a review earlier this month.

The review identified only three studies since 1975—of sufficient quality to be included—that addressed the effectiveness of fluoridation on tooth decay in the population at large. These papers determined that fluoridation does not reduce cavities to a statistically significant degree in permanent teeth, says study co-author Anne-Marie Glenny, a health science researcher at Manchester University in the United Kingdom. The authors found only seven other studies worthy of inclusion dating prior to 1975.

The authors also found only two studies since 1975 that looked at the effectiveness of reducing cavities in baby teeth, and found fluoridation to have no statistically significant impact here, either.

The scientists also found “insufficient evidence” that fluoridation reduces tooth decay in adults (children excluded).

“From the review, we’re unable to determine whether water fluoridation has an impact on caries levels in adults,” Glenny says. (“Tooth decay,” “cavities” and “caries” all mean the same thing: breakdown of enamel by mouth-dwelling microbes.)

“Frankly, this is pretty shocking,” says Thomas Zoeller, a scientist at UMass-Amherst uninvolved in the work. “This study does not support the use of fluoride in drinking water.” Trevor Sheldon concurred. Sheldon is the dean of the Hull York Medical School in the United Kingdom who led the advisory board that conducted systematic review of water fluoridation in 2000, that came to similar conclusions as the Cochrane review. The lack of good evidence of effectiveness has shocked him. “I had assumed because of everything I’d heard that water fluoridation reduces cavities but I was completely amazed by the lack of evidence,” he says. “My prior view was completely reversed.”

“There’s really hardly any evidence” the practice works, Sheldon adds. “And if anything there may be some evidence the other way.” One 2001 study covered in the Cochrane review of two neighboring British Columbia communities found that when fluoridation was stopped in one city, cavity prevalence actually went down slightly amongst schoolchildren, while cavity rates in the fluoridated community remained stable.

Overall the review suggests that stopping fluoridation would be unlikely to increase the risk of tooth decay, says Kathleen Thiessen, a senior scientist at the Oak Ridge Center for Risk Analysis, which does human health risk assessments of environmental contaminants.

“The sad story is that very little has been done in recent years to ensure that fluoridation is still needed [or] to ensure that adverse effects do not happen,” says Dr. Philippe Grandjean, an environmental health researcher and physician at Harvard University.

The scientists also couldn’t find enough evidence to support the oft-repeated notion that fluoridation reduces dental health disparities among different socioeconomic groups, which the CDC and others use as a rationale for fluoridating water.

“The fact that there is insufficient information to determine whether fluoridation reduces social inequalities in dental health is troublesome given that this is often cited as a reason for fluoridating water,” say Christine Till and Ashley Malin, researchers at Toronto’s York University.

Studies that attest to the effectiveness of fluoridation were generally done before the widespread usage of fluoride-containing dental products like rinses and toothpastes in the 1970s and later, according to the recent Cochrane study. So while it may have once made sense to add fluoride to water, it no longer appears to be necessary or useful, Thiessen says.

It has also become clear in the last 15 years that fluoride primarily acts topically, according to the CDC. It reacts with the surface of the tooth enamel, making it more resistant to acids excreted by bacteria. Thus, there’s no good reason to swallow fluoride and subject every tissue of your body to it, Thiessen says.

Another 2009 review by the Cochrane group clearly shows that fluoride toothpaste prevents cavities, serving as a useful counterpoint to fluoridation’s uncertain benefits.

***

“I couldn’t believe the low quality of the research” on fluoridation, Sheldon says.

***

Cavity rates have declined by similar amounts in countries with and without fluoridation.

***

Sheldon says that if fluoridation were to be submitted anew for approval today, “nobody would even think about it” due to the shoddy evidence of effectiveness and obvious downside of fluorosis.

***

The CDC and others “are somehow suspending disbelief,” Sheldon says. They are “all in the mindset that this is a really good thing, and just not accepting that they might be wrong.” Sheldon and others suggest pro-fluoridation beliefs are entrenched and will not easily change, despite the poor data quality and lack of evidence from the past 40 years.

Indeed, an overwhelming number of scientific studies conclude that cavity levels are falling worldwide … even in countries which don’t fluoridate water.

World Health Organization Data (2004) – 
Tooth Decay Trends (12 year olds) in Fluoridated vs. Unfluoridated Countries: 

who dmft An Overwhelming Number of Scientific Studies Conclude That Cavity Levels are Falling Worldwide ... Even In Countries Which Dont Fluoridate Water

And the scientific literature shows that – when fluoridation of water supplies is stopped – cavities do not increase (but may in some cases actually decrease). See thisthisthisthisthis and this.

A couple of weeks ago, the British Medical Journal reported that Americans lose a lot more of their teeththan the Brits … even though the U.S. fluoridates a lot more of its water than the UK.

Fluoridating may water also cause reduction in IQ, depression and a variety of other illnesses.

The Guardian notes:

Critics cite studies claiming to have identified a number of possible negative associations of fluoridation, including bone cancer in boysbladder cancerhypothyroidismhip fractures and lower IQ in children.

Newsweek reports:

A growing number of studies have suggested … that the chemical may present a number of health risks, for example interfering with the endocrine system and increasing the risk of impaired brain function; two studies in the last few months, for example, have linked fluoridation to ADHD and underactive thyroid.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Health Impacts of Fluoridated Water. “Shaky Science”

Iraq’s readiness to take military action against Turkey if Ankara fails to withdraw its troops from Iraqi territory has increased the possibility of NATO involvement on the side of Turkey and its territorial ambitions, reported the German press on Thursday.

Even though Iraq is aiming for a diplomatic solution to its dispute with Turkey, its government hasn’t ruled out using military force in order to remove Turkish troops from Iraqi territory, thus raising the possibility of NATO involvement, German Economic News (DWN) reported on Thursday.

 Iraqi soldiers advance their position in northern Ramadi, 70 miles (115 kilometers) west of Baghdad, Iraq, Monday, Dec. 21, 2015

“If it comes to war, NATO must be on the side of Turkey in Iraq,” the newspaper pointed out.

‘Iraq doesn’t want any Turkish troops in its country, and threatens war against a NATO country,’ reported DWN.The Federal Republic of Germany has been a NATO member since 1955. In December the German government announced that its forces were joining the US-led anti-Daesh (ISIS/ISIL) coalition in a non-combat, support role. On Wednesday, Iraq’s Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari said that although Iraq wants to use diplomatic means to resolve the conflict, it does not exclude the use of force if “fighting is imposed on us.” “We will consider it (the use of military force) to protect our sovereignty, people and resources,” said al-Jaafari.

Tanks of the Turkish army at the Turkey-Iraq border . (File)
Tanks of the Turkish army at the Turkey-Iraq border . (File)

 

In early December, the Turkish government sent a battalion of 25 tanks and about 150 troops into northern Iraq without the permission of the Iraqi government. Ankara said its forces were there with the assent of the Iraqi government, and were sent in response to security concerns in northern Iraq, where its forces help to train Iraqi militia battling Daesh in northern Iraq. The Iraqi government in Baghdad called the incursion a violation of Iraqi sovereignty, and demanded the troops withdraw in 48 hours.

 

At first Turkey refused to withdraw troops from the Bashiqa military base, which is close to Mosul in northern Iraq, but later agreed to withdraw some of the forces after Iraq complained to the UN Security Council. On Wednesday the Iraqi government again complained, that Turkey has so far failed to honour the agreement to withdraw all its troops from Iraqi territory.Turkey has been a NATO member since 1952, and according to the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty, the principle of collective defence commits its members to defend each other in the event of an armed attack against another member. However, Article 5 of the Treaty makes no reference to the alliance’s responsibilities to intervene in the case of an act of aggression by a NATO country.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Turkey Drags NATO into Quagmire as Iraq Threatens Military Retaliation

Venezuela Passes Law Banning GMOs, by Popular Demand

January 2nd, 2016 by William Camacaro

The National Assembly of Venezuela, in its final session before a neoliberal dominated opposition takes the helm of legislative power on January 5, passed one of the most progressive seed laws in the world on December 23, 2015; it was promptly signed into law by President Nicolas Maduro. On December 29, during his television show, “In Contact with Maduro, number 52,” Maduro said that the new seed law provides the conditions to produce food “under an agro-ecological model that respects the pacha mama (mother earth) and the right of our children to grow up healthy, eating healthy.” The law is a victory for the international movements for agroecology and food sovereignty because it bans transgenic (GMO) seed while protecting local seed from privatization. The law is also a product of direct participatory democracy –the people as legislator– in Venezuela, because it was hammered out through a deliberative partnership between members of the country’s National Assembly and a broad-based grassroots coalition of eco-socialist, peasant, and agroecological oriented organizations and institutions. This essay provides an overview of the phenomenon of people as legislator, a summary of the new Seed Law, and an appendix with an unofficial translation of some of the articles of the law.

The People as Legislator of Seed Policy

The Legal Basis

The Seed Law is a glowing example of the legal personality of popular power (poder popular) at work in Venezuela, the people as legislator. As Article 5 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela indicates, “Sovereignty resides intransferable in the people, who exercise it directly as provided for in this Constitution and in the law, and indirectly, through suffrage . . . .” An example of the direct legislative powers of citizens is found in Article 204, no. 7 of the Constitution which specifically names citizens as potential legislators, should they organize a petition of at least one percent of the registered voters (see also Article 205). There are also numerous references to the legislative power of communal structures in the organic Laws of Popular Power (Poder Popular) passed in 2009 and 2010.

Farmer, Cooperativa Aracal in the State of Yaracuy.
Credit: Fred Mills

Venezuela’s seed policy had been based on an earlier 2002 Seed Law that was passed in a highly polarized political environment, just months after a short-lived coup against then President Hugo Chavez and just weeks prior to an opposition-led strike and sabotage of the oil industry. That law was superseded in April of 2004, when after halting a project to plant Monsanto’s transgenic soybeans on 500,000 acres of land, then President Hugo Chavez declared, “The people of the United States, of Latin America, and the world, need to follow the example of Venezuela free of transgenics.” This declaration constituted a virtual ban of transgenics. It was also consistent with the government’s emphasis on endogenous development. Endogenous development, asChristina Schiavoni and William Camacaro describe it, means development from within:

[Endogenous development] implies first looking inside, not outside, to meet the country’s needs, building upon Venezuela’s own unique assets. This means valuing the agricultural knowledge and experience of women, Indigenous, Afro-descendants, and other typically marginalized campesino (peasant farming) populations as fundamental to Venezuela’s food sovereignty. This also means preserving Venezuela’s native seeds, traditional farming methods, and culinary practices.

Such endogenous development received further support when in June 2012, Chavez made the Country Plan (2013 – 2019) his presidential campaign platform. The Plan, which is now the law of the land, includes among its five major objectives, “the construction of an eco-socialist economic model of production based on a harmonic relationship between humans and nature that guarantees the rational and optimal use of natural resources, respecting the processes and cycles of nature.” The Plan also prioritizes the expansion of agricultural production, but only in a way that advances the goal of food sovereignty (1.4) and accelerates democratic access to the necessary resources for sustainable agricultural production (1.4.2).

Chronology of the People as Legislator of Seed Policy

The blog of Eco-Socialist Space of Popular Power (CDR-SUR) provides a detailed chronology of the popular struggle for input and impact on the new Seed Law. In “The Process of the Collective Construction of the New Seed Law in Venezuela,” CDR-SUR indicates that the people as legislator of seed policy first emerged in response to a notice by the legislative branch of government in mid-2012 that the National Assembly would be considering a substantial revision of the 2002 Seed Law. Since a transgenic and big agribusiness lobby had been at work trying to influence seed policy, it was also time for eco-socialists and other ecological movements to weigh in on the issue.

In response to the Assembly’s notice, several hundred social and ecological organizations organized the “International Meeting of Guardians of Seeds” in Monte Carmelo (October 26 – 29, 2012), in the State of Lara, in order to draft measures for consideration by the National Assembly that would unequivocally ban transgenic seed and protect Indigenous, Afro-descendant and peasant seed from privatization. More than 1000 persons, 116 organizations, and 162 institutions participated in the grassroots (popular) deliberations (CDR-SUR).

While the idea of the people as legislator is grounded in the Constitution and the organic laws of popular power, it took some public pressure on the National Assembly and government ministries (called Ministries of Popular Power!) for this legislative voice to be heard and taken into account. In March of 2013, while the relevant legislative committees and government ministries were holding hearings on the Seed Law Project, the “Venezuela Free of Transgenics Campaign” (VFTC) lobbied unsuccessfully for inclusion in the initial phase of debate. The ecological movement, undeterred, organized the Venezuela Free of Transgenics Open Seminar at the Bolivarian University of Venezuela in March of 2013 which sponsored periodic forums on the debate over seed policy.

On May 25, 2013, the VFTC collected signatures at a national mobilization held in the Plaza de Los Museos in Caracas, to petition the National Assembly to include the coalition’s voice as a legislative partner in the Seed Law deliberations (CDR-SUR). The next day, according to CDR-SUR, Alfredo Ureña, a deputy of the National Assembly and president of the Permanent Subcommission on Agro-Food Development, formulated an action plan to ensure that the Seed Law would be anti-transgenic.

In June of 2013, the VFTC stepped up its organizing and education efforts. These efforts included, as part of the Fourth Venezuelan Congress on Biological Diversity (June 28), a workshop on the “collective construction of a Seed Law proposal” (CDR-SUR). This collective effort produced documents directly relevant to the legislative deliberations on the Seed Law.

On October 21, 2013, as documented by William Camacaro and Frederick B. Mills in Venezuela and the Battle against Transgenic Seeds (December 6, 2013), the VFTC mobilized in front of the National Assembly to prevent the advance of a Seed Law proposal because it contained stealth provisions that would have opened the door to transgenic seed and possibly allow the privatization of locally shared “free” seeds. This was a critical turning point in the eco-socialist struggle to influence the nation’s seed policy. As CDR-SUR points out, on October 22, in a meeting between the VFTC and legislators involved in drafting the Seed Law, it was agreed that there would be popular participation in the construction of the Seed Law, referred to as the Popular Constituent Debate on the New Seed Law.

According to CDR-SUR, “The Popular Constituent Debate convened on the 28 and 29 of October in Monte Carmelo, Sanare in the State of Lara on the occasion of the Day of Peasant Seed (Semilla Campesina).” It was here that a consensus was hammered out by a large variety of agroecological organizations on the basic objectives of the Seed Law.

As a follow up to this conference in Monte Carmelo, “the second round of discussion [by 135 peasant collectives and educators] took place in the City of Naguanagua in the State of Carabobo from November 1 to 3, 2013” (CDR-SUR). The focus of this round was in large part to determine the procedures of popular debate to ensure that the final product was indeed a result of collective deliberation in concert with key legislators of the National Assembly. These procedures were to ensure the practice of inclusion, public dissemination of information, and the constitutionally grounded praxis of the people as legislator.

The third round of discussion was held at the Latin American Institute of Agroecology Paulo Freire (IALA) in Barinas state on November 22, 2013. During this round the Popular Constituent Debate constructed a proposed preamble, objectives, and structure for the proposed law. It was agreed that the Popular Constituent Debate would meet two more times in the states of Aragua and Merida.

After the last round of Popular Constituent Debate on the New Seed Law, the members of the Popular Movement for the New Seed Law and the National Assembly set up a work group to construct the consensus draft of the law and it is this version that entered into the first of the two required discussions by the National Assembly. On October 14, 2014 the proposed Seed Law was approved by the first discussion, one of two discussions normally required prior to the passage of a proposed bill.

During 2015, workshops were set up to review the proposed seed law before the final discussion; these workshops included members of the National Assembly, the Venezuela Free of Transgenics Campaign, and several government ministries. Through the workshops, several additional mechanisms were built into the law. These included a means for popular control over seeds by means of the recognition of the Popular Council for the Storage and Protection of Local, Peasant, Indigenous, and Afro-descendant Seed, as well as a recognition of the government’s role in licensing free seed and thereby protecting it from patents or other forms of privatization.

In “Venezuela to Consider Ban on Transgenic Seed” (June 8, 2015), Camacaro and Mills discuss the consensus reached by the collective efforts of the agroecological movement with regard to seed policy. In short, the popular version of the Seed Law proposal (June 2015) was constructed over a two year period of collective deliberation by a broad coalition of agroecological oriented organizations and movements. On December 26, 2015, The Popular Movement for the New Seed Law issued a celebratory statement declaring:

This 22 of December, with the approval of the new Seed Law by the National Assembly, we close the legislative cycle of popular constituent debate and collective deliberation that we initiated more than two years ago. The product of our struggle is a law that has no precedent anywhere in the world in terms of both its emancipatory content and the way it has been made possible by the protagonistic participation of the People as Legislator.

The Seed Law was also endorsed, “after ample discussion,” by the Presidential Council of Communes. A statement issued by the Council on June 3 reads:

“From the diverse voices of the Presidential Council of Popular Government of the Communes, the comuneros (members of communes) of the country solicit the prompt approval, in the second discussion [by the National Assembly], of the Seed Law . . . The Seed Law, constructed collectively from the grassroots, is anti-transgenic and makes us advance significantly towards the recovery and consolidation of local, peasant, Indigenous and Afro-descendant seeds. Moreover we are speaking about a proposed Seed Law, profoundly anti-imperialist and ecosocialist, that incarnates the legacy of the Leader of the Bolivarian Revolution, Hugo Chavez, at a moment in which the transnationals of agribusiness aim at privatizing seed and life.”The people as legislator, then, consisting of both the nationwide agroecological movements as well as the highest level of communal representation, made full use of their constitutionally grounded constituent power to partner with the liberal democratic state to forge the nation’s seed policy.

Summary of the Seed Law

The new Seed Law is inspired by the eco-socialist movement in Venezuela and the worldwide peasant movement La Via Campesinaand is informed by the Indigenous philosophy of vivir bien (living well). As President of Bolivia, Evo Morales Ayma explains:

Vivir Bien well is to live in equality and justice. It is where there is no exploited and no exploiters, where there are no excluded and no persons who exclude others, where there are no marginalized persons and no persons who marginalize others. Vivir Bien is to live in community, in collectivity, in reciprocity, in solidarity, and, most important, in complementarity.  (note 2)

The Seed Law contributes to vivir bien and advances eco-socialist principles by promoting small- and medium-scale farming using agroecological methods rather than monoculture that depends heavily on environmentally harmful chemical interventions. Moreover, it prioritizes the collective interest in the farming community’s control of the means of production, distribution and consumption of food. This law bans transgenic seeds and thereby avoids the political capture of seed policy by the corporate interests of transnational big agriculture while promoting and protecting the heirloom seeds and farming methods of Venezuela’s Indigenous, peasant, and Afro-descendant communities. Traditional seeds (semillas campesinas) will be immune to patents and privatization and come under the control of the communities that share them. The seed is considered a living thing, and as such is not only an object at hand for use in agriculture, but a subject that is entitled to certain rights and protections. These rights, combined with the philosophy of vivir bien and eco-socialist principles, form the ethical and legal basis for the development of food sovereignty and food security and of resistance to transnational corporate capture of the nation’s agricultural policy.

The law is consistent with Article 127 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela: “The genome of living things cannot be patented, and the law that refers to bio-ethical principles regulates the matter.” It is also consistent with the Country Plan 2013 -2019 that declares one of the “great historic objectives” to “construct an eco-socialist economic model of production, based on the harmonious relation between man and nature, that guarantees the use and rational and optimal utilization of vital natural resources.” (p. 19-20).

In closing, with the passage of the Seed Law, history is being made in Venezuela. Not only is the law extraordinary in and of itself, both for its content and the for the highly participatory way in which it was developed, but the fact that it was passed at this very moment, in the face of adverse circumstances both globally and nationally, is all the more extraordinary. Globally, national seed legislation is increasingly being co-opted by corporate agribusiness interests, with many governments turning a blind eye, or worse, actively colluding in the process, as has been powerfully documented by GRAIN and La Via Campesina. Nationally, Venezuela’s food system has been under attack by, among other things, an “economic war” being waged by some elements of the opposition, resulting in food shortages that played a definitive role in influencing the recent elections. The economic war has shown that, despite important advancements made toward food sovereignty, i.e., toward greater national and local popular control over the food system, since the inception of Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution, much work remains to be done to achieve a food system that is truly equitable, sustainable, and under the firm control of the people, in partnership with the government. The people, however, are clearly determined, and they are not going to sit back passively and wait for this to happen, as we have seen with the major popular organizing and mobilizing efforts that ultimately led to the successful passage of the Seed Law.

The passage of the Seed Law thus marks a major step forward for food sovereignty in Venezuela, as well as a victory for the global food sovereignty movement, and a warning sign to corporate agribusiness. However, as they say in Venezuela, “la lucha sigue” – the struggle continues – and indeed the passage of the Seed Law is one step, albeit an important step, in a much longer process. As the popular movements who worked on the Law’s passage are already emphasizing, now is the time to disseminate it, defend it against likely backlash, and push forward its full implementation. While the Venezuelan people will remain the protagonists in this process, they are calling for international solidarity to defend what might arguably be the world’s most revolutionary seed law.

APPENDIX: Highlights of Several Articles of the Seed Law (unofficial translations)

Article 1 of the law summarizes its main features:

The present Law has as its objective to preserve, protect, and guarantee the production, propagation, conservation, and free circulation and use of seed, as well as the promotion, research, distribution, and commercialization of the same, based on a socialist agroecological vision, with the aim of consolidating our food security and sovereignty, prohibiting the release, the use, the propagation, and the entrance into the country and the national production of transgenic seeds as well as the patents and right of the breeder over the seed, in a manner that is sovereign, democratic, participatory, co-responsible and in solidarity, making special emphasis on the valorization of the Indigenous, afro-descendent, peasant and local seed, that benefits biodiversity and helps to preserve life on the planet in conformity with what is established in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

Article 2 lays out the goals of the law:

1. Promote the transition from conventional systems of production based on monoculture and the use of agrochemicals with agro-industrial and/or corporate seed for conventional use, to an agroecological system and the preservation of the environment in the short, medium and long term, based on agro-biodiversity.

2. Promote the production of seeds that are necessary to guarantee national production, with the goal of avoiding importation and achieving national sovereignty.

3. Promote the transition to communal and eco-socialist agriculture, in order to protect agro-biodiversity by means of the production of local, peasant, Indigenous, and Afro-descendant seed.

4. Revalorize and re-legitimize the local, traditional, and ancestral knowledge wisdom, beliefs and practices of the peasant, Indigenous, Afro-descendant, and other communities.

5. Prohibit the privatization of seed.

6. Orient the organization and planning of public policy in function of the different scales of production, distinguishing the policies intended for family agriculture or polyculture in small-scale production from the policies intended for big producers.

Article 3. Seed is recognized as a living thing and a constituent part of Mother Earth and for this reason it is considered an object as well as the subject of right and the application of norms pertaining to the preservation of life on the Planet and the conservation of biological diversity.

Article 4. The local peasant, Indigenous, and Afro-descendant seed is declared a common good of public, cultural as well as natural material and immaterial interest of the peoples; this seed is considered a contribution of our communities to the improvement of vegetable varieties and their propagation and preservation for a sustainable form of agriculture that constitutes the basis of our food and our culture.

Article 5. The production, importation, commercialization, distribution, release, use, propagation and entrance into the country of transgenic seed is prohibited. The National System of Seeds will develop and guarantee the technical, organizational, and institutional capacity to prevent, identify, detect, correct, return, and to sanction the violations of this prohibition.

One of the principle values of the law, expressed in Article 8, is that it “promotes, in a spirit of solidarity, the free exchange of seed and opposes the conversion of seed into intellectual or patented property or any other form of privatization.”

With regard to popular power (grassroots democracy), Article 9 provides that a Popular Council will be responsible for the storage, protection and regulation of Indigenous, Afro-descendant and peasant seed “with an emphasis on the exchange and local distribution of seed to guarantee our food sovereignty and the construction of an eco-socialist model of economic production.

Article 11 of the law also creates a National Seed Commission constituted by officials from several ministries related to agriculture, as well as representatives from both the Presidential Councils that deal with seed policy and the Popular Council for the storage and protection of local, Indigenous, peasant and Afro-descendant seed. This Commission will be responsible for planning and promoting seed policy as well as facilitating research, development, production and commercialization of seed.

Article 14 creates the National Institute for Seed (INASEM) which will be responsible for providing the material resources and administration necessary for implementing much of the policy developed by the Seed Plan, such as operating labs, offering technical assistance and issuing licenses for the disposition of certain categories of seed. This institute will also include spokespersons from the Presidential Council concerned with seed policy, but is largely a governmental body.

Notes:
1. In the section on chronology, the authors are indebted to the content of a chronology of the struggle produced by the CDR-SUR(Espacio Ecosocialista Del Poder Popular, Nov. 6, 2015). We have translated parts of that document into English. All shortcomings are, of course, our own.

2. Entrevista al President Evo Morales Ayma, con motivo de la aprobacion en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas de la Declaracion de las Naciones Unidas sobre los derechos de los pueblos indigenas, La Paz, 24 septiembre, 2007 in Vivir Bien: Mensajes y documentos sobre el Vivir Bien, 1995-2010, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia.)

3. All translations of government documents are unofficial.

Frederick B. Mills is a Professor of Philosophy at Bowie State UniversityWilliam Camacaro, MFA, is a Member of the Bolivarian Circle of New York  “Alberto Lovera” and an expert on Venezuela. Christina Schiavoni is an activist and scholar focused on food sovereignty and the right to food.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Venezuela Passes Law Banning GMOs, by Popular Demand

State Department spokesman Admiral John Kirby’s year in review  “Official Blog” comments focus on reinventing history.

He turned truth on its head, claiming:

 “the United States helped change the world for the better” in 2015 – “across a range of issues…vital to ensur(e) the safety, security and prosperity of the American people.”

It’s hard taking rubbish he wrote seriously, substituting fiction for facts,  ignoring America’s endless war on humanity at home and abroad, etc 

Claiming America reestablished diplomatic relations with Cuba, Kirby failed to explain its imperial objectives – to return the island state to colonial status, exploit its people and resources under officials it controls, the same dirty scheme it has in mind for all independent nations.

Positive steps were achieved in the war on terrorism, Kirby claimed. The so-called “war” is the greatest hoax in modern times.

ISIS and other major terrorist groups are US creations – armed, funded, trained and deployed as imperial foot soldiers, doing America’s killing and dying for it.

Claiming America took important steps to protect the environment and climate is polar opposite official US policy. Ecological destruction is unrestrained.

Fossil fuel use continues unabated. Dangerous nuclear power is expanding. A Fukushima-type incident on US soil is just a matter of time.

Foods and ingredients permitted to be sold are hazardous to human health – GMOs and others saturated with dangerous chemicals.

Many rushed to market with inadequate testing prescription drugs cause more harm than good – drug industry bandits allowed to push them the way illicit traffickers sell their wars – often at unaffordable prices.

Kirby credited Washington with consummating the Iran nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – JCPOA) – without explaining current US intentions to undermine it by irresponsibly imposing new sanctions Tehran won’t tolerate, perhaps not most other countries.

Nor did Kirby explain Iran’s peaceful program with no military component or intention to have one. So why was Tehran forced to make major concessions demanded of no other nations?

Official US policy toward the Islamic Republic remains regime change by war or other means – removing its independent government, replacing it with one Washington controls, stealing its vast energy reserves, exploiting its people, eliminating Israel’s main regional rival. Thirty-six years of US hostility toward Iran remain unchanged.

Kirby gave Washington’s “robust response” full credit for stemming the Ebola outbreak, Obama calling it one of America’s greatest threats along with Russia (threatening no one) and ISIS, its own creation.

US-led General Assembly members “adopt(ed) an ambitious set of global goals…to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all,” Kirby blustered. Reality is polar opposite. Poverty rages out-of-control, including in America and other Western countries. Ecological destruction is unrestrained.

Corporate coup d’etat Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade talks were concluded. Kirby ignored the measure’s predatory provisions, putting profits above public safety and other major concerns.

Kirby claimed America’s commitment to preserve global oceans, ignoring their unrestrained ravaging for profit. He called the sham Paris climate agreement a success.

Perhaps his most outrageous claim was saying America is

“bringing peace (and) security to Syria – aid(ing) the Syrian people during their time of need.”

Obama bears full responsibility for one of history’s great crimes – launching war in March 2011, continuing it unabated without mercy, using ISIS and other takfiri terrorists as imperial foot soldiers, bombing Syrian infrastructure and government targets, wanting Assad replaced by a US-controlled puppet.

There’s nothing civil about war in Syria. It’s US-led naked aggression using imported terrorists against a sovereign independent country threatening no others.

America’s war is responsible for ravaging the country, slaughtering many tens of thousands, displacing half the population, and creating unspeakable human misery, one of many high crimes on Obama’s rap sheet – a record of unaccountable horrors, ruthlessness and shame.

Preventing “peace and security” are central to Washington achieving its aims. Allowing them defeat its agenda.

Admiral John Kirby is Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Public Affairs, serving as the department’s spokesman.

His job involves disseminating propaganda and other misinformation, suppressing vital truths.

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

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

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

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Delusional US Claimed 2015 “Success Stories”: Reinventing History on the “Official State Department Blog”

Syria is the Middle East’s Stalingrad

January 2nd, 2016 by Andre Vltchek

Day and night, for years, an overwhelming force has been battering this quiet nation, one of the cradles of human civilization.

Hundreds of thousands have died, and millions have been forced to flee abroad or have been internally displaced. In many cities and villages, not one house is left intact.

But Syria is, against all odds, still standing.

During the last 3 years I worked in almost all of Syria’s perimeters, exposing the birth of ISIS in the NATO-run camps built in Turkey and Jordan. I worked in the occupied Golan Heights, and in Iraq. I also worked in Lebanon, a country now forced to host over 2 million (mostly Syrian) refugees.

The only reason why the West began its horrible destabilization campaign, was because it “could not tolerate” Syria’s disobedience and the socialist nature of its state. In short, the way the Syrian establishment was putting the welfare of its people above the interests of multi-national corporations.

*

More than two years ago, my former Indonesian film editor demanded an answer in a somewhat angry tone:

“So many people are dying in Syria! Is it really worth it? Wouldn’t it be easier and better for Syrians to just give up and let the US have what it is demanding?”

Chronically petrified, this young woman was always searching for easy solutions that would keep her safe, and safe with significant personal advantages. As so many others in this time and age, in order to survive and advance, she developed a complex system resting on betrayals, self-defenses and deceptions.

How to reply to such a question?

It was a legitimate one, after all.

Eduardo Galeano told me: “People know when it’s time to fight. We have no right to tell them … but when they decide, it is our obligation to support them, even to lead them if they approach us.”

In this case, the Syrian people decided. No government, no political force could move an entire nation to such tremendous heroism and sacrifice. Russians did it during World War Two, and the Syrians are doing it now.

Two years ago I replied like this: “I have witnessed the total collapse of the Middle East. There was nothing standing there anymore. Countries that opted for their own paths were literally leveled to the ground. Countries that succumbed to the dictates of the West lost their soul, culture and essence and were turned into some of the most miserable places on earth. And the Syrians knew it: were they to surrender, they would be converted into another Iraq, Yemen or Libya, even Afghanistan.”

And so Syria rose. It decided to fight, for itself and for its part of the world.

Again and again, it retained itself through the elections of its government. It leaned on its army. Whatever the West says, whatever the treasonous NGOs write, the simple logic just proves it all.

This modest nation does not have its own powerful media to share the extent of its courage and agony with the world. It is always the others who are commenting on its struggle, often in a totally malicious way.

But it is undeniable that whilst the Soviet forces stopped the advance of the German Nazis at Stalingrad, the Syrians have managed to stop the fascist forces of Western allies in its part of the world.

Of course Russia got directly involved. Of course China stood by, although often in the shadow. And Iran provided support. And Lebanon-based Hezbollah put up, what I often describe as, an epic fight on behalf of Damascus against the extremist monsters invented and armed by the West, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

But the main credit has to go to the Syrian people.

Yes, now there is nothing left of the Middle East. Now there are more tears than raindrops descending on this ancient land.

But Syria is standing. Burned, wounded, but standing.

And as is being widely reported, after the Russian armed forces came to the rescue of the Syrian nation, more than 1 million Syrian people were able to return home … often to encounter only ashes and devastation, but home.

Like people returned to Stalingrad, some 70 years ago.

*

So what would my answer be to that question now: “whether it would be easier the other way”, to surrender to the Empire?

I guess something like this:

“Life has meaning, it is worth living, only if some basic conditions can be fulfilled. One does not betray great love, be it love for another person or love for one’s country, humanity or ideals. If one does, it would be better not to be born at all. Then I say: the survival of humankind is the most sacred goal. Not some short-time personal gain or ‘safety’, but the survival of all of us, of people, as well as the safety of all of us, humans.”

When life itself is threatened, people tend to rise and fight, instinctively. During such moments, some of the most monumental chapters in human history are written.

Unfortunately, during these moments, millions tend to die.

But the devastation is not because of those who are defending our human race.

It is because of the imperialist monsters and their servants.

Most of us are dreaming about a world without wars, without violence. We want true kindness to prevail on earth. Many of us are working relentlessly for such a society.

But until it is constructed, until all extreme selfishness, greed and brutality are defeated, we have to fight for something much more “modest” – for the survival of people and of humanism.

The price is often horrible. But the alternative is one enormous gaping void. It is simply nothing – the end, full stop!

In Stalingrad, millions died so we could live. Nothing was left of the city, except some melted steel, scattered bricks and an ocean of corpses. Nazism was stopped. Western expansionism began its retreat, that time towards Berlin.

Now Syria, quietly but stoically and heroically, stands against Western, Qatari, Saudi, Israeli and Turkish plans to finish the Middle East.

And the Syrian people have won. For how long, I don’t know. But it has proven that an Arab country can still defeat the mightiest murderous hordes.

Andre Vltchek is philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist, he’s a creator of Vltchek’s World an a dedicated Twitter user, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.


  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Syria is the Middle East’s Stalingrad

Looking forward into the New Year, here are a few predictions and some emerging trends to be on the look out for in 2016.

In last year’s Predictions and Trends for 2015, we told readers to expect some major tectonic shifts in the geopolitical arena.

That happened alright, and in the coming 12 months we can expect some of those new realities to solidify, while others continue to take shape.

The good, the bad, and the ugly – here’s what to look for ahead in 2016…

1-minority-report
Positive Trends…

Geopolitical Realignment – 2015 saw one of the most significant geopolitical realignments of the last 40 years. Russia’s arrival on the scene in Syria signaled a departure from a unipolar‘New American Century’ where Washington dictated the pace and facts on the ground in all major overseas conflicts. In addition to this, the gradual disintegration of Washington’s half-baked plan to impose international sanctions against Russia has re-opened a door between European nations and Russia – much to chagrin of rogue central planners in Washington like Victoria Nuland and John McCain.

AssadSyria Remains – What the nation of Syria has endured over the last few years is nothing short of incredible. For four years, the US, Britain, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Israel and a bevy of other “allies” have been flooding the country with illegal weapons, illicit cash, jihadist terrorist fighters, narcotics, as well as bombing the country in violation of every international law on the books (and costing western taxpayers billions of dollars per year) – in an all-out effort to destabilize the country and collapse its government in Damascus, and to redraw its borders in a Neocolonial move to reshape the Middle East. After all that, the tough resolve of the Syrian people and its government have managed to repel this violent conflict driven by foreign interests – and despite propaganda coming out of the US to the contrary – any sectarian divisions that may have existed before in Syria, have been replaced by a movement towards national solidarity, bringing the people together closer than ever – in full support of  President Assad. It seems like the people of the Middle East are rapidly wising-up to age-old false flag games and other methods of foreign manipulation.

Cuba and Iran – In 2015, Cuba returned into the fold of politics and economics, as it began interfacing with Washington. Overall, this is a positive thing, so long as Sheldon Adelson and Donald Trump aren’t allowed to buy-up Havana harbor and build a strip of mega casinos there. With the advent of the international Iran Nuclear Deal, Iran is now threatening to re-enter to global marketplace – which ultimately means more economic opportunity, not only for Iran, but for all of its trading partners too. More trade and cultural exchange also means there’s a great opportunity for peace and stability in the Middle East and central Asia. Many in the US Republican Party do not want to see this happen and are backed an Israeli Lobby throwing money at them in order to keep tensions high. 2016 could be another diplomatic break-out year for Iran.

Oil Price – For the second straight year running, we are seeing a drop in oil prices and this translates to savings at the pump with many US states now enjoying prices below $2.00 per gallon. It’s also good for small to medium size businesses and translates into lower food prices (lower cost of transportation). It also means that Fracking shale industry is no longer viable economically – which is good news if you are a fan of clean ground water. The Saudis have spent around $100 billion of foreign reserves to keep shale and other low-cost oil producers out of business. Their decision in 2014 not to cut production has driven prices well below $50 a barrel. However, this is not good news for countries who are overly dependent on oil to support their entire economy. One such country currently in trouble financially is Saudi Arabia, who are now in debt and have no cash reserves left – for the first time in their history. This also exposes the Saudi royal family additional risk of domestic and social instability at home. Will too much debt cause petrol kingdom to lose its ability to project power internationally? Not necessarily, just look at the US who are $17 trillion in the hole, and still bullying the world. Russia is also dependent on healthy oil and gas prices in order to remain strong, and there are some pundits who believe that OPEC’s choice to keep prices down is a form of ‘economic warfare’ in a US-led effort to bankrupt Russia. Time will tell who the winners and losers are, but one thing is certain in 2016 – someone is going to feel the pinch somewhere.

HempHemp – 2015 may have been the Year of Pot, when legalized cannabis and medical marijuana gained mainstream acceptance in a number of states in the US, but 2016 looks set to be the year of hemp. Even though modern society is mostly ignorant to the many key uses of industrial hemp – for food, protein supplements, medicine, beauty and cosmetics, bio-fuel, textiles, plastics, utilities items and building material – many will soon come to realize that our forefathers were heavily invested in hemp products, and that hemp holds the key to solving a number of hot issues on both the right and the left, namely issues of economy, long-term sustainability, nutrition, health and better alternatives to dodgy GMO technology. California is one of the first states to pass legislation to legalize industrial hemp. Be warned however, GMO imperialists like Monsanto seek to patent the cannabis plant and thus monopolize the industry (this is what is behind George Soros pouring millions into legalization campaigns globally), so there are still many epic battles to be fought on the road to cannabis freedom.

twitter-future
(Image: Barjesh War)

Not so positive…

Stock Market Crash – In the last months of 2015, every pundit and wealth website seemed to be predicting some kind of major stock market crash in 2016. Many have the date pinned to the fist week of February. Some say this is simply inevitable after a seemingly endless ‘bull market’, in other words, what goes up, must come down. In fact, the markets did take a dip right before the new year’s end, so maybe that slide is already underway. Considering all that happened in 2015 – the Greek debt crisis, oil prices crashing, and the Chinese currency devaluation – it could’ve been a lot worse. But what would really push that trend over the edge is a good old fashion crisis. If the market does tank and millions of middle class savers are wiped out – expect the Moguls to move in to buy up everything on the cheap. That’s right: a re-consolidation of wealth and power, where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. During the election cycle of 2008, Wall Street engineered a financial crash which helped sweep Barack Obama into power, but more importantly, it worked to re-consolidate wealth and power in the US and beyond. Such a convolution would then lead nicely into a re-boot of the Occupy Movement, and will also aid whichever presidential candidate is best positioned to capitalize on a perceived ‘economic crisis’ (which could very well be Donald Trump).

War on Cash – One of the progressive trends of the last decade has been a gradual transition towards a ‘cashless society’, where all good and services will be bought and sold by an electronic debit and credit system. Today, we are closer than ever to this becoming a reality. In the US, top banks like Chase have already begun restricting the use of cash. What next? Will the government want to tax cash, and eventually move to prohibit the private storage of cash altogether? As Zero Hedge states, “We keep being bombarded by moves to restrict the use of cash and demands to ban it altogether. These demands seem to mainly revolve around two arguments: one is that ‘only criminals need cash’, which is on a par with the absurd assertion that we should all be fine with Stasi-like ubiquitous government surveillance ‘if we have nothing to hide’.” In this climate of fear and staged “ISIS” attacks, expect “terror” to be the main rally cry to ban the mainstream use of cash once and for all.

Hashtag#Hashtag Hell/ Emoji Hell – More memes. 2015 was the year of the hashtag. Some say that it is human evolution; a brave new worldwhere all of man’s experiences and philosophical insights can be reduced down to 142 characters or less. There were the predictable terror memes like #JeSuisCharlie#SanBernardinoStrong, #PrayForParis, and even #JeSuisChien (translated: I am a dog), there was also trending favorites like #BlackLivesMatter#IStandWithAhmed and #LoveWins. Can it get any worse? You bet it can. If Twitter manages to integrate Emoji icons into its system, the hashtag hell will quickly become Emoji Hell. Is there any escape from this vapid, reductionist Silicon Valley digital reality? At what point can we jump off this cultural Titanic?

Gun Control – This is not so much a prediction as it is a reality now. Already, on New Year’s Eve, US President Barack Obama, desperate to cement his own ‘legacy’ in his final year in office, announced he will be bypassing the democratic process and enact his own federal decrees on ‘Gun Control’ in America by passing a series of “bold executive actions” to limit the sale and procurement of fire arms. For 2nd Amendment advocates and Republicans, this means war (in political terms), and will be a major hot-button issue all year in the US media, and will ultimately end up in the Supreme Court. Thanks to Obama’s ‘bold’ move, in 2016 the real winners will be gun and ammo manufacturers and retailers – who will rake-in record sales and profits this year. If we didn’t know any better, we’d think that Obama owned shares in the firearms industry. The other dangerous byproduct of this issue is that we can expect many more staged ‘mass shooting’ events which the media and the White House will use to further ram home their anti-gun agenda, which really isn’t about guns at all – but is really about the federalization and ‘fusion’ of every law enforcement and emergency response agency in the country, aka more federal control.  Once again… problem, reaction, solution. 

Early False Flag – NOTE: This is one prediction we definitely DO NOT want to see happen this year. In the first week of 2015, we saw a spectacular event in the Charlie Hebdo Attack. This event set the pace for the coming 12 months. What was more amazing was how many other staged terror events and geopolitical outcomes were tethered in some way to Charlie Hebdo. It was if this early event set the tone and pace for the coming year. It provided a much-needed continuity to many of the mainstream’s popular narratives related to terrorism, Syria, Islamophobia, war, as well as ramping-up a government police state in Europe and North America. For the architects of war and chaos – this proved to be an incredibly successful formula. Let’s hope and pray that they do not use it again.

1-SultanTurkey Goes Rogue – In the last months of 2015, the world got a glimpse of just how deep the nation of Turkey is in terms of fomenting geopolitical turmoil in the Middle East, and beyond. Since 2010, NATO member Turkey has hosted terrorist training camps, as well as facilitated the free flow of terrorist fighters, weapons, cash, as well as a lucrative black market ISIS oil trade – all of which exposes how Turkey is a prime mover in fueling the progress of the so-called ‘Islamic State’See 21WIRE’s comprehensive report on the illicit ISIS Oil Trade for more shocking revelations on Turkey’s activities there. Now at odds with Russia, we learned that Turkey is now involved in facilitating the movement of jihadist terrorists between their country and the Ukraine, and allowing ISIS to buy weapons in the Ukraine. In 2016, Turkey may become to world’s premier ‘bad actor’ internationally. This will certainly lead to a NATO crisis, which will lead to…

A New EU Army – As the world grows tired of the cold war dinosaur known as NATO, and as crisis points like the Paris Attacks and the engineered ‘Migrant Crisis’ push European politics further into the abyss, a new ‘solution’ is already waiting in the wings. In 2016, we will see the final pieces being put into position for the creation of a new federalized European Army, complete with all the federalized accompaniments like a militarized external EU Border Force, an EU CIA, an EU FBI and an EU NSA – mostly in the name of ‘fighting terror’ and protecting against attacks on ‘soft targets’. In terms of freedoms and openness in society, this is not a positive trend.

Crimea – The west have not given up on the Crimea and the architects of instability are currently deploying both US-backed Ukrainian NeoNazi paramilitary fighters and Jihadis from Chechnya – into the Crimea to try and start a sub-regional conflict there. If they poke too hard, this one could get ugly very quickly. Washington is playing with fire here.

Precrime – As man becomes lazy and thinks less, reliance on expensive computer models and artificial intelligence has become the new buzz practice in law enforcement and ‘fighting terror’. Keystone cops around the globe are so enamored with this Orwellian level of gadgetry, that the concept of ‘pre-crime’ as illustrated in Philip K. Dick’s sci-fi classic The Minority Report is now beginning to gain mainstream acceptance. This technology is based on the insane premise that a computer will be able to predict if someone is about to commit a crime or  “may become radicalized”, based on their data profile and other creative computer modeling exercises. Believe it or not, western governments have already unleashed this crack-pot Victorian technology in towns and schools to monitor suspect children from a young age. 

Active-Shooter-Main-Graphic-2015Active Shooter Nation – In a bid to “Make America Ready”, government buildings, schools, colleges, airports, military bases, libraries, hospitals, shopping malls and bingo halls – are all staging multi-agency, “Active Shooter Drills”. America is fast turning into the world leader in staging these contrived, ‘hyper-real’ productions. The only problem is, as these events play-out in real life and on TV, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between an actual drill and a staged ‘mass shooting’ or ‘domestic terror’ event. The important thing to note is that behind every “drill”… is an endless stream of dollars. This is part of the new predator ‘security’ economy in the US. While other businesses are struggling to make ends meet, the security industry seems to be a real growth area. The problem is that too many agencies and private contractors all want a piece of this plastic apple pie, and are all-too-willing to submerse themselves in this bizarre, and highly disturbing new Amerika. When will it end?

Hostage Crisis – It’s been a while since the establishment has engineered a high-profile hostage crisis. One of the last major events in this class of crisis event happened in 1979 with the Iranian Hostage Crisis, where 52 American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for 444 days. It just happened to take place during a US presidential election cycle, with president Jimmy Carter (D) running for reelection against challenger Ronald Reagan (R). The crisis, including a horrific failed rescue attempt, was used against Carter in the media. According to reports at the time Reagan campaign operatives had managed to do a backdoor deal with the elements of the new Iranian regime to ‘hold-off’ releasing the hostages until after the election. In the end, Reagan won and took credit for that ‘victory’. It’s been a while since Washington has had a good ‘hostage crisis’ and in an election year, it could help to divide voters and perhaps benefit a candidate as it did with Reagan. Let’s hope that this year’s 2016 Summer Olympics in Brazil goes off without a hitch, unlike the 1972 Olympics in Munich which featured a made-for-TV Israeli-Palestinian hostage crisis and massacre (many researchers still content that it was a deliberately staged event). As mainstream news ratings continue to plummet, it seems the only thing CNN, FOX, MSNBC and others can do to guarantee a healthy income is to produce a long protracted crisis, where viewers will stay glued to their TV for days, if not weeks on end. In this way, a hostage crisis is a real winner. And then Michael Bay can make a Hollywood blockbuster about it.

Multidimensional False Flag Terror – As the public becomes increasing fatigued from fake ISIS videos and obvious one-dimensional terrorist incidents (like the fake Chattanooga production), the architects of chaos and false flag terror are looking for bigger and better ways to sustain news coverage and keep the public afraid and completely dependent on the state to feel “safe and secure”, while at the same time advancing a domestic and global military, economic and social agenda. Last year, staged terror events like HebdoGarland and Copenhagen – had multiple dimensions in that they managed to join a ‘fear of the Muslim’ together with the illusive concept of ‘free speech’ in the west. Later, the San Bernardino Shooting took things to another level altogether – by fueling left-wing fear of ‘guns’ and served the White House’s liberal anti-gun agenda and justified an increasing militarization (and federalization) of America’s police and ‘law enforcement’ agencies.  For the right-wing it fueled a building anti-Islamic wave and called for more US “boots on the ground” in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan (and everywhere else) and prompted calls to “shut US borders”, further diluting the immigration debate. On top of this, San Bernardino allowed the FBI and the media to demonize social media – prompting calls to allow full access at any time to anyone’s social media accounts – all because of ‘suspicion’ that the alleged shooters were “radicalized” on the internet. That’s 5 or 6 major issues spun into one ‘terror’ event, leaving the media (not 21WIRE) and the public (not 21WIRE readers) nearly paralyzed in trying to analyze the maelstrom. This is the false flag formula of the future.

1-eco_terrorist_ISISEnvironmental Terror – Bringing together the sum of all fears for the liberal left-wing and fueling the hysteria of the right-wing is a powerful combination. Nothing could achieve this hyper-politicized marriage of fear and insanity in the west – than some bizarre jihadi-environmentalevent. As the Paris Attacks in November just happened to coincide with the UN’s COP21 Climate Summit in Paris, and how this led a number of high-profile western political leaders to utter the idiotic idea that “climate change is causing jihadi terrorism and ISIS,” we can see how easily the mentalists in media and politics would have a technocratic orgy should such a ‘event horizon’ ever occur. This is one scenario we definitely do not want to see happen, except in the movies.

New War Theatre – As the world gets tired of the west’s failure to collapse Syria, and an already established public fatigue about Iraq and Afghanistan, western war planners will be on the lookout for a new theatre of operations for the public to become fixated on. Some prime candidates here could be Pakistan and Somalia. Script writers already introduced Pakistan as a terror hot bed with the San Bernardino Shooting with the bogus claim that one of the THREE gunmen was a 5’2″, 120 lb Pakistani mail-order bride named Tafsheen Malik. Also, with Saudi’s rampage in Yemen still receiving ZERO media coverage in the US and Europe, look for western intelligence agencies to re-heat the old al Shaabab terrorist narrative in Somalia – creating a virtual geopolitical crisis across the Gulf of Aden from neighboring Yemen.

Israel Status Quo – As every year passes, one wonders if this will be the year that Israel gets smart, ends apartheid, and stops repressing, stealing land and killing the native Palestinian population. Sadly, there are no signs that the Israelis have found religion, and more indication that they are continuing down a road to nowhere, and will continue to be ostracized by the international community for presiding over the longest running, illegal pogrom in the modern world. You just can’t teach an old dog new tricks. Kosher bull terrier Bibi Netanyahu looks set to head the world second biggest protection racket again this year. Expect Israel to kick, scream, threaten and blackmail everyone possible again this year when Palestine moves closer and closer into the family of nations.

Occupy Redux – During the election cycle of 2008, Wall Street engineered a financial crash which helped sweep Barack Obama into power. This helped to spur-on the Occupy Movement (ironically, funded by a Wall Street billionaire). In 2011, the Democratic Party used the Occupy Movement to register millions of young voters which helped Obama win in 2012. The 1% vs. the 99%, in an epic battle guaranteed to lead nowhere (as it did in 2011). The rest is just one big mess of muesli, falafel, portable toilets, groups of students playing “repeat after me”, the smell of weed and suspiciously underfed white people with dreadlocks camping out in city squares nationwide. It’s a proven formula and one that Democrats will most likely use again. Will it be in 2016?

Hillary-DonaldUS Election – Who will win the US presidency? We don’t know, but we will this time next year. More importantly, will it really matter in reversing many of the negative trends identified above? All we know for certain is that all the US presidential candidates will continue to spout more insane rhetoric – on the left it’s calls for “redistribution of wealth”, “job creation” and “free healthcare”, and on the right it will be “tougher national security” and “close down the border” etc. Honestly, most of us don’t care who wins, we just can’t wait until it’s over.

Obama Golfing – In his last year in office, you can be certain that Barack Obama will take every opportunity swing his clubs on the US taxpayer dime. Expect to see him golfing a lot this coming year.

Return of Jihadi John? – Contrary to popular belief, the US did not kill ISIS actor Jihadi John in a drone strike this past fall (if not, then show us the evidence). Like all US drones strikes, there is no forensic evidence to ever back-up any of their illustrious claim of killing ‘high profile’ targets. So this means there’s a chance the Tom Clancy Unit in Langley will be resurrecting the popular YouTube mascot in 2016. That would be a real show-stopper, wouldn’t it? Watch this space…

We could go on and on here, but we’ll stop there… for now. Be sure to stay tuned to 21WIRE and our weekly radio show, SUNDAY WIRE, this year for all the best analysis on big breaking news stories and events.

LAST YEAR: See Our Predictions and Trends for 2015

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Looking Ahead, “The Good, the Ugly” : Geopolitical and Economic Predictions, Trends for 2016

Quand la Maison blanche et le Pentagone ne sont pas d’accord.

January 1st, 2016 by Pierre Van Grunderbeek

Le récent article de Seymour Hersh qui a été publié sur le site du très sérieux London Review of Books [1] n’a pas fait les choux gras des médias français.

Comme toujours, Seymour Hersh met en avant des informations de première importance.  Il s’agit ici de divergences d’analyses entre la DIA, l’agence de renseignements du Pentagone, et les conseillers de Barack Obama.

Une autre information a bien retenu l’attention de ces médias.  La mort de Zahran Allouche, l’autoritaire commandant de Jaish Al-Islam (l’Armée de l’islam).

 

Il a été ciblé par un bombardier, sans doute russe, alors qu’il tenait une réunion secrète dans la Ghouta Est avec une brochette de commandants locaux.

Zahran Allouche était le fils d’un prédicateur salafiste et il était originaire de la Ghouta.   Il avait le plein soutien de l’Arabie saoudite, un pays qui le lui fournissait les fonds et les armes pour payer ses hommes et pour lutter contre l’armée loyaliste.  Il se rendait fréquemment en Arabie saoudite pour discuter des besoins de ses troupes et pour définir les objectifs militaires avec les services de sécurité saoudiens.

Les récentes avancées de l’armée loyaliste ont coupé la plupart des voies d’approvisionnement de la Ghouta et la population y est affamée.  Un vaste réseau de tunnels permet encore à cette région de maintenir le contact avec l’extérieur mais la situation y devient de plus en plus précaire.

L’armée qu’il commandait est composée de plusieurs dizaines de milliers d’hommes (de vingt à quarante mille) et il était un farouche adversaire de l’État islamique qu’il avait chassé de la région.

Il n’y a évidemment aucun lien entre ces deux informations sauf peut-être l’attaque chimique qui a eu lieu le 21 août 2013.

La première partie de l’article de Seymour Hersh est un recueil de confidences d’un ex-conseiller de l’État-major interarmes.

À l’été 2013, toutes les analyses de la DIA confirmaient que si Bachar al Assad était militairement battu, une prise de pouvoir par les islamistes s’ensuivrait immanquablement.

Jaish Al-Islam, une rébellion takfiriste soutenue par l’Arabie saoudite et commandée par Zahran Allouche, aurait pris Damas.   Jabhat al-Nosra (le front de la victoire), un groupe djihadiste affilié à Al-Qaïda, aurait pris les villes du centre de la Syrie et Alep tomberait sous la coupe d’islamistes proches des Frères musulmans soutenus par la Turquie et le Qatar.

L’État islamique (DAECH) n’existait pas encore en Syrie mais l’État islamique en Irak et au Levant venait d’apparaitre en Syrie et se battait aux côtés de Jabhat al-Nosra pour prendre Raqqa aux troupes loyalistes.

À cette époque, la CIA complotait depuis plus d’un an avec le Royaume Uni, l’Arabie Saoudite, le Qatar et avec l’aval du président des États-Unis pour expédier des armes et des marchandises dans le but de renverser Bachar al Assad.  Les armes partaient de Libye jusqu’en Syrie via la Turquie.

Ce qui avait débuté comme une opération secrète pour armer et soutenir les rebelles modérés s’était transformée en un programme technique, militaire et logistique à cheval sur la frontière turque pour toutes les forces d’opposition, y compris Jabhat al-Nosra et les autres groupes islamistes radicaux.

Les soi-disant rebelles modérés s’étaient évaporés et l’Armée syrienne libre n’était qu’un mirage stationné sur une base aérienne en Turquie. Le constat était peu réjouissant : il n’y avait aucune opposition modérée viable face à Bachar al Assad et les USA armaient des extrémistes.

Le directeur de la DIA, le Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, continuait à envoyer des rapports alarmistes au président mais il semblait que l’administration ne voulait pas entendre la vérité.

Les commandants du JCS (État-major interarmes) partagèrent alors les informations avec leurs collègues allemands, israéliens et russes en se disant que leurs analyses seraient soufflées à Bachar al Assad.

En été 2013, l’AAS (l’armée loyaliste) tenait les villes et les groupes rebelles n’arrivaient plus à avancer.  Ces groupes rebelles, renforcés par des djihadistes et des mercenaires étrangers payés par les États du Golfe ou de riches donateurs continuaient à publier des vidéos d’exécutions et de tortures sur des prisonniers et des civils syriens.

Les médias commencèrent à parler d’intervention militaire pour mettre fin à cette effusion de sang.  Une zone d’exclusion aérienne était envisagée mais il fallait pour cela l’aval de Conseil de Sécurité de l’ONU.

En juin 2013, au G8 de Dublin, Vladimir Poutine tint bon contre les sept autres membres et refusa jusqu’au bout de donner l’accord de la Russie pour une telle opération.

 

Sauf à violer la Charte des Nations Unies, la situation était bloquée.

Barack Obama commis alors une bourde qui aurait pu avoir de lourdes conséquences.

Il répondit à la question d’un journaliste en disant que l’utilisation d’armes chimiques par Bachar al Assad autoriserait les États-Unis à lancer des frappes sur la Syrie sans l’aval de CS de l’ONU.

Les journalistes, qu’on aurait dits avides d’encore plus de sauvagerie, se mirent alors à scruter les bulletins d’informations à la recherche de l’acte qui obligerait Barack Obama à tenir sa parole.

L’occasion se présenta ce fameux 21 août 2013.  Un bombardement chimique sur la Ghouta orientale fit entre 350 et 1700 morts (suivant les sources) parmi la population civile.

Pour les médias, pour les dirigeants politiques et pour l’opinion publique, il ne faisait aucun doute que Bachar al Assad était le responsable du massacre.

Barack Obama était sous la pression des médias qui le poussait à faire intervenir ses bombardiers.  Il savait que les rebelles étaient prêts à se lancer à l’assaut des grandes villes syriennes.  Les bombardements franco-étasuniens auraient mis l’armée régulière en déroute comme en Irak.

Bien sûr, il connaissait les rapports de la DIA et il avait lu que la chute de Bachar al Assad signifiait l’arrivée des Islamistes partout en Syrie mais ce n’était pas du tout le scénario prévu au départ par les États-Unis.

Nous savons que ce qui était privilégié, c’est un départ de Bachar al Assad et son remplacement par un président pro-occidental.  L’armée et l’administration syrienne devant assurer la continuité de gestion de l’État jusqu’à son éventuel démembrement suivant le bien connu projet de remodelage du Moyen-Orient.

Ma conviction personnelle est que ce n’est pas qu’un changement de régime qui était envisagé pour la Syrie, c’était surtout un changement d’alliance avec une rupture avec l’Iran, avec la Russie et avec le Hezbollah.

Mais Barack Obama était prisonnier de sa parole.  Que vaudrait encore la parole d’un président des États-Unis s’il se défaussait de sa promesse dans un cas pareil.

Il pouvait lancer quelques frappes symboliques mais il se serait quand-même déjugé.

Il y a un autre élément dont il faut tenir compte pour comprendre la valse-hésitation de Barack Obama.  Le budget de la Défense venait de subir une forte coupe budgétaire et le JCS (État-major interarmes) était réticent à se lancer dans une action militaire aux contours mal définis pouvant entrainer les États-Unis dans un bourbier comme en Irak.

Le sauvetage est alors venu en deux temps.

John Kerry a dit en répondant à un journaliste qu’il n’y avait pas de possibilité d’éviter l’intervention aérienne excepté si une chose tout-à-fait improbable arrivait comme par exemple si Bachar al Assad se débarrassait de ses armes chimiques.

Vladimir Poutine a répondu dans les 48 heures que Bachar al Assad est d’accord de se débarrasser de ses armes chimiques.  On se demande parfois si ce n’était préparé à l’avance tellement que c’était bien coordonné.

Nous connaissons la suite.  Barack Obama a d’abord invoqué l’accord du Congrès.  Ensuite il a accepté l’offre russe et Bachar al Assad a donné ses armes chimiques pour qu’on les détruise.

Bien sûr, tout le monde n’a pas été dupe de cette fameuse attaque chimique de la Ghouta qui était tombée à point nommé.

Deux éminents experts du prestigieux MIT ont démontré quelques mois plus tard que ces obus chimiques ne pouvaient avoir été tirés d’une zone gouvernementale.  [2]

Seymour Hersh, déjà lui, fut un des premiers à publier et à commenter ce rapport à la fin 2013.

Il reste quelques détails à prouver mais il est clair qu’on avait presque commencé une guerre avec un « false flag » comme motif.  Si ce ne sont les troupes loyalistes, c’est alors forcément les rebelles islamistes de Jaish Al-Islam qui sont responsables du massacre pour un motif bien simple : ils savaient que cela provoquerait l’intervention aérienne franco-étasunienne qui leur permettrait de reprendre l’offensive sur Damas.

Depuis ces deux dernières années, nous avons pu nous apercevoir tous les jours que les islamistes n’accordent aucune considération à la vie humaine et il n’y a aucune raison de croire qu’il en était autrement en août 2013.

Si on continue dans les déductions, on constate que c’était bien Zahran Allouche qui était le commandant des rebelles de cette zone.  Il devait certainement en savoir des choses sur cette attaque chimique.  Il ne parlera plus maintenant et c’est dommage.

Il reste encore à savoir qui a trahi pour indiquer le lieu où le groupe se réunissait.

L’article de Seymour Hersh parle aussi d’un rapport de l’ambassadeur étasunien en Syrie, William Roebuck de décembre 2006,  qui analysait les failles du gouvernement Assad et proposait une liste des méthodes « susceptibles d’augmenter la probabilité » d’opportunités de déstabilisation. Il recommandait que Washington travaille avec l’Arabie Saoudite et l’Égypte pour développer les tensions sectaires.  L’ambassade se chargeait aussi de donner de l’argent à des dissidents politiques locaux.

Cette partie de l’article prouve que la contestation en Syrie n’avait rien de spontané.  Elle était bien préparée de longue date.  Cela indique aussi que les États-Unis utilisent des méthodes tout-à-fait illégales pour renverser des gouvernements.  Il n’y a aucune raison de croire que ce genre de méthodes se limitait uniquement à la Syrie, bien au contraire.  Cela confirme bien que toutes les soi-disant révolutions de couleurs spontanées sont le résultat d’une manipulation de petits groupes par les ambassades étasuniennes.  Tous les lecteurs assidus de sites sérieux le savent depuis longtemps.

 

L’histoire des prisonniers d’Al Qaïda livrés par la CIA à la Syrie pour y être torturés est déjà connue depuis longtemps.  La Syrie n’est d’ailleurs pas le seul pays concerné.  Il est maintenant mal venu pour les journalistes et pour les ONG d’accuser la Syrie de violation des droits de l’homme sans lancer en parallèle les mêmes accusations contre la CIA.

Un autre point intéressant relevé par l’article est que le Pentagone avait réussi à faire parvenir aux rebelles des armes obsolètes provenant de stocks de l’armée turque en 2013.  Cela expliquerait les avancées de l’ASS en été de la même année.  Malheureusement, l’Arabie saoudite, le Qatar et la Turquie décidèrent d’augmenter le financement des groupes islamistes y compris l’État islamique qui avait fait son apparition en Syrie en cette fin 2013.  Ces groupes prirent alors le contrôle d’énormes territoires dans l’est du pays.

À la fin de 2013, la CIA continuait à former des combattants qui rejoignaient les groupes islamistes dès leur passage en Syrie.

Une accusation qui revient souvent dans les confidences du conseiller de l’État-major concerne la Turquie et le rôle négatif de son président,  Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, dans la crise syrienne.  Il était évident que pour la DIA, le président turc ne concentrait pas ses efforts sur le remplacement de Bachar al Assad par une personnalité pro-occidentale.  Son ambition est d’avoir une zone d’influence sur les zones nord de l’Irak et la Syrie qui étaient des parties de l’Empire ottoman il y a un siècle et de peut-être régler son problème kurde en coupant le PKK de ses bases arrière.

La deuxième partie de l’article analyse la situation actuelle en Syrie et les rapports conflictuels entre les présidents Obama et Poutine.  Cela reste intéressant mais ce sont des informations qui n’apportent pas d’éléments nouveaux.

La conclusion de l’article est un appel à travailler ensemble, donc avec les Russes, pour venir à bout de l’État islamique et de stabiliser la Syrie en gardant pour cela Bachar al Assad à la tête du pays jusqu’à ce que la situation soit stabilisée.  Des élections pourront avoir lieu ensuite.

C’est l’avis de nombreux experts ne faisant pas partie du cercle néo-conservateur ainsi que de nombreux anciens diplomates.

Cet avis n’est pas majoritaire au Congrès mais en privé, de plus en plus de députés approuvent cette idée.

En septembre dernier, le général Dempsey a pris sa retraite et a été remplacé par le général Joseph Dunfort à la tête de l’État-major interarmes.  Lors de son audition devant la Commission sénatoriale des  forces armées, il avait déclaré que la Russie est une menace existentielle pour les États-Unis et que la Turquie est un des alliés les plus importants.

Barack Obama a maintenant un général beaucoup plus en accord avec son entourage idéaliste (idéaliste dans le sens « uniquement idéal pour les intérêts des États-Unis)  à la tête de l’État-major.  Il n’y aura plus de contestation indirecte.

Le lieutenant général Michail T. Flynn avait été remplacé à la tête de la DIA en août 2014.

Revenu à la vie civile, il continue à clamer lors de nombreuses interviews que les décisions de Barack Obama sont incompréhensibles. (lien)

Conclusion.

Cette contestation de la Politique du Président par le Pentagone est assez étonnante et même rare dans l’histoire des États-Unis.

On peut dire qu’il y d’un côté des analyses réalistes basées sur des informations récoltées sur place ainsi que sur des photos aériennes et de l’autre, une approche idéologique tout-à fait déconnecté de la réalité qui tend vers la recherche de la suprématie des États-Unis.  Les décisions sont dans ce cas toujours prises en veillant à ce qu’elles n’avantagent pas un concurrent géopolitique.

En 2013, les tenants de l’école réaliste étaient John Kerry, Chuck Hagel, des généraux du Pentagone dont Martin Dempsey et Michail T. Flynn.

Il ne reste que John Kerry en fonction.  On constate de plus en plus souvent que ses déclarations sont contredites par Susan Rice, une proche conseillère de Barack Obama.

Cela ne donne pas plus de cohérence à la diplomatie actuelle des États-Unis.

En Syrie, la Russie s’est placée au centre du jeu.  Presque cinq ans de guerre a été le temps nécessaire qui a permis à Vladimir Poutine de préparer son armée pour intervenir intelligemment en Syrie.

 

Les experts du Pentagone estiment dans leurs calculs que le coût de l’intervention pour la Russie est de 1 à 2 milliards de dollars par an entièrement prélevés sur le budget de l’armée.

Ce coût serait supportable pour 4 à 5 ans sans problème.

Cela change complétement la donne.  La Russie est maintenant incontournable et quelle que soit la solution qui sera négociée en Syrie, il faudra tenir compte de ses intérêts.

Barack Obama est discrédité sur le dossier syrien et, sauf grande surprise, il le laissera à son successeur.

C’est le prix à payer pour avoir eu une politique étrangère confuse et incompréhensible pendant son dernier mandat.

Ceci est une constatation réaliste qui se base sur la détermination de Vladimir Poutine à défendre les intérêts existentiels de la Russie qu’il estime fondamentalement menacés.  Cela ne concerne aucunement une considération préférentielle pour la Russie.

L’alternative est une guerre contre la Russie dont on devine les conséquences désastreuses pour tous les belligérants.

Traduction intégrale de l’article de Seymour Hersh en français sur le site “Les Crises”.  [3]

Pierre Van Grunderbeek

 

[1] http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military

[2]http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/la-syrie-et-le-rapport-du-mit-147902

[3]http://www.les-crises.fr/echanges-entre-militaires-par-seymour-hersh/

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Quand la Maison blanche et le Pentagone ne sont pas d’accord.

Selected Articles: Fingers Crossed for a More Placatory New Year.

January 1st, 2016 by Global Research News

burundi_flagAfrica in Review 2015: Social Crises, “Peacekeeping” Operations and the Legacy of Imperialism

By Abayomi Azikiwe, January 01 2016

From Burundi to Ghana and beyond the intervention of western states continues as an impediment to genuine development.

Former CIA Director Richard Helms Photo credit: Adapted by WhoWhatWhy from CIA Library“CIA Lying Performance” Then and Now: The JFK Assassination Versus The CIA’s Obstruction of Justice in 2015

By Prof Peter Dale Scott and Milicent Cranor, December 31 2015

The essay focuses on tales told by Richard Helms, a top official of the CIA in 1963 who later became its director — and  is based on a talk given by Prof. Peter Dale Scott. Scott is the popularizer of the expression, “Deep Politics,” and a virtuoso when it comes to what sometimes seems like grabbing smoke (…) and then analyzing the residue.

q-4A-Z of Drones 2015: “Reducing Terrorism”, Targeted Assassinations, UAV Engines, Whistleblowers

By Chris Cole, January 01 2016

Part 3 of 3. Read parts 1 and 2.

mcmurtryGlobal Crises 2016: Western Media, the Public Interest, Corrupting Youth, the Real Terrorism, Collective Consciousness

By Prof. John McMurtry, January 01 2016

Philosopher John McMurtry (image left) was asked to “co-operate with Ayatollah Khamenei in the Supreme Leader’s letter to the Youth in Europe and North America”. The questions posed by  a designated US enemy opened a new world standpoint on the US-led world disorder and the taboo depths of  shared crises as we enter 2016.

IMF go homeIMF Warns of Slow Growth and Economic “Shocks” in 2016

By Barry Grey, December 31 2015

International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde offered a bleak economic forecast for 2016 and beyond in a guest column published Wednesday in the German financial newspaper Handelsblatt.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Fingers Crossed for a More Placatory New Year.

Philosopher John McMurtry was asked to “co-operate with Ayatollah Khamenei in the Supreme Leader’s letter to the Youth in Europe and North America”. 

The questions posed by  a designated US enemy opened a new world standpoint on the US-led world disorder and the taboo depths of  shared crises as we enter 2016. 

What in general do the Western media hide and not let people know?

In general, the mass media across cultures are propaganda systems for those who own or control them. But the Western media lead the world in silencing one ultimate issue confronting  all peoples on Earth – the despoliation of the world’s life support systems by transnational  corporate globalization. They talk only of climate warming’, not destabilization of planetary life cycles at every level. They promote only market-growth solutions which are known not to work.

No-one talks of US-led ‘globalization’ itself as the underlying disorder. No science or story defines the common cause of the spasmic extinctions everywhere, the oceanic pollutions, the fish stock collapses across all waters, and the ever larger-scale looting of resources across borders. It is a deeper causal mechanism than even US empire. Transnational money tides increasingly devour and poison all that exists with even Communist-Party China destroying its own air to breathe and grounds of a human life.

Western media are the lead PR vehicles for this limitlessly life destructive invasion and growth – the nature of fascism in all forms. Financial fascism is never named in the media, and so its world floods of private money sequences, commodities and public waste grow and multiply beneath detection. Throughout the corporate media present only isolated problems, competitive spectacles and ads for the system. Humanity`s common life ground and universal needs are screened out. ‘Reforms’ are only more corporate marketizations and bank-driven dispossessions.

The underlying law of corporate globalization its media presentation is undeniable, but taboo to name. Whatever stands against the transnational corporate market as the cosmic engine of humanity’s well-being is anathematized and annihilated in one nation after another. The methods range from bombing social infrastructures in Slavic and Arab societies to silencing and reversing undeniable facts exposing the lies of the system.  No alternative to feeding resources into the life-blind growth juggernaut has arisen at a productive level.  The media repel any real economic reform as unthinkable.

In this borderless chaos of corporate globalization which now strips even the social infrastructures of the European Union to pay big banks and dispossess workers, the mass media select out whatever joins the dots of the cumulative catastrophe unfolding on both social and ecological planes.  No real threat to collective life security computes except constructed enemies who mutate from one Orwellian hate object to the next. The collective life capital on which everyone’s continued breathing, water, nutrition, biodiverse surroundings, social security and knowledge depend are not even conceived.

Are the politics of European and US governments contrary to the national interests of even their own nations?

The meaning of ‘the national interest’ is the prior question. It is the common life interest of citizens through generational time. Yet you will never find this principle in the mass media, official declarations, or even academic journals. Typically the meaning is reversed– for example the US orchestrating society-destroying wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine, and Syria. All are claimed to be for the ‘US national interest’ and ‘global security’ at once, but these very big lies are only incantations of unaccountable power.

In fact, all societies involved keep being destroyed all the way back to the lead invading state. Social life fabrics are divided, bombed and torn apart in the Islamic world, and hollowed out at home at the same time.  One dark truth persists underneath all the lies – an endless eco-genocide of poorer peoples and their life conditions across continents that profit the transnational money party alone.  Is there exception?

This is the world-defining fact that no corporate state or media report. They divert instead to “the terrorists threatening the civilized world”. In fact this is merely the US and allies projecting the terror onto the victims that fight back or on their own jihadi constructions  sowing civil wars to divide and rule from without.  Thus endless US-led bombing from one country to the next somehow avoids the very oil-supply lines sustaining ISIL, the designated Evil One which has in fact been financed, armed and directed by the CIA and allies like Saudi Arabia and Turkey. That the ‘terrorists’ are a creation of the system warring upon them is another Orwellian absurdity. But it is the reigning pretext for  armed lockdown and dispossession of US-EU societies too for transnational corporate exploitation – the ultimate global terrorism at work across cultures and borders.

Consider the bizarre turns on the ground of the master big lie of ‘protecting the Free World and its allies’. Turkey’s despotic state under Erdogan, whose son is making millions out of running ISIL stolen oil, shoots down a Russian plane tracking the Turkey-protected ISIL oil-truck columns, and bombs only Kurds, the sole indigenous fighting force in the US-led Syria-Iraq wars. It is all so confusing until one recognizes that it is the same underlying pattern throughout. Names, cultures, even rulers make little difference. The corporate rich always get richer while peoples and their environments are ever more predated and looted in the name of their ‘security’ and ‘freedom’.

At the same time, the connection between the Western rule of armed force and financial terror – essentially NATO and big banks following Wall Street – is never named however much it dispossesses and ruins the citizens of the lead Western societies themselves.

Robotic despots called “technocrats” spread the terror of money-control extortion, and liquidate all liveable social programs to force the payments.  NATO armed forces stand ready to be called as back-up enforcers. Resistance is bombed within Europe itself, as in Yugoslavia and Ukraine. War criminal facts disappear into blaming the designated enemy, usually a former ally.  The simultaneous hollowing out of US and EU majorities by the same military-financial axis funded by the public treasury is anathema to recognize.

But the systemic financial extortion, corporate treaty rights as absolute over nations, and NATO armed terror cannot succeed by themselves. Pervasive toxic propaganda against resistance across borders, special agents and forces on site at pleasure, and floods of US dollars to pay local fascisti to scream abuse and threats all participate in enforcing the final unseen objective –to transform all public wealth into transnational financial control and multiplication of instruments of dispossession. This is the nature of the global financial fascism advancing beneath the public radar. Even the food and water futures of the world’s peoples are bought up by Wall Street and company using US Federal Reserve cash. There is no end to the carcinomic invasions of the public realm and people’s lives unless forced back from without and risen  up against from within.

Is the West divided against itself? 

No matter what country you live in, perpetual war is built into this system’s exponential money-sequence demands across all cultures and borders. The staggering wastes of lives and public resources never end but always rise in demands. They have ever since the Reagan-Thatcher turn which is still absurdly masked as ‘neoliberal’ by the Left – a sign of the categorical confusion that allows it to go on destroying across the world. This is the division not yet comprehended.

As with the Mafia in microcosm, financial fascism commands citizens everywhere to pay up or suffer the consequences of life ruin. In fact, there is no other way to keep a system of armed extortion at every level going, even if you spin it as “globalization”. The key is to proclaim the opposite of ‘freedom’ and ‘prosperity’ all the way. This is the mass public relations function at which this system surpasses all others. This masking by advanced public relations techniques is the only way it can keep on going.

The deprivation, invasion, and looting of sovereign nations for more transnational private  profits without limit is called ‘growth’. It devours the developing and developed world at the same time. Every wage, tax, access to life means is now at risk and the demands for more private corporate rights never stop. This is the ultimate division within the West and now the East – the life of societies against their transnational financial predation.

How can it be believed in as ‘the free world’ by anyone with a working mind? It is totalitarian in its reach – for example, the US Executive, Legislature and Supreme Court all now directly or indirectly controlled by the money party across parties. In functional terms, The US-led military is joined at the hip to transnational bank-corporate rule along with the mass media – the unseen global financial fascism operating across state and private divisions. But the new PR twist of this global fascism is to condemn violence not glorify it, while showing and using terror and violence more pervasively all the while‘Neoliberal’ fits this public relations mask like a glove. It conceals the absolute conflict between the people’s lives and future and the system’s demands for continuous destruction to grow private money demand and sequences without limit as a form of ‘liberalism’ – in fact, the original philosophy of John Stuart Mill and John Dewey, both mild socialists. Thus the most absolute conflict between society’s common life interests and borderless financial-fascist rule is erased by an equivocal slogan.

For example, it is certainly not remotely liberal or in the interests of US taxpayers to pay out $2,000,000,000 dollars a day for the US corporate war and terror machine, a peerlessly profitable quasi-monopolist global business in its own right and enforcer of the limitlessly life-destructive  system across borders . Yet even dispossessed Greece pays billions of public money to the transnational NATO enforcer standing over it behind the foreign banks to annihilate any embodied social resistance to the concealed invasion.

With endless cuts to social spending “to reduce government costs”, ever more people within Western borders have been pushed into inhuman conditions at the same time as refugees flee in millions from the bombed states and engineered civil wars. Together they overstress social life support systems beyond any built capacity to manage by  systematically defunded social states. Again the absolute division between peoples’ common life interests and the system’s DNA of consuming life organization and conditions at every level cannot be denied. But no category yet recognizes it.

What do you see as the importance of youth in the future of the West and the failure of policy-makers to provide for them?

Perhaps the worst problem of this system has been the way in which the lives of the younger generations have been sacrificed beneath notice. There is no private profit in enabling the young to understand and flourish as human beings. But there is ever more profit in exploiting the young’s increasing market demand as well as cheap labor. The vast and growing global businesses of junk foods, violence entertainment, and selfie-chatter have one thing in common. They depend on the young as unthinking spenders.  In this way the next generations are made pervasively addictive consumers degrading human life capacities the more corporate commodities are consumed by them. Maximizing corporate sales and ‘investor’ profits is the sole value criterion. Even infants in the crib are consciously conditioned into this expanding addictive-junk cycle as “job-creating growth”.

Alarm arises in informed citizens with the latest epidemic disorder like obesity, bullying, unfitness, and failing attention spans. But the overall pattern is blocked out. Youth are conditioned to a totalizing market of appetites and future insecurity without human meaning left.  Life-serving vocations are everywhere chopped to ‘save money’. Students in higher education are treated as consumers of course packages by corporate university managements who multiply themselves as students are forced into debt slavery. With human livelihoods ever scarcer, youth depression becomes epidemic. Long-term demoralization sets in beneath understanding of its system cause.

But banning Western ideas, clothing or music won’t solve the problem. The disorder is far deeper and invades every level of life organization. The only truth is what sells. The only competition is to lower costs on life and increase money-value outputs faster. The Creation itself is destroyed by the lock-stepping money sequences to more. Over 90% of resource extractions become waste within weeks.

Youth everywhere are threatened by this global disorder. But prohibition of ‘Western ways’  is symptomatic. Yes, prohibit the selling of what is scientifically known to attack life capacities from junk food to extreme violence entertainment. But ethnic appearances are not the issue. They are diversions. The need is to re-set to the lost life ground – the universal life needs of humanity and its ecological host through generational time.

It is on this common life-ground that science and religion meet, and East and West join across differences. The young long for it.

Why is there Islamophobia in the West?

Cultural differences provoke ignorance – the first level of the problem. But false  propaganda  cultivates hate. Long before Islamaphobia, US-led ‘anti-communism’ murdered millions in Vietnam, Indonesia, and Latin America. Before that, European Nazism was assisted by US transnational corporations against the ‘communist threat’ – which meant, decoded, whatever stood in the way of the transnational corporate fascism already building the perpetual war system on which it still thrives and grows today. After fascist Germany and Japan were defeated, the now militarily supreme US, led by corporate Nazi partners in the US never named or prosecuted, carried on the global pogroms to holocaust proportions. So-called ‘communists’ were everywhere slandered, persecuted and warred upon even where they did not exist – a global holocaust that killed tens of millions of people and ruined as many lives.

In short, the cornerstone of US ideology is its designated Enemy – whatever opposes private corporate globalization. The genocide of first peoples was its original stage.  Islamaphobia is one more variation on the theme. Ironically, ‘Islam’ as armed jihad –the main hate object now – has been a creation and instrument of covert-state US policy. It has been for decades an admitted US asset in advancing the bi-partisan project of ‘full spectrum dominance’ of the world. Back in the 1980’s, jihadi mass murder and mayhem were orchestrated and funded by the US to destroy a secular Afghan state led by equality for women and social guarantees.

It was destroyed to bleed the USSR coming to its defense through the ‘Afghanistan War’. A fanatically sectarian Islam was led by foreign Saudi corp-man and Wahabi Osama bin Laden, with US National Security Adviser Pole Brzezinski cheer-leading the annihilation of secular socialism as the means to destroy Russia, his instituted fixation. So from al Qaeda to D’aesh, the terrorist monsters have been a Saudi-and-Sunni-based fanaticism led by the US special-forces state – lately with ample support from Turkey’s Erdogan and Gulf kings hating Shia Iran as well. But such distinctions are smeared out in the Islamaophobia of today.

Yes, imperial colonization and destruction of the Islamic world has bled its civilization dry on a far longer and larger scale. The main modern driver has been money-oil exploitation, the fuel of world capitalism until Wall Street sold its futures. The Greater Israel project has been the permanent enforcer in situ. Through all this evil – meaning limitlessly life-destructive self maximization – Islamic civilization has retreated into an obscurantist and punitively authoritarian clerical rule without productive base. An inward-looking mullah Islam has become the dominant line of collective belief through the chaos.

It has resulted in what is not recognizable in Islam’s golden years as the world’s leading civilization. In Moorish Spain over centuries, for example, Islamic order demonstrated peerless architecture, arts and science that still capture the wonder of those who look today. None of the violent in-looking practices sustaining Islamophobia in the Western mind are evident. Life-and limb-destroying punishments for theft, heresy, consensual sex and the face-elimination of women that provoke the anger of so many in the West seem foreign to this earlier civilisation. Certainly the death-to-non-believers fanaticism was alien to the Islamic civilisation that saved the classical secular works of Plato and Aristotle from the dark ages of the ‘Christian’ West.

Today Islamophobia finds its rational kernel in the dispossession, maiming, lashing torture and legal murder of individuals for no violent offence. Persons found guilty of heresy, sexual non-conformity, criticism of the theocracy, completely personal and peaceful offenses can be legally tortured, maimed and murdered. All of this is anathema to the reasonably caring mind.

It does not matter who commits this inhuman violence – whether the Spanish Inquisition, secular despots, US torturers, the Israeli occupation, or a mullah hierarchy. It is hideous in principle. For evolved humanity, life-enabling institutions and advancing knowledge form the pathway of true civilisation. An end to paralyzing fear and extreme violence to non-violent persons is a dividing line of human history.

Why the delay of awakening collective consciousness in the West?

‘Awakening collective consciousness’ can have opposite meanings. The US-EU today claim binding Western values for every invasion of another society.  So we need a criterion to rule out group-mind aggression and destruction in any form.

A deep core of our problem is that the US has in fact no collective life interest or consciousness in its constitution, its dominant social sciences, its actionable laws, or its white fundamentalist religions. Western market and political doctrine repudiate collective consciousness in principle. Only self-maximizing atomic individuals with no binding life community alone exist to this ruling mind-set. Self-serving corporations and consumers compete for survival according to market rules whose algebra is life-blind. Endless “trade agreements” override any society’s collective laws if they reduce expected profits to private transnational money sequences. The Trans-Pacific Partnership is the latest extension of this sociopath metaphysics built into the ruling market paradigm.

“Delay of collective consciousness” is thus locked into what is called ‘globalization’, East and West. Permanent war is waged to enforce and extend it. The academy itself apes the atomic market model. Hidden in a technocratic code few know, its transnational dogmas and corporate form have claimed all our countries by secretly minted treaties whose defining principle is the absolute right of borderless corporations over all rights of sovereign nations, workers and environments that may conflict with foreign ‘investor’ demands. The predictable result is that an increasing majority of the world’s people is without sufficient livelihoods or ecological security. Only market solutions are allowed. Only self-maximizing greed counts as rational in the model.

The only security that matters is of this ruling system itself.  “Who’s security gets protected by any means necessary? Whose security is casually sacrificed in the process?” Naomi Klein aptly asks before the long-planned mass meetings and demonstrations for climate justice in Paris when a jihadist mass-murder stopped them all overnight.  It conveniently justified the state decision to ban all peaceful protests, marches and other outdoor activities during the all-nations negotiations for a new global regime. In such ways the perpetual war system and creeping police state continue rolling over opposition by all means. The greatest irony is that all this happens in the name of ‘collective security’ when, in fact, the collective security of the living world is what is continuously destroyed by this a-priori life-blind disorder.

Collective life interests and decisions are already ruled out by the punitive regulations of transnational corporate-market treaties overriding the laws of once sovereign nations. Every one of these secretive treaties is controlled and minted outside of any people’s vote, participation or knowledge of proceedings, and is enforced by public dispossession decided by closed lawyer tribunals without public records or any right of appeal. Collective consciousness is precisely prohibited from any social formation, policy or legislation limiting private corporate profit opportunities across borders.

How could Western peoples allow it?

The macro pattern is unnamed. Global financial fascism advances by ignorance of it. Few recognize that humanity’s social evolution has in fact been reversed by a life-blind global mechanism that rules beneath knowledge of its meaning. Its slow-motion coup d’etat across nations and cultures has silently reversed post-1945 history which had developed collective life standards of human life and flourishing. Look, for example, at the UN Declaration of Universal Rights, or the binding International Covenant of Social, Economic and Cultural Rights. They remind us how far human rights were being built into the order of the post-War world. Every article is a collective requirement for the protection and enablement of human life across classes and nations.  Beneath these international ideals, various forms of socialism and social democracy were the choice of virtually every society and population.  Racism, sexism, child abuse, ecocide –the great evils were becoming consciously repudiated by a new reign of international law. Collective institutions of education, health, pensions and worker rights and unions were all advancing.  There was even a competition between superpowers to achieve them across the lines of the Cold War.

Then it was all reversed from 1980 on led by the corporate-fascist regimes of Reagan and Thatcher.  From then on via global currency and interest control, borderless corporate rights and armed-force empire, the US-led private money party declared war on all collective consciousness and institutions that did not serve the corporate market. Working from the US’s advantageous post-War position of its nuclear bombs, sea-lane and aerial military control across oceans, and private corporate rights in technology and knowledge production, the US corporate class – fresh from collaboration with the Nazis even during the War – imposed a long march backwards to private money-party control as “freedom”.

Social consciousness became a taboo within the academy itself. Beneath all the delusionary propaganda of “the free market and democracy”, ever more uncontrolled private money sequences propelled mass-murderous pogroms and wars against collectives of all kinds. Worker and social-base strippings under ever more parroted euphemisms of “austerity”, “deficit reduction”, “market reforms”, “technocratic government”, and “efficiencies” became mechanical slogans mouthed by media and politicians. Their common meaning became undeniable, but never named – reductions of life means to citizens everywhere. Long-evolved regulations and institutions for the common life interest continue today to be dismantled, defunded and warred upon on every plane, almost in feeding frenzy.

Yet people increasingly know the only collective awakening that works is awakening to our shared life-ground through every moment, our evolved natural and social life bases without which our next breaths cannot be drawn. This is the demystified core of the world’s wisdom traditions. In the lost bonds of meaning, the ultimate cause is to serve life’s more inclusively compossible flourishing through time – our true human becoming finding its way through the massacre and stupefaction of the global financial fascism not yet named or bound.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Global Crises 2016: Western Media, the Public Interest, Corrupting Youth, the Real Terrorism, Collective Consciousness

GR Editor’s Note

America’s quest for military hegemony includes the use of nuclear weapons on a preemptive basis against both the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China.

Russia has responded to US threats through a major modernization of its strategic nuclear weapons arsenal.

A new nuclear arms race has been launched.  All the safeguards of the Cold War era have been scrapped. The US is openly threatening Russia with nuclear weapons. 

Should we be concerned. Public opinion is largely unaware of the dangers of a nuclear holocaust which threatens life on planet earth. 

The United States and its allies have launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. 

The Western military alliance is in an advanced state of readiness. And so is Russia.

Russia is heralded as the “Aggressor”. U.S.-NATO military confrontation with Russia is contemplated.

Michel Chossudovsky,  January 1, 2016

*       *      *

Recent days and weeks have seen several news items pertaining to the future state of the Russian nuclear triad. The scope of  modernization plans suggests the role Russia’s strategic nuclear forces are to play as of Russia’s security foreign policy.

The scale of Russian strategic nuclear modernization is impressive. President Putin recently attended the laying down of Aleksandr III, the seventh Borey-class ballistic missile submarine out of eight planned which carry 16 multi-warhead Bulava SLBMs each. Three of these ships are already in service, the whole series is to become operational by 2020.


Text by J.Hawk

It was also announced that the first PAK-DA heavy bomber flight is to take place in 2020, with the aircraft becoming operational by 2025. In the interim, Russia’s Long-Range Aviation will receive several squadrons of Tu-160M2 bombers, whose production is expected to resume in the upcoming years. The Sarmat heavy ICBM research and development has been recently declared complete, and the missile will begin launch testing in 2016 or 2017. The missile’s unique capabilities include the ability to strike any target on the planet using multiple possible trajectories, for example, it could be used to strike North America not only by flying over the North Pole, but also using an alternative trajectory over the South Pole which would render US ABM systems irrelevant. The construction of Voronezh-DM over-the-horizon ballistic missile attack early warning radars is continuing. Finally, the Russian General Staff announced the development of a system allowing strategic ballistic missiles to be retargeted following launch, which thus far was impossible to do because once the target selection was completed prior to launch there was no way to alter it once the missile was in flight.

This brief outline of current developments shows that Russia is pursuing a sophisticated strategy of deterrence. The comparatively small and uniform French, Russian, and Chinese nuclear arsenals are capable of deterring only one threat, namely a nuclear attack on their national territory. The variety of capabilities inherent in Russia’s triad means that its national leadership has a range of responses at its disposal and can use its capabilities to deter not only nuclear attacks against its territory but also conventional attacks against its military targets, including outside of Russia’s borders.

Syria is an example of what these capabilities mean for Russia. It is no accident that Putin’s request to raise the strategic nuclear force readiness level to 95% came when he instructed the General Staff to destroy any potential threat to Russian aircraft or ground facilities in Syria. The Russian military presence in Syria is not large enough to guarantee survival against a concerted NATO attack. Fifty aircraft located at a single airbase, even one protected by the S-400, are still vulnerable due to their exposed location and lack of strategic depth. Russian conventional forces could not easily come to Hmeimim’s aid in the event of it being attacked by NATO forces. What makes Hmeimim secure from attack is the credible and flexible deterrence posture.

What makes that deterrence both credible and flexible is the variety and modernity of Russia’s delivery vehicle force which is not limited to having to launch a multi-warhead ICBM or SLBM, and which can penetrate all current or planned defenses. The credibility of Russia’s nuclear deterrent is strengthened by the existence of a powerful conventional deterrent in the form of Kalibr and Kh-101 cruise missiles.

The use of these missiles against ISIS targets was likely motivated to dissuade any countries hostile to Russia’s presence in Syria because it demonstrated Russia could use these weapons to retaliate against any attack on Hmeimim. The target state would then have to choose between backing down or escalating, thus risking a nuclear exchange with Russia. If Russia simply had an ICBM and SLBM force, Hmeimim would be a much more tempting target because an ICBM launch would be disproportionate response to the attack. Russia’s strategic force modernization plans indicate that its leadership anticipates Syria-like scenarios in the years to come.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Russia’s Nuclear Arsenal. Moscow’s Strategy of Deterrence

The VW emissions scandal sent shock waves throughout the auto industry across the world, as it was revealed that the company had been fraudulently lowering the emission counts of the nitrogen oxides that were included in many of its diesel engines after the company realised that there was no legal way for those diesel engines to meet the tight U.S. emissions standards that were in place.

Volkswagen were vague when detailing exactly how the fraud was allowed to take place, and simply blamed the scandal on a ‘chain of events’ within the company. Despite a two hour intensive press conference at the time the scandal first broke, a satisfactory explanation for who authorised the installation the inaccurate software, when the software was first used, and how was the cover up to disguise this usage kept hidden for such a long period of time. What is known is that  500,000 diesel-powered cars in the U.S. were found to be effected when the scandal first broke in September. But this isn’t the biggest controversy to emerge from the scandal: what it reveals about the global auto industry is much more illuminating.

Shining A Light on The European Car Market

The scandal reduced Volkswagen’s standing within the global auto industry (albeit temporarily) and also shone a light on the industry and the way in which its reporting takes place in general. Volkswagen is the biggest car maker in Europe, and one whose reputation revolves around its commitment to reliability and trustworthiness. Correcting the scandal now it has emerged is likely to cost the company, and therefore the German economy, greatly, as it is estimated that 11 million cars and vans will need to be serviced in order to remove the faulty software, and the United Kingdom and Germany are considering the further recall of approximately 1.2 million and 2.8 million diesel cars respectively as a result.

The knock on ramifications are effecting more than just VW: shares in other car manufacturers, including Renault, Peugeot, Nissan and BMW have all dropped by between 2 to 4 percent since the scandal first broke. Focus and guidelines on the European auto industry are likely to become much stricter, and the effect of this will be a loss of profits in association with a loss of consumer confidence.

A Death Blow to the Diesel Car?

Automobile research analyst at Bernstein Research, Max Warburton believes that the VW scandal could mark the beginning of the end for the global diesel car market, In an interview on the subject he stated that: “The move against VW is going to act as a catalyst to speed up the fall in diesel market share in Europe and halt it in the US.” Diesel cars already have a bad reputation amongst those consumers with an environmental interest, because of the high levels of emissions that they produce, and diesel cars are already around 10-15% more expensive to insure than petrol cars (with adequate car insurance coverage being a legal requirement in most markets) making them generally more expensive for consumers to run. This is devastating news for Europe, which has seen billions of euros extensively invested in diesel technology over the last decade, in a bid to find a cleaner and more environmentally friendly diesel engine. The fraudulent activity of the region’s largest manufacturer means that this money has been, effectively, wasted.  No doubt because on of their biggest exports sits at the heart of the scandal, the German government has raised its concerns over the lack of regulation within the car industry, and costly new regulations are sure to be implemented in the short term.

Good News For The American Auto Industry?

Where there is disaster for one market it usually indicates opportunity for another, and it has been predicted that this difficult time for the European auto industry will spell an opportunity for the American auto industry to assert its authority and provide a viable challenge to the diesel market and to diesel car technology which has been dominated by the European auto industry for so long. American hybrid and electric car brands in particular could and should take advantage of the light that this scandal has shed on the need for environmentally friendly motoring. What is yet to be seen is if VW is the only manufacturer to be caught up in this kind of scandal, or if the effects may be even wider reaching that we currently perceive them to be.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The VW Emissions Scandal and Its Effect on the Global Auto Industry

Russia’s New National Security Strategy

January 1st, 2016 by Stephen Lendman

Acting by decree, an updated national security strategy, has been implemented which fundamentally redefines US-Russia relations. 

It addresses significant threats Russia faces – notably US-led NATO encroaching on its borders, stating:

“The buildup of the military potential of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and vesting it with global functions implemented in violations of norms of international law, boosting military activity of the bloc’s countries, further expansion of the alliance, the approach of its military infrastructure to Russian borders create a threat to the national security.”

It accused Washington and it allies of “seeking to keep up their domination in global affairs,” risking greater conflicts than already.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement, saying

“(t)he course NATO has assumed towards ‘deterring’ Russia, materialized as a buildup of military presence in countries of Eastern Europe and the Baltic States, increase in the number and intensity of exercises close to the Russian border, necessitated measures to counter the threats that NATO creates for Russia’s national security.”

“The remaining channels of a political dialogue with NATO and bilateral contacts with the leadership of the key member countries of the organization have been used for the explanation of negative consequences and potential risks from changes to the existing configuration of forces in Europe.”

The Ministry noted the “confrontational nature of the Alliance’s decision to invite Montenegro to the start of talks on its accession to NATO, leading to a further fragmentation of the European security space, creation of new demarcation lines on the continent.”

Are plans to incorporate Ukraine next not yet revealed? Will US-led NATO divisions be deployed along Russia’s borders more than already? Pentagon tactical and strategic nuclear weapons target its heartland.

Are things heading recklessly toward direct confrontation? Russia’s warning against deploying nuclear weapons in Europe to avoid “dangerous consequences” went unheeded.

Former German Defense Ministry Parliamentary State Secretary Willy Wimmer called “new attack options against Russia a conscious provocation of our Russian neighbor.”

Despite Bundestag members overwhelmingly ruling for the withdrawal of US nuclear weapons from Germany earlier, new ones are being deployed, sparking outrage in Russia.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called it “an infringement of Articles 1 and 2 of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.”

Putin responded to Washington’s provocative Eastern European expansion, saying Russia “will be forced to aim our armed forces…at those territories from where the  threat comes.”

“It is (US-led nuclear armed and dangerous) NATO that is moving towards our border, and we aren’t moving anywhere.”

Russia’s Foreign Ministry accused Washington of “inciting tensions and carefully nurturing (its) European allies’ anti-Russian phobias (as a pretext for) expanding its military presence and influence in Europe” – threatening world peace.

Key US NATO allies Britain, France, Germany, Turkey and others march in lockstep with its aggressive anti-Russian policy. Its officials have just cause for concern.

Russian lower house State Duma Speaker Sergey Naryshkin called NATO a “cancer tumor” in Europe. World peace depends on its “disband(ment).”

“This could be done in several stages,” he said. First “expel” America. Disbandment could “painlessly” follow – a vital step toward “strengthening security and stability on the European continent,” he stressed.

Russia’s updated national security strategy cited other significant threats – including internally or externally instigated color revolutions, a US specialty, threatening its sovereignty by undermining and destabilizing its political integrity.

US bioweapons threaten its security, the document saying its “network of…biological military labs is expanding on the territories of countries bordering Russia.”

Its “independent foreign and domestic policy has been met with counteraction by the US and its allies, seeking to maintain” unchallenged global dominance, including by marginalizing, containing, weakening and isolating Russia, a high-risk confrontational policy assuring no winners.

US-installed fascists in Ukraine pose a direct threat to Russia’s security. Their regime represents a “long-term source of instability in Europe and directly at the Russian border” – an intolerable situation forcing Putin to respond appropriately, at the same time fostering peace and stability.

Moscow wants nuclear proliferation constrained, urging “the creation of appropriate conditions that will enable a reduction of nuclear weapons without damaging international security and strategic stability” – perhaps a first step toward eliminating these hugely destructive weapons once and for all.

Its document explained “(a)n entire spectrum of political, financial, economic and information instruments has been brought into struggle for influence in the international arena.” America’s agenda threatens world peace.

Russia only intends using force when other options to “protect the national interests” fail, a possibility it hopes won’t be necessary.

It’s concerned about its resource-dependent economy, noting a need to become more diversified and competitive.

It cites “a lag in the development of advanced technologies, the vulnerability of the financial system, the imbalance of the budgetary system, the economy going offshore, the exhaustion of the raw materials base, the strength of the shadow economy, conditions leading to corruption and criminal activities, and uneven development of regions.”

It intends initiatives designed to deal with these and other significant issues – planning social and economic policies to strengthen its financial system, as well as “ensur(e) its sovereignty and the stability of the national currency.”

It understands the threats and challenges it faces – intending to address them effectively, permitting no outside forces from compromising its sovereignty, especially US-led Western ones.

Whether its efforts will be enough to avoid potentially catastrophic global war is the most pressing issue of our time.

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

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

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

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. 

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs. 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia’s New National Security Strategy

The power-brokers who influenced congress to support nuclear Israel’s illegal settlements in 2015 and war with non-nuclear Iran in 2016

In 1933, a baby was born into a low-income family and grew up in the Dorchester neighborhood of Boston, Massachusetts. His family was of Ukrainian Jewish ancestry whose father drove a taxi, and his mother ran a knitting shop. Currently he is the owner of an Israeli daily newspaper as well as being boss of an LA gambling casino group and is the major founder of the Republican Party.

It is, of course, a matter of global bemusement that the government of the most powerful Western democracy, the United States of America, is elected not on the basis of political acumen, education or intelligence but on the amount of money that specific individuals have either amassed or inherited. Barack Obama, of course, being the one exception.

This political aberration has, in the recent past, given us such incompetent nonentities as George Bush who personified the ultimate in inept leadership,  and which currently showcases a television host and hotel owner, a certain Mr Trump.

Whilst this aberrant behaviour on the part of the American public may seem to the outside world to be a rehearsal for another TV show, in fact it is a tragedy of global proportions whereby casino bosses and the like use their gambling or other profits to ensure that they control or heavily influence the supposedly democratically elected US congress. The result is, that wherever we live in the world – in Europe, Asia or North America – our lives are circumscribed by the antics of such American nonentities who have managed to obtain huge political influence by the power of money alone.

One of the consequences of such a flawed system is that foreign states such as Israel are able to send politicians such as Binyamin Netanyahu to demand of congress $6 billion a year as an involuntary gift from the American electorate to support his own government and to keep him in power. That huge sum includes vast amounts of arms and military equipment to support the Israeli government’s policy of illegal settlement on Palestinian land.  A policy for which Mr Adelson uses the considerable clout of his (unelected) power to support.

Such corrupted methods of allegedly democratic government are of immense disadvantage to global peace and prosperity and should be banned by the UN in the interests of the international community of nations.

(C) [email protected]  London.
1st Jan 2016

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Money is the Driving Force: Politicians in America are Not Elected on the Basis of Acumen, Education or Intelligence…

Revolutionizing Political Economic Analysis in Nigeria

January 1st, 2016 by Abiodun S. Falodun

Records of events are very important. They serve as not only historical documents but a guide for the future. The book, Revolutionary Pen has done it properly as it chronicles events of struggles of the working people, youth and the poor, that emanated in almost all facets of the encounters of the working masses and the society at large; at every serially and not seemingly ending periods of attacks by the state on  them. It does not stop at reporting these events, but goes further to analyse the way forward the working masses and the society in general can take to end these state attacks and also to realise their own inherent political power, which can and only give them the panacea, to rebutting the system of oppression, and take charge of their patrimony.

It should be put rightly on record that events happen almost every second but many are missing in history. This is the main reason the book, Revolutionary Pen, which is a compilation of many articles on the field of struggle of the working people, epitomizes and accurately gives proper records of how these events happened, and also the way out of the problems associated, which makes it a resort for researchers and activists alike.

Far from a conventional write up, the book touches on the much awaited and “hoped for” 2015 Elections, which majority of the Nigerian masses reposed their belief for “Change” from the rotten and corrupt past Jonathan/PDP-led government in. It also x-rayed the similarities, nexus and the profit-oriented coloration of both Jonathan and nascent Buhari governments.

We are now in the aftermath of the elections, and the new ‘Change’ government and agenda are unfolding in the eyes of Nigerians. But before mentioning the tumultuous struggles of workers and pensioners for a living wage and pensions, it is necessary to say a few words on the current and unabated Boko Haram terror camapign in the north-eastern part of Nigeria. The book actually explains in clear terms, the roots of militancy and insurgency in the Nigerian society, the creators of this menace, the reasons behind their rise and how these terror groups and terrorism can be subdued, through the mass actions of working people, youth, labour movement and community movements. I believe that if the solutions proffered in this book can be put to practice by those affected and involved, our society, Nigeria in particular, would have less to bother about rightwing militancy and terrorism.

According to the book, the region where the menace of Boko Haram terrorism is rampant (the North East Nigeria) is the most underdeveloped part of the country where an average youth hardly knows the wonders or the efficacy of science and techniques. The book put forward that the reason is not far-fetched. It explains how these north-eastern youth could not get access to quality education, while the bulk of their endowments and patrimonies are being shared as take-home by rich few in corridors of power. Furthermore, these rich few utilize divisive instrument of religion and ethnicity to subjugate the mass of people, as expressed in the use of Sharia by northern ruling elites when they lost control of political power. The monster of religious division and radicalization thrown to the society is now confronting the country through the Boko Haram terrorism.

Anyone could try to denounce the plight of workers and their senior brothers, the pensioners, especially when one enjoys a juicy contract sum from government or when one is not so ‘lucky’ to be in the employment of capitalist class – either in the state establishment or private sector. The reality of mass suffering of workers and pensioners was clearly expressed in the struggle for implementation of N18, 000 minimum wage and the continuous battle of pensioners for their pittance called pensions, after they have committed their adult lives to the public and private establishments.

The fact that the fate of the working class and those of other oppressed and exploited class is interwoven was recently expressed in Osun State where, as a result of the non-payment of salaries for several months, other oppressed strata, including market women and artisans, find it difficult to sustain a decent living and regular income. This underscores the essence of the book’s serious and detailed analysis of the struggle of workers and pensions, and linking it with the general economic straitjacket the capitalist system, nay its neo-colonial type in Nigeria, has pushed the working and poor people into.

It also explores the role of labour leaders and labour movement in the struggle for living wage and pension payment; drawing out the lessons and errors of the leadership. The leadership of labour had earlier requested a N52, 200 minimum wage in 2010 only to settle for N18, 000 minimum wage in early 2011. Interestingly, when most of the state governments, federal government and private sector employers refused to implement or properly implement the meagre wage law, the labour movement could not defend the wage effectively.

The same story could be said of pension of retirees where the labour movement, instead of defending living pension based on cost of living and other economic and social indices, supported the fraudulent contributory pension scheme that deduct from workers’ salary in order to pay them pension. The recent attack on pensioners by state-sponsored gangsters in June 2015 in Osogbo, Osun State, who protested non-payment of their pensions for up to a year, and stories retirees dying on the queues in the process to collect their meagre pensions, reflect serious suffering pensioners are undergoing. On the other hand, very few in control of retirees pensions are looting en mass billions from these funds.

Today, there is serious attack on N18, 000 minimum wage as many state governments are planning to cut the workers’ salaries while some like the Osun State government have resorted to paying half salaries for workers. There are also plan to sack several thousands of workers by public and private sector. This section of Revolutionary Pen, under the title Workers’ and Pensioners’ Struggle, is a vital material for working people and activists searching for tactics and methods of defending a better living wage for workers and pensioners. More importantly, it underscores the need for labour movement to build a new mass party of working people, youths and the oppressed as a way of permanently ending the misery and sufferings of workers and pensioners. The writer, Kola Ibrahim, has since 2012 written a book on Minimum Wage struggle where all issues pertaining to minimum wage were clearly explained.

The mass misery and squalor ravaging workers and the entire peasantry at large is not limited to Nigeria or Africa alone; it spreads across the entire globe. This itself the working masses must realize that it is a virile tool in the hands of the state. Examples are not far-fetched. We have cases in the northern part of Africa and Middle East where youths and working people, fed up with the failure of global capitalism and their sit tight rulers to improve their lots, took the road of mass revolts and revolutions against their ruling classes. This saw the defeat of decades-old regimes such as those of Hosni Mubarak and Ben Ali in Egypt and Tunisia respectively.

Aside spreading like wildfire, the revolts and revolutions also show the limit of terrorism as a tool of fighting the ruling class. Regimes that used terrorism as a tool to drive through anti-poor policies and sustain their rule were overthrown by mass revolts and revolutions. Of course, most of these revolutions have been derailed with counterrevolution taking deep root. This is a product of failure of these revolutions to end the rule of capital and establish a government of workers, youths and poor. This book underscores the fact that concessions are not won on a platter of gold, but fought for and won by mass of people organized in their common struggle to break the stranglehold of ruling class and improve their conditions.

This book under the section, International Issues, addresses the rise of revolutionary movements in Egypt, Senegal and Burkina Faso, and the continued Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It draws on various international issues and the struggles of the working people globally to underscore the uniformity of struggle of the working people and the need for international mass movement of working and oppressed people. It also exposes the hypocrisy and the failure of global capitalism and imperialism to solve political, social and economic crises facing humanity.

The book also put in proper perspective how the economy has been bastardized by selling off public properties to private individuals at a give-away prices all in the name of obnoxious privatization. Example is when Prof. Barth Nnaji who owns a private electricity firm was made a Minister of Power by the Goodluck Jonathan government. The resultant effect is that the public power sector was sold off to private firms close to corridor of power but with no serious plan to undertake massive long-term investments in the power sector. The same power sector today has not been performing better than before it was handed over to private shylocks. The case has been a sorry one with poor people paying the price with skyrocketing and estimated bill for unavailable electricity. The country after committing over $20 billion to the sector since the civil rule began in 1999 can only boost of about 4,000 megawatts of electricity for a population of over 170 million. Meanwhile, South Africa with around a quarter of Nigeria’s population generates more than 40, 000 megawatts. Even at that, millions of working class South Africans do not have access to electricity.

Revolutionary Pen submits that only when our economy is nationalized under democratic public control and management can we have serious plan of massive development of the power sector as part of the holistic plan to develop the economy and the society. The book explores various capitalist options propounded by bourgeois strategists and clearly shows how Nigeria cannot get out of its underdevelopment under this system.

Addressing the educational crisis in the country, the book provides analysis on how governments at various levels and at different times have neglected the education sector through under funding and capitalist policies of commercialization, rationalization and privatization. The chapter on education titled Education Sector, addresses various issues ranging from analysis of the education sector especially in view of the 2013 six-month strike of the university lecturers’ union, ASUU, to attempt of the Fashola government to totally price education out of the reach of the poor by hiking fees in Lagos State University (LASU), the only state owned university by over one thousand percent. It also addresses the issue of private university education that is becoming a significant feature of education system in Nigeria; while the book also addresses the problem of non-functioning library system in Nigeria, which as the author noted, mirrors the crisis in the education sector as a whole. The author was himself a proven student leader and activist during his days as a student; therefore, his proposals and analyses clearly expressed those of an insider, who has been part and parcel of the struggle and debate about proper funding and management of education sector.

The economic analysis ranging from the global economic meltdown that started in 2008 to the banking crisis in Nigeria in 2009 and the fraudulent bailout system under Jonathan administration, give vivid view of the future of Nigeria, nay the world under the current capitalist system. Not to be forgotten also is the analysis on the health sector vis-à-vis the Ebola virus disease and the attack on doctors in Lagos State by the Fashola government. The health sector analysis clearly delves into the root of the crisis facing the health sector such as inadequate funding and mismanagement of health institutions by government appointed managers. In the analysis on Ebola, the book also dwells on the role of global political economy and especially the pharmaceutical companies in the health crisis especially in Africa and third world countries. The author, just as he did in the education sector, challenged the in-house unions in the health sector to rise to the occasion by building a united platform of struggle to seek improvement in the health sector. The book conclusively links this with the ultimate political challenge before the working and poor people, by linking the health sector crisis with the political economy of Nigeria, nay Africa.

Finally, the book is a library material for students and academics seeking historical analyses and alternative narrative on the political, social and economic issues in Nigeria, Africa and the world. The ending chapter on politics, which includes an essay on the politics and personality of the late pro-democracy activist, Gani Fawehinmi, a discourse on the undemocratic nature of Nigeria’s electoral system, and the debate on the political crisis generated by the health problem and eventual death of the late president Umar Yar’Adua, is also worth reading.

It is an honour to write a review of such an important historical book as Revolutionary Pen. The book is both revolutionary in its analyses and alternative approach to documenting political, social, economic and historical issues. Of course, I hope the publisher will improve on the quality of the book in terms of its production including its cover and graphics. However, the content and the historical value of the book far outweigh in manifolds, the shortcoming of the production. I therefore recommend the book to activists and civil society community; students of politics, history and economics; researchers and academics; labour leaders, journalists/media practitioners, and all those interested in alternative and leftwing understanding of Nigeria’s and global political economic issues.

Revolutionary Pen: Collected Essays on Nigeria, and Global Political-Economic Issues, through the eye of a socialist, by Kola Ibrahim, 2015

Abiodun S. Falodun is Coordinator, Campaign for Democratic and Workers’ Rights (CDWR), Osun State Chapter

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Revolutionizing Political Economic Analysis in Nigeria

Has Boko Haram Been “Technically Defeated”?

January 1st, 2016 by Adeyinka Makinde

Nigeria President Muhammadu Buhari’s recent comment made during an interview with the BBC that the Islamist terror group Boko Haram had been “technically defeated” has unsurprisingly brought a high level of criticism – not least in the light of the massacre of 80 people shortly after.

Some have been quick to draw analogies with US President George W. Bush’s now infamous victoriam declarationem aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln on May 1st, 2003 that brought an end to what he said would be “major combat operations” in Iraq. His televised address, dubbed the “Mission Accomplished” speech was of course followed by a Sunni insurgency which claimed many civilian and military lives. Twelve years later with the rise of several Islamist insurgent groups including al-Qaeda in Iraq and the so-called Islamic State, that country has defied attempts at being militarily pacified.

Buhari was referring to the re-conquest of Nigerian territory acquired by Boko Haram. The distinction is a subtle one and affords little comfort to the relatives of those who have lost their lives in the recent terror outrages.

It is instructive to remember that given the inherent dynamic related to asymmetric warfare, many insurgencies, including those which were successful in destroying the will of a national army or an army of occupation, have not had the goal of territorial conquest. The goal is often to sap the will of the opponent -politically, militarily and morally- in order to extract the relevant concessions among which ultimately would be the ceding of power. Thus Britain withdrew from Palestine in the face of unceasing attacks from the main Zionist terror groups: the Irgun and the Stern Gang.

Buhari may need reminding that the damage capable of being inflicted by a determined guerrilla movement which does not acquire territory is no less of a challenge than one attempting to challenge a national army for territory.

‘Strong ideologies’ such as those which are religiously motivated cannot be defeated without a coherent plan aimed at counter-acting the ideology and merely by the re-conquest of land or the disruption of the activities of the group’s cells.

There needs to be something more tangible in terms of ‘winning the hearts and minds’ of the population in the north east of Nigeria, especially among the disenchanted youth who form the recruiting fodder for Boko Haram.

The Nigerian military may have recaptured land ceded to the insurgents and may have muted, to use Buhari’s words, their ability as an “organised fighting force” in the battlefield, but it is only when there is demonstrable progress in the civic, psychological and economic spheres of counter-insurgency that Buhari should mention the word “defeat” albeit that it is presently qualified by the term “technically.”

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Has Boko Haram Been “Technically Defeated”?

From Burundi to Ghana and beyond the intervention of western states continues as an impediment to genuine development

One of the major issues gaining international attention during 2015 was the political crisis in the Central African state of Burundi stemming from a dispute over whether incumbent President Pierre Nkurunziza could pursue a third term in office. Mass demonstrations took place in the capital demanding that the president reverse his decision to run for a third term.

Nkurunziza was appointed as the head-of-state over Burundi in the aftermath of a negotiated transition process aimed at ending a twelve year civil war during 1993-2005. The president said that the first term resulted from an appointment by the parliament and the second election was the first one where he had to stand before the electorate. A Burundi Constitutional Court decision on May 5 upheld the position of Nkurunziza in the disagreement.

The National Council for the Defense of Democracy-Forces for the Defense of Democracy (CNDD-FDD) ruling party won the elections held on July 21 guaranteeing Nkurunziza another five year term of office. Burundi is considered a lesser developed state with an economy based on agricultural production and exports.

Nonetheless, the unrest inside the country has continued. A disaffected military officer, Gen. Godefroid Niyombara, attempted to stage a coup on May 13 which did not succeed in part due to the condemnation of the effort by the African Union (AU) and East African Community (EAC) regional organizations. It has been estimated that 280,000 people have fled Burundi to neighboring states in response to the growing extra-judicial killings in the capital of Bujumbura and other areas.

In recent weeks there have also been clashes between rebels opposed to the Nkurunziza and Burundian security forces in the southwestern Rumonge district of the landlocked state. Similar attacks were launched near the capital of Bujumbura on Dec. 11.

According to UPI.com,

“Rebels in Burundi attacked military installations surrounding the capital of Bujumbura on Friday (Dec. 11), a sign from the opposition to the president that the conflict is becoming a rebellion. The coordinated assaults at dawn by heavily armed insurgents on military sites, security encampments and a prison left 12 rebels dead and 20 under arrest, an army spokesman said.”

Many Burundian refugees have re-located in neighboring Rwanda where claims indicate that armed opposition forces are being recruited. The government in Kigali has denied these suggestions and says that it is neutral in the conflict.

Rwanda and Burundi have a near-matching ethnic composition with Hutu majorities and Tutsi minority groups. However, in Burundi the head-of-state Nkurunziza, a former rebel leader during the 1993-2005 civil war, is from the Hutu majority whereas in Kigali, President Paul Kgame is Tutsi and the former leader of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the guerilla army that took control of Rwanda amid the genocide of 1994 that killed an estimated 800,000 people.

Burundian Foreign Minister Alain Nyamitwe spoke during a press conference on December 19 in Bujumbura saying “There have been reports that some Burundian refugees have been recruited and went for military training to attack the country. We call on these illegal activities to stop. We needed the truth to be brought to the table as to whether the allegations are false or true.” (The East African)

Refuting these assertions, Rwandan Minister for Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs, Seraphine Mukantabana, stressed “These are the same baseless accusations that different people keep on trading. There is no proof to it, like the names, pictures or other details of refugees they allege were recruited so that we can go and check if they ever lived in the camp and left as a result of recruitments. I don’t see anything factual except just hearsay, and idle word of mouth.” (East African, Dec. 19)

Meanwhile, amid the failure of the Nkurunziza government and the opposition to reach a political agreement, the AU, which is seeking the support of the United Nations Security Council, has pledged to deploy 5,000 peacekeeping troops into Burundi. The Burundian leaders in Bujumbura are in complete opposition to this proposal.

Despite efforts by AU Commission Chair Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma to reassure the Burundi government that it is only concerned with preventing the full eruption of a civil war and has no hidden agenda as it relates to regime-change, Nkurunziza refuses to entertain any foreign occupation of the country and is blaming the former colonial power of Belgium in conjunction with Rwanda for the rising instability. Dlamini-Zuma in a statement on the Burundi crisis  “expressed the AU’s readiness to rapidly initiate discussions with the government of Burundi to devise the best ways and means of facilitating the deployment of the mission, in a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation”.

The AU Commission Chair encouraged the Burundi government to participate fully in peace talks that were scheduled to take place on December 28 in Uganda. However, the political character of the proposed intervention by the AU in Burundi remains to be determined.

Such an intervention would undoubtedly be reliant upon assistance from western imperialist states based in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels. With this type of deployment the potential for a conflict framed within the context of national sovereignty and the role of western states could prove problematic and protracted.

West Africa 50 Years After the Coup Against Nkrumah: Economic Dependency and the Ebola Crisis

Nearly five decades ago on February 24, 1966, a right-wing police and military coup guided and coordinated by the United States Central Intelligence Agency and State Department was staged against the Convention People’s Party (CPP) of the First Republic of Ghana. Nkrumah had studied for a decade in the U.S. and two years in England where he attended Lincoln University, the University of Pennsylvania and the London School of Economics.

During his tenure oversees in the years of 1935-1947, Nkrumah was associated with the Marxist left and African nationalist movements in the U.S. and Britain. He was an organizer among African students, reading and learning from the work and personal association with luminaries such as W.E.B. Du Bois and C.L.R. James along with being a reputed member of the Garveyite Universal Negro Improvement Association, African Communities League (UNIA-ACL) while he lived in Pennsylvania.

After completing his studies in the U.S. during 1945, he traveled to Britain where he participated in the organization of the Fifth Pan-African Congress held that October, working with Du Bois, veteran communist and Pan-Africanist George Padmore, among others. By the end of 1947, Nkrumah had returned to the Gold Coast (colonial name for Ghana) becoming an organizing secretary for the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC), a moderate organization which hired Nkrumah to develop a mass base for the group.

By mid-1949, Nkrumah had broken with the UGCC taking its Committee on Youth Organization (CYO) which he founded and the Accra Evening News publication conceived by him as well. The CPP was initiated on June 12, 1949 at a rally attended by tens of thousands of Ghanaians.

The Positive Action campaign of January 1950 landed him in prison for a year when he was released after the CPP won governmental elections established by the British colonialists to reform the system of imperialism. After his release from prison, Nkrumah was named Leader of Government Business by the British Governor General Sir Arden-Clark.

During the years of 1951-1957, Nkrumah described this period as moving from Positive Action to Tactical Action. The independence years of 1957-1966, witnessed tremendous strides in the areas of national development, support for other independence struggles through the CPP press and the foreign ministry and efforts designed to bring about the realization of a United States of Africa.

Socialism under an All-African union government was the strategic objective of the CPP. Nkrumah argued that in a 20th century international context of large-scale economic production within both the socialist world and the decaying imperialist system, Africa, in order to develop rapidly, required the consolidation of its nation-states, integrating small-scale neo-colonial dominated micro-national structures into a large continental political construct that could engage in centralized planning and development.

The Congo crisis of 1960, resulting in the imperialist-backed coup against national liberation leader and first Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, leading to him being kidnapped and assassinated in January 1961, illustrated even more starkly to Nkrumah and other anti-imperialist governments in Africa, that an independent military force was needed to safeguard the sovereignty of the post-colonial states. These progressive governments led by revolutionary parties and organizations such as in Guinea, Algeria, Mali, Egypt along with Ghana, took a different line than the majority of the moderate and conservative post-colonial states which were divided into two blocs known as the Monrovia and Brazzaville groups.

Of course in Ghana, it was the military and the police that were utilized against the socialist-oriented state led by the CPP. Nonetheless, it was the economic dependency of the state in relationship to neo-colonialism, which Nkrumah described in his seminal 1965 book, as being “The Last Stage of Imperialism” that provided the ideological underpinning of the regime-change tactics utilized by Washington under the administration of the-then President Lyndon Baines Johnson.

The citadel of neo-colonialism is the U.S. and its multi-national corporations and banks. Nkrumah writes in the introduction of “Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism”, that “Foremost among the neo-colonialists is the United States, which has long exercised its power in Latin America. Fumblingly at first she turned towards Europe, and then with more certainty after world war two when most countries of that continent were indebted to her. Since then, with methodical thoroughness and touching attention to detail, the Pentagon set about consolidating its ascendancy, evidence of which can be seen all around the world.”

Nkrumah goes on to ask “Who really rules in such places as Great Britain, West Germany, Japan, Spain, Portugal or Italy? If General de Gaulle is ‘defecting’ from U.S. monopoly control, what interpretation can be placed on his ‘experiments’ in the Sahara desert, his paratroopers in Gabon, or his trips to Cambodia and Latin America? Lurking behind such questions are the extended tentacles of the Wall Street octopus. And its suction cups and muscular strength are provided by a phenomenon dubbed ‘The Invisible Government’, arising from Wall Street’s connection with the Pentagon and various intelligence services.”

Ghana’s first attempt at securing a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was during the last several months of the Nkrumah administration in 1965. The Ghana government was severely impacted by the decline in cocoa prices on the global market. In addition, petty-bourgeois class interests within Ghana, allied with neo-colonialism and imperialism, worked incessantly to undermine Socialism and Pan-Africanism.

After the coup and the installation of a puppet regime composed of a group of lower-level military officers and police, the IMF granted a series of loans to Ghana under terms that proved quite disadvantageous to the interests of the workers, farmers and youth of the country. Consequently, Ghana has never regained its political and social status attained during the Nkrumah government of the 1950s and 1960s.

Today under the leadership of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) ruling party headed by President John Dramani Mahama, Ghana faces the continuation of the post-colonial crisis. The IMF is preparing to extend further credit to the government despite the hardships the people have suffered since 1966.

The economic dependency and military subordination of Africa could not be more clearly revealed than when the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) epidemic erupted during 2014-2015. These developments represented the largest outbreak of this virulent form of a Viral Hemorrhagic Fever (VHF) on the continent of Africa in 40 years, when it was first identified in the former Zaire, now-known as the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia were the most severely impacted by the EVD outbreak. It has been reported by the World Health Organization (WHO) that over 11,000 people died, most of which were in the above-mentioned states. Small incidences were reported in other states including Nigeria, Senegal and Mali but were rapidly contained and eradicated.

All three of these states, Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia maintain close economic, political and military links with imperialism. The U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) engages in military operations alongside these West African governments whose people are among the poorest on the continent and the world.

Absent of a firm Pan-African system of healthcare, economic production and communication, the devastation of this EVD outbreak could not be properly tackled. Even if Pentagon-based bioweapons research centers were the cause of this pandemic, the failure of Africa to squelch the spread in its infancy is a reflection of the current status of neo-colonialism well into the second decade of the 21st century.

Then it was the military apparatuses of Washington, London and Paris which were given permission by the neo-colonial dominated regimes to intervene. Cuba also deployed but solely with medical personnel and played a significant role in stemming the spread of EVD, even prompting recognition by imperialism through its corporate and state-controlled media.

Revolutionary Cuba has been subjected to biological warfare by the CIA and the Pentagon for decades. Nonetheless, the socialist state has been able to overcome these assaults and emerge even stronger as an anti-imperialist country.

The only medium and long-term solution to the healthcare crisis in Africa lies within a Pan-African planning framework. There must be an integration of the medical and scientific infrastructure to facilitate the sharing of investigative and research methodologies.

The need for an All-African military high command is as necessary in 2015 as it was during the early and mid-1960s during the times of Nkrumah, Ahmed Sekou Toure (Guinea), Modibo Keita (Mali), Ben Bella (Algeria), Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Julius Nyerere (Tanzania) and the other anti-imperialist leaders of the period. Nonetheless, this continental command must be independent of imperialism, distinguishing it from the current collaborative efforts led by AFRICOM and NATO which characterize the operations now in effect in Somalia, Nigeria, Mali, the Gulf of Guinea, the Gulf of Aden and other geo-political regions on the continent.

Neo-Colonialism: 1965-2015

Over the period of fifty years, Africa has experienced numerous crises involving food deficits, unsustainable national debt, periodic and consistent proliferations of infectious disease epidemics, ongoing series of military interventions both domestic and western in orientation as well as political efforts aimed at exerting continental influence upon the UN Security Council and other multi-lateral structures controlled by the imperialist industrialized states. In 2015 yet another African debt crisis is developing due to the precipitous decline in commodity prices including oil and strategic minerals.

This crisis comes in the almost immediate aftermath of AU member-states being hailed for their phenomenal economic growth. Events in Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, the Republics of Sudan and South Sudan and other countries illustrates how precarious these assessments of the financial status of neo-colonial dominated states are in actuality.

These challenges on the economic front are not limited to Africa. Many of the so-called “emerging countries” are facing the same problems such as Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Russia and China. Beijing with its social constructs utilizing the commanding role of the Communist Party and its planned economy under socialism with Chinese characteristics has proven to be in a better position to address the current crisis.

Xi Jinping’s recent state visits to the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of South Africa, along with the second full summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), noted that the desire for closer ties between Beijing and AU member-states was cognizant of the new situation within the global economy still dominated by imperialism. Africa needs infrastructural development in order to secure genuine growth and development in the short, medium and long-term political and economic trajectories.

The fact that prices for oil have ranged from $34-38 per barrel in December 2015, down by over two-thirds in the last year-and-a-half, provides a glimpse into the current situation involving the international division of labor and economic power. The U.S. under the administration of President Barack Obama has strongly emphasized domestic oil production and along with ally Saudi Arabia, has over-produced petroleum resulting in a glut in the market and a rapidly declining economic situation in the other producer-states including Russia.

Other prices for commodities have also gone down significantly. For example platinum, in which the Southern African states of South Africa and Zimbabwe constitute approximately 75 percent of the world’s production, has also declined in price impacting foreign exchange earnings and the labor market.

Bloomberg in an article published on September 29, stated that “Platinum extended its slump to the lowest in more than six years amid concerns demand from automakers will slow as investigations into the Volkswagen AG scandal deepen. Volkswagen cars with diesel engines rigged to cheat on emissions tests are being pulled from markets in Spain, Switzerland, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium, while prosecutors in Sweden consider opening an investigation on potential corruption. About 42 percent of platinum demand comes from its use in pollution-control devices in diesel engines, according to Morgan Stanley.”

This same article continues saying “Platinum futures for January delivery fell 0.5 percent to settle at $918.10 an ounce at 1:23 p.m. (Sept. 29) on the New York Mercantile Exchange, after touching $899.60, the lowest for a most-active contract since December 2008. Palladium advanced. Gold futures for December delivery slipped 0.4 percent to $1,126.80 an ounce on the Comex in New York. Prices are set for a fifth straight quarterly loss, the longest losing streak since 1997. Silver gained. Platinum is trading at a discount of about $210.50 to gold, the biggest since August 2012. Some investors who had been betting on platinum outperforming gold are now exiting that trade, David Govett, head of precious metals at broker Marex Spectron Group in London, said by telephone.”

As Nkrumah pointed out in his book “Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism,” some five decades ago, “On the economic front, a strong factor favoring Western monopolies and acting against the developing world is international capital’s control of the world market, as well as of the prices of commodities bought and sold there. From 1951 to 1961, without taking oil into consideration, the general level of prices for primary products fell by 33.l per cent, while prices of manufactured goods rose 3.5 per cent (within which, machinery and equipment prices rose 31.3 per cent). In that same decade this caused a loss to the Asian, African and Latin American countries, using 1951 prices as a basis, of some $41,400 million. In the same period, while the volume of exports from these countries rose, their earnings in foreign exchange from such exports decreased.”

Consequently, the cycle of dependency in Africa upon the imperialist states must be overturned in order for real growth and development to occur and maintain its sustainability over a period of decades. This cannot be realized under the current system of global capitalism, also referred to as international finance capital and imperialism.

The realization of the aims and objectives of the African Revolution requires socialist construction. Until the character of development is viewed and analyzed within an anti-capitalist framework, the actual solutions to these crises will remain elusive.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Africa in Review 2015: Social Crises, “Peacekeeping” Operations and the Legacy of Imperialism

Part 3 of 3. Read part 1 and part 2.

Documents released by Edward Snowden brought fresh questions about GCHQ involvement in US drone strikes outside conflict zones.  MPs took the unusual step of writing to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, suggesting  it was time “to consider and issue clear guidance on the law, policy and procedure concerning the investigation of complicity into extraterritorial targeted killing.”  Qatar continues to be an important hub for US and UK drone operations with the Al Udeid base hosting the Combined Air Operation Center (CAOC).  British military operations against ISIS are also run from ‘RAF Al Udeid’ in Qatar.

RMilitary officials from the US, UK, France and Italy began to meet as the Reaper Users Group during 2015.  The group is aimed, we are told, at enhancing interoperability and reducing costs.   More details emerged during the year of the role of the US air base at Ramstein in Germany in the on-going drone wars.  The base is a key communications hub linking the US with its armed drones around the globe. Hundreds marched on the base in September in response to the revelations. The debate over whether the use of drones for targeting killing is effective at reducing terrorism or a recruitment tool for terrorist groups continues. This year, former military officers have been most vocal in arguing the latter.

sAround forty alleged militants were killed in a single reported US drone strike in Somalia at the end of January.  Although the Pentagon publicly denied carrying out that particular strike, they were happy to confirm that US drones had struck Somalia on the very same day, targeting a senior leader of al-shabab.  There seems to have been a real change of tactics and an increase in drone strikes in Somalia as Jack Serle of The Bureau of Investigative Journalism noted early in the year.  Perhaps inevitably the increasing use of drones has been followed by the rise in numbers of military drones being shot down.  USRussianIsraeli and Saudi Arabian drones have all reported been downed during the year although it is impossible to confirm all these reports.  The safety and security threat from small civil drones began to be recognized during the year. As sales of these small cheap drones takes off, the threat will simply grow.

TThe normalisation of drone targeted killing took a step forward in 2015 as the UK wholeheartedly embraced the tactic.  ParliamentariansUS Senatorsthe United Nations and civil society groups continue to struggle to, at the very least, limit such activity and gain some oversight of the process.  Transparency, however, is in short supply and government contempt for proper public oversight, never mind curbing the practice, is obvious. Meanwhile BAE Systems’ Taranis combat drone continued its test programme with a third (and reportedly final) set of flight tests in November. The drone, or a derivative of it, is likely to be a contender for the UK’s Future Combat Air System (FCAS) likely to see some funding decision in 2016.

UBritish-based Israeli-owned UAV Engines attempts to curb protests at its factory in Staffordshire were botched during the year when the company failed to abide by court rules. In February the CPS dropped a case against nine protesters when the company refused to co-operate with court mandated disclosures.  In July protesters successfully overturned in the courts a ‘forbidden zone’ around the factory, and then in October the High Court threw out an injunction as the company had in effect misled the court. This led to the collapse of the caseagainst a further 19 people arrested for breach of the injunction at a protest in July. Maybe UAV Engines should join US drone manufacturer General Atomics in setting up shop in theUnited Arab Emirates (UAE).

capital-letter-vThe UK MoD has suddenly developed a taste for releasing videos of British drone strikes. Since March 2015 there have been nine videos of such strikes published online as opposed to just six released over the past seven years.  While the Vatican has long opposed the use of armed drones and the development of autonomous weapons, drones have this year been banned from flying over Vatican City due to security fears.

wWhistleblowers helped us have a better understanding of the drone wars during 2015 with the release of a set of documents that have become labelled ‘The Drone Papers‘.   Edward Snowden’s NSA revelations also revealed GCHQ links to US drone strikes and that personnel from project Widowmaker were based at Menwith Hill. Finally, former US drone pilots went on the record to detail the horrific consequences of the US drone targeted killing programme.   The information released by whistleblowers is crucial to the public’s understanding of drone warfare – thank you.

The manifest failings of the UK’s Watchkeeper drone were laid bare this year.  After spending almost £1bn on its development, the UK got barely six days use out of the (ahem) state of the art drone in Afghanistan.  Army training with the ‘all weather’ drone is now being conducted in the Ascension Islandsas the weather in the UK is not, er, suitable. Wimbledon was not immune to the intrusion of rogue drones, something that occurred at numerous sporting events during the year.

xyzWhile Northrop Grumman was happy to feature the X-47b drone in its Super Bowl ad, the much more mysterious X-37b drone took off on another classified mission into space in May 2015.  Don’t expect it back any time soon – the previous secret mission lasted almost two years.  Despite the chaos and horror of the on-going war in Yemen – in which more than 90% of the casualties are civilians – the US continues to launch drone strikes, with the Bureau reporting around 20 confirmed and an additional 10 possible strikes. The extremely high-altitude Zephyr drone was purchased by the UK for use by its Special Forces. Airbus executives, mistakenly, let the cat out of the bag ahead of the SDSR in September. After a rushed Airbus retraction the deal was discretely confirmed as part of the SDSR in November.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A-Z of Drones 2015: “Reducing Terrorism”, Targeted Assassinations, UAV Engines, Whistleblowers

International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde offered a bleak economic forecast for 2016 and beyond in a guest column published Wednesday in the German financial newspaper Handelsblatt .

The IMF head wrote that global economic growth next year would be “disappointing” and the outlook for the medium term had also deteriorated. Lagarde pointed to the continuing slowdown in China and the prospect of rising interest rates in the US as major factors leading to a continued slowdown in world growth rates and the potential for financial shocks.

Lagarde also noted the substantial decline in the growth of world trade, the ongoing fall in oil and other commodity prices, and the worsening economic and financial crisis in so-called “emerging market” and “developing” countries whose economies are heavily dependent on commodity exports and expanding trade.

“All of that means global growth will be disappointing and uneven in 2016,” Lagarde said. She warned, in particular, of “spillover effects” resulting from the decision of the US Federal Reserve Board earlier this month to begin raising its benchmark interest rate from near zero, the first Fed rate increase in over nine years.

Lagarde and the IMF had lobbied against the Fed move, warning that it could spark a panic outflow of capital from emerging market countries with high levels of dollar-denominated corporate debt such as Brazil, Turkey and South Africa.

In the Handelsblatt article, Lagarde said that she was concerned about the ability of such countries to absorb “shocks,” citing in particular an increase in financing costs for corporations that sold large volumes of dollar-denominated bonds during the emerging market and oil boom that followed the financial crisis of 2008. The rise in the dollar means the real cost of debt repayment for these companies, whose revenues are in sinking local currencies, increases.

Lagarde hinted that the crisis could spread more broadly across the financial system, suggesting that emerging market and energy sector companies defaulting on their payments could “infect” banks and state treasuries.

On Wednesday, oil prices resumed their slide to their lowest levels in eleven years after the Saudi oil minister said the kingdom had no intention of scaling back petroleum production in 2016. Since the middle of 2014, oil prices have plummeted by two-thirds. In 2015 alone they have dropped by 35 percent.

But the oil price fall is only part of a broader collapse in industrial commodity prices. Nickel has dropped by more than 40 percent. Zinc, which was widely expected to rise in price this year because of the signaled closure of large mines in Australia and Ireland, has fallen 28 percent. Iron ore has also plummeted.

The new drop in oil prices and Lagarde’s pessimistic forecast combined to push down global stock prices Wednesday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling 117 points (0.66 percent), in line with other major indexes in the US and Europe.

The continuing decline in commodity prices is a sharp expression of a deepening crisis in the real economy internationally. The slowdown in China is the most prominent factor in the fall in these prices, as its previously voracious appetite for industrial commodities propped up global demand.

But China’s slowdown is itself an expression of more fundamental processes and contradictions in the world capitalist economy. An indication of the systemic nature of the current malaise is the forecast released this week by OPEC that petroleum prices will not return to the $100-per-barrel levels of 2013 and early 2014 until 2040 at the earliest.

In October, the IMF released a report predicting world economic growth of 3.5 percent for 2016, the slowest rate since the immediate aftermath of the September 2008 financial meltdown. Last April, it warned that the global economy would remain locked in a pattern of slow growth, high unemployment and high debt for a prolonged period, acknowledging that there was little prospect of a return to the growth rates that prevailed prior to the 2008 crash.

In the April report, the IMF focused on a sharp decline in business investment during the so-called “recovery” that officially began in June of 2009. It noted that business investment in North America and Europe had declined by 20 percent, twice the fall that followed previous recessions.

While the IMF chose not to make the connection, this figure points to a basic feature of the global capitalist crisis—the enormous growth of speculation and parasitism. The same tendencies that triggered the 2008 crash—the reckless and largely criminal speculative activities of the financial elite that have come to dominate economic life—have only intensified in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

Far from reining in the banks and hedge funds, the IMF, the major central banks and governments in the US, Europe and Japan have bailed them out to the tune of trillions of dollars and subsidized a further orgy of speculation. By means of ultra-low interest rates and central bank money-printing operations, known as “quantitative easing,” finance capital has been encouraged to inflate new financial bubbles—from the stock market to the oil sector, junk bonds and emerging market economies—which have further enriched the wealthy and the super-wealthy while diverting resources from the productive forces and impoverishing the working class.

While the real economy has remained depressed, stock prices have soared. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index in the US has risen by more than 200 percent since 2009.

Corporations and banks have starved the real economy of productive investment, instead seeking higher profits from risky investments that are entirely parasitic. These include speculation in high-yield, high-risk “junk bonds” linked to the oil and commodities industries. After the implosion of the subprime mortgage market in 2007-2008, money has flooded into this area of speculation. High-yield assets at US mutual funds hit $305 billion in June 2014, triple their level in 2009. Outstanding debt in the US junk bond market has soared to more than $1.2 trillion from less than $700 billion in 2007—an increase of 71 percent.

Now, under the impact of the collapse in industrial commodity prices, the ratings agencies are warning that 50 percent of energy junk bonds could default, along with 72 percent of bonds in the metals, mining and steel industries.

The mounting crisis of the emerging market economies is similarly bound up with massive inflows of hot money seeking high rates of return during the oil boom and China’s post-Wall Street crisis rapid economic expansion. Between 2004 and 2014, emerging market corporate debt increased from $4 trillion to $18 trillion, with much of the increase taking place since 2008.

One figure highlights the further growth of economic parasitism since the 2008 crisis: global debt has increased by 40 percent to $200 trillion, almost three times the size of the world economy.

To pay for this exercise in recklessness and greed, the working class all over the world has been hammered with austerity programs, mass layoffs and cuts in wages, pensions and health benefits. This has only deepened the stagnation and decline in the real economy. But these attacks will continue and intensify in 2016 and beyond, in tandem with the deepening of the crisis of the capitalist system.

Perhaps the sharpest expression of the explosive growth of parasitism is the record increase registered in 2015 in mergers and acquisitions and stock buybacks. US corporations that amassed trillions from cost cutting, wage cuts and the benevolence of the Obama administration and the Fed, rather than invest their cash hoards in job-creating, productive areas, have instead plowed it into stock buybacks to increase the payouts to big investors, and in mergers, which result in downsizing and job cutting. This past year, $4.7 trillion worth of mergers and acquisitions were announced in the US, a record.

One day prior to Lagarde’s column in Handelsblatt, the initial fruits of one of the biggest mergers of the year, the $130 billion deal involving the chemical giants DuPont and Dow, were announced. DuPont said Tuesday it would cut 1,700 jobs in its home area around Wilmington, Delaware. This is part of a $700 million cost-cutting plan that will reduce the firm’s 6,100-strong work force by 10 percent.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on IMF Warns of Slow Growth and Economic “Shocks” in 2016

In  Dara’a province, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and the National Defense Forces (NDF) with the Russian Air Forces’ support are advancing in the town of Sheikh Miskeen clashing with the Free Syrian Army’s “Southern Front Brigades”. The pro-government sources report that the SAA took control of the Battalion 82 base and the hilltop of Tal Al-Hish overlooking the northern flank of the town. The clashes are continuing.

Sheikh Miskeen is located along the Quneitra-Sweida Highway and overlooks a way on the Al-Quneitra Governorate and the city of Nawa.

According to the field reports, the SAA liberated the town of Maheen, 25 kilometers from the vital M5 highway, and the town of Huwwarin after the heavy clashes with ISIS. The towns were taken by the terrorist group in late November. It is expected that the SAA will continue their offensive onto the town of Quryatayn.

The Syrian government has essentially avoided clashing with the Syrian Kurds which are a major part of the SDF.

However, as the Kurdish forces and the Russian-backed government forces meet up, the question of developing joint strategy arises. Moreover, Ankara already concerned by the growing Kurdish clout on the border and definitely is preparing actions to stop the Kurds in their offensive actions. Such an action would also push the Syrian government and the SDF to coordinate their actions in fight against foreign-backed terrorists.

If you have a possibility, if you like our content and approaches, please, support the project. Our work wont be possible without your help: PayPal: [email protected] or via: http://southfront.org/donate/

Subscribe our channel!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaV1…

Visit us: http://southfront.org/

Follow us on Social Media:
http://google.com/+SouthfrontOrgNews
https://www.facebook.com/SouthFrontENTwo
https://twitter.com/southfronteng

Our Infopartners:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/
http://thesaker.is
http://www.sott.net/
http://in4s.net

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Strategic Advance of SAA Forces against ISIS Rebels in Southern Syria, Supported by Russian Air Strikes

Arizona Senator John McCain’s crusade to rid the US space industry of Russian rocket engines by 2019 could be scuppered by a devious provision placed in the upcoming defense spending bill.

After the outbreak of violence in Ukraine, McCain was the leading figure behind the legislation enforcing the rapid phase out of the RD-180 engines that have powered the Atlas V rocket, used in most US launches, for the past two decades.

United Launch Alliance (ULA), the leading space rocket contractor co-owned by Boeing and Lockheed Martin, says it is developing its all-American Vulcan rocket, a tweaked version of the Atlas, with a new engine. But until its launch, it insists it needs to rely on the 14 RD-180 it has already ordered from Russia’s Energomash.

The exact number of engines ULA is allowed to use is at the heart of the behind-the-scenes battle going on in Congress. The House version of the 2016 defense spending bill says all 14, while Senate insists that only nine should be used, and McCain is arguing the number should be even lower.

Russian RD-180 rocket engines manufactured at Energomash at the request of the U.S., being prepared for transport to Sheremetyevo Airport. (RIA Novosti/Iliya Pitalev)

But one group of Republicans have strengthened ULA’s hand with a provision in the bill, that McCain is calling“outrageous”. Section 8045 says that any tender for a space launch in the 2016 fiscal year must receive bids from two suppliers, and if there are fewer, the competition is void.

Since there are only two companies licensed for space launches in the US – the other is Elon Musk’s SpaceX – this gives ULA the power to sabotage any tender, by saying it has no engines, due to Congress restrictions.

Atlas V rocket (Reuters/Michael Brown)

McCain has placed the blame on Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, and his group of pro-ULA – and by proxy, “pro-Putin” – Republicans.

“Why in the world would anyone think we would want to continue dependency on Russian rocket engines, which traces up to the corrupt mafia that is around Vladimir Putin?” McCain said to The Daily Beast. “The American people should ask a question of these appropriators: Why are you taking care of Vladimir Putin’s cronies?”

Shelby’s Alabama houses extensive facilities operated by Lockheed Martin and Boeing, and the two giants contributed $160,000 to his election fund last year.

Grounded by space politics

Beyond the Congress machinations, the RD-180 replacement program threatens to create a major bottleneck for the US space industry.

Even supposing the current 14 Russian engines are fired into space, the future of the Vulcan is up in the air, with 2022 as the earliest working date, if all field tests by private US engine manufacturers go to plan, with ULA also on the hook for a large bill. It has stated that in the worst-case scenario each launch could cost up to $1 billion, five times the current price.

Once the plucky outsider, Space X, which has claimed it can outcompete ULA on launch price, could now become a monopoly. But Space X doesn’t even have a heavy rocket that could compete with Atlas, and won’t until its Falcon Heavy project is complete, which could also take another six or seven years.

The Pentagon has pleaded with Congress to hold off its politically-motivated plans, saying in a letter signed by Defense Secretary Ash Carter that the anti-Russian legislation could leave “a multiyear gap where we have neither assured access to space nor an environment where price-based competition is possible.”

On the other side of the Atlantic, Energomash will also likely be in financial trouble without government support, as RD-180 formed the bulk of its orders.

Falcon Heavy rocket (Image from spacex.com)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Lockheed Martin Dependent on Russian Technology. John McCain Slams Fellow Republicans for Lobbying in Favor of Russian Space Engines

A Year of Achievement for Cuban Healthcare

December 31st, 2015 by Ollie Hopkins

The 56TH year of the Cuban Revolution, 2015, has been a year of more inspirational achievements in health, education and internationalism — despite the ongoing US blockade.

In June, Cuba became the first country in the world to receive validation from the World Health Organisation (WHO) to successfully achieve the elimination of mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis.

Given the global scale of the HIV/Aids epidemic, where an estimated 1.4 million women living with HIV become pregnant each year, the potential global health impact is phenomenal if the world can learn from Cuba.

The WHO said: “Eliminating transmission of a virus is one of the greatest public health achievements possible. Cuba’s success demonstrates that universal access and universal health coverage are feasible and indeed are the key to success, even against challenges as daunting as HIV.”

This year also saw the largest contingent of health workers who were fighting the Ebola outbreak in west Africa return home after completing their successful missions.

These world-leading achievements are from a very long list of Cuban healthcare accolades — and are a testament to the Cuban revolution and its people.

Cuba has created a world-class healthcare system and is at the forefront of biotechnology and medical research, despite being under blockade for over half a century, which prevents access to many crucial medicines and equipment.

According to the World Bank, the United States spends almost 20 times what Cuba spends per head per year ($8,553 to $431) on healthcare and yet Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the US and a similar life expectancy.

If the US had the same infant mortality rates as Cuba, it would save thousands of US children’s lives each year.

Cuba’s achievements clearly go beyond simple statistics and are a product of its socialist system. How society is organised, for whose benefit is public spending and the goal of a healthy, educated population all need to be considered.

The fundamental difference is that in the United States, healthcare spending funds huge profits for a wide range of companies that profiteer along the supply chain of the created health sector market.

Cuba, by contrast, has a centrally planned system where different public-sector departments work highly effectively with one another, in pursuit of the public health of its people, rather than a pursuit of profit.

Cuba’s vaccine development continues to be among the best in the world. Cimavax is a lung cancer vaccine that can suppress the growth of tumours in the lungs allowing for a stable stage of the illness, prolonging life.

The Molecular Immunology Centre of Havana, a Cuban state-owned organisation, is the creator of Cimavax and has also developed vaccines for meningitis B, hepatitis B and dengue fever. These drugs are free and universally available for patients in Cuba.

Cimavax has been available in Cuba for several years, but has gained more global attention since the US-Cuba rapprochement on December 17 last year. There has been hope for improved co-operation between the US and Cuba on health and Cimavax is now undergoing clinical trials in the US, which does signify a step in the right direction on this particular issue.

However, progress elsewhere has been limited.

Embassies opened in Washington and Havana this summer, symbolising the formal re-establishment of diplomatic relations. Despite these positive developments, the blockade is still in place, Guantanamo Bay is still occupied and US aggressive policies towards Cuba continue.

Only the United States and Israel now stand isolated in support of the blockade. Twenty-fifteen saw the largest-ever majority in the UN vote to end the blockade with a total of 191-2, with no abstentions.

The financial impact of the blockade has been devastating — $833 billion since its introduction. The blockade costs lives, and that was its intention.

Former Cuban diplomat Dr Carlos Alzugaray said at this year’s Cuban Futures conference: “One can never forget the original motives — hunger, desperation and the overthrowing of the Cuban government. They are the exact words used by the State Department in 1960.”

In October, a Cuban seven-year-old cancer patient Noemi Bernardez was denied access to Temozolomida, a drug which could radically improve her survival chances, as Cuba cannot directly purchase drugs from US manufacturers.

This is just one example from an endless list from over five decades of US aggression against Cuba, costing the health and lives of the Cuban people.

As part of the post-December 17 relations, President Barack Obama has authorised limited trade. But the devil is in the detail — only US companies are allowed to supply certain goods to privately owned properties or enterprises in Cuba. Cuba still cannot export to the US.

The US strategy of exclusive private-sector trade is a deliberate attempt to undermine the Cuban government and its social achievements, including free universal healthcare.

The US Treasury guidelines give examples such as not permitting US companies to provide air-conditioning to Cuban hospitals because they are publicly owned.

The methods have changed but the objective remains the same. US interference in Cuba clearly continues, with regime change being the goal and to roll back the achievements of the revolution.

Another year of revolution has continued to improve the lives of Cubans and the wider world — from Ebola sufferers in west Africa to post-earthquake Nepal, Cuban internationalism continues to direct resources to where they are needed.

Cuba continues to be an inspiration for those who strive for a better world and international solidarity with Cuba is crucial in the struggle to end the blockade. Ending the blockade could unleash Cuba’s vast potential and help improve and save yet more lives across the world.

Ollie Hopkins is campaigns officer for the Cuba Solidarity Campaign (www.cuba-solidarity.org.uk).

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Year of Achievement for Cuban Healthcare

Part 2 of 3. Read part 1 and part 3.

Reported Israeli drone strikes in Syria and Sudan received scant attention as Israel simply refuse to acknowledge such operations.  India abandoned development of its indigenous Nishant drone and turned its sights on procuring armed drones from Israel while Italy received permission from the US to arm its Reaper drones. The Pentagon’s Inspector General launched an investigation into allegations that military officials have skewed intelligence reports to provide more positive accounts of the progress of the campaign against ISIS.  Some suggested that documents have subsequently been destroyed seemingly as part of a cover up.

jUS officials confirmed in September that Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in conjunction with the CIA are conducting drone operations aimed at killing ‘high value targets’ in Syria.  21-year old British hacker Junaid Hussainwas said to be one of the first targeted.  Mohammed Emwazi, the British ISIS militant known as Jihadi John, was also killed in a US drone strike in the centre of Raqqa in November.  Despite strong lobbying from Republicans, Jordan was refused permission to purchase US drones – Israel has stepped in to supplythem instead.

KThe ‘Killer Robots campaign continues its efforts to ensure a preventative ban on the development of autonomous weapon systems. While US and UK diplomats insist that such weapons are not being pursued, simultaneously military officials argue that drones, “particularly autonomous ones,” have to be “the new normal.”  Officials repeatedly refuse to disclose where British drones are currently based in the Middle East although several reports – and satellite photos – suggest they are at the Ali Al Salem air base in Kuwait.

l_plateBoth the Israeli military and US Special Forces operated drones over Lebanon during the year while US drones also deployed to Latvia as part of a ‘European Reassurance Initiative’.  Drone industry lobbyists were as active as ever behind the scenes aiming to ‘relax’ controls on drone exports while also challengingrestrictions on drones flying in domestic civil airspace.  Although US drones have been flying some surveillance missions over Libya (and apparentlycrashing) such operations are likely to increase during 2016

alphabet-mHollywood’s discovery of the drone wars has resulted in several movies including Ethan Hawk in ‘Good Kill’ and Helen Mirren and Alan Rickman in the forthcoming ‘Eye in the Sky.  Many more are apparently in the pipeline.  Michael Fallon, the British Defence Secretary changed the methodology for calculating British drone and air strikes during the year, leading to ‘less’ strikes on paper, if not on the ground.  Leaked NSA documents showed clear links between the North Yorkshire US spy base, Menwith Hill, and US drone strikes in Yemen.

N2Nigeria’s acquisition of Chinese armed drones was a complete surprise and clearly showed the global spread of drones, with The Netherlands being one of a number of European countries gaining  US approval to purchase Reaper drones. Naming continues to be an issue for the industry with the UK choosing to re-christen the Predator B (Reaper) drone as the more soothing and acceptable ‘Protector drone’.  The preposterously named  European combat drone prototype, nEUROn, continued its test programme during the year with test flights in Italy and Sweden.

OA number of commentators highlighted that President Obama’s much promised openness on US drone strikes outside of conflict zones has failed to materialise. In fact there has probably been even less oversight of the targeted killing strikes within Iraq and Syria. Authors George RR Martin and Will Self as well as retired General Stanley McChrystal were among a diverse and growing number of people voicing opposition to the way that drones are lowering the threshold for war.

pThe pressure on pilots due to the ever-increasing demand for drones was a regular new item during the year.  In December the USAF announced changes that will now see enlisted personnel (and not just officers) fly drones – surveillance flights at first but this will also likely change.  Police use of drones has taken a significant  step forward in 2015 with many local forces announcing they are to trial the use of drones.  At the same time, the number of drone incidents being reported to the police has rocketed.  Protests at drone bases and factories continued during the year withCreech in Nevada and Waddington in the UK being a key focus of attention.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A-Z of Drones 2015. Israeli Drones, the “Killer Robots” Campaign, Obama’s Promises

Heightened visibility alone, however, has not effectively ended such slayings or brought justice to victims

The Black Lives Matter movement that swept the country in 2015 has—among other accomplishments—forced global media outlets to afford victims of police killings the most basic acknowledgement: a public record of their names and deaths.

Such a grim tally was maintained this year by both the Guardian and the Washington Post, following the consistent failure of the U.S. government to keep adequate records.

African-American Chicago resident Betty Jones, pictured on the left, was killed by Chicago police while attempting to help a neighbor, who was also killed. (Photo: Facebook). Native-American Alaska resident Larry Kobuk, pictured on the right, died in police custody this year. (Photo: Alaska Native News).

African-American Chicago resident Betty Jones, pictured on the left, was killed by Chicago police while attempting to help a neighbor, who was also killed. (Photo: Facebook). Native-American Alaska resident Larry Kobuk, pictured on the right, died in police custody this year. (Photo: Alaska Native News).

According to the Guardian, 1,126 people were killed by police so far in 2015, averaging more than three a day, with 27 percent of those slain facing mental health issues.

The numbers confirm the racial injustices highlighted by nationwide protests. Among black people in America, 6.9 per million were killed by police, compared to 2.86 white people per million. In other words, African-Americans were nearly 2.5 times as likely to be killed by police as their white counterparts.

Native-Americans and Latinos were also disproportionately likely to have their lives taken by law enforcement, with 3.4 per million and 3.35 per million killed respectively.

The high number of killings was corroborated by the Washington Post, which only tracks fatal police shootings—not killings by taser, beating, and other forms of force, such as the high-profile death of African-American man Freddie Gray in Baltimore. The paper concluded, nonetheless, that nearly 1,000 civilians were shot and killed by police this year.

What’s more, the Post‘s analysis found that the FBI, which is tasked with tracking such shootings, is dramatically undercounting killings because “fewer than half of the nation’s police departments report their incidents to the agency.”

“The Post documented well more than twice as many fatal shootings this year as the average annual tally reported by the FBI over the past decade,” journalists Kimberly Kindy, Marc Fisher, Julie Tate, and Jennifer Jenkins reported this week.

However, Jim Naureckas, editor of Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting’s watchdog journal Extra!argued Tuesday that the Post also “held back” key information by downplaying the connection between the high number of police killings and the grievances issued by racial justice movements.

For example, Post journalists wrote that “the kind of incidents that have ignited protests in many U.S. communities—most often, white police officers killing unarmed black men—represent less than 4 percent of fatal police shootings.”

But in fact, the Black Lives Matter movement has condemned killings by officers of all races, killings of people who were armed, and killings of black women—such as Mya Hall and Rekia Boyd—by police as well as vigilante violence.

Even still, the Post‘s numbers are damning.

“Although black men make up only 6 percent of the U.S. population, they account for 40 percent of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year,” the paper’s database found. “In the majority of cases in which police shot and killed a person who had attacked someone with a weapon or brandished a gun, the person who was shot was white. But a hugely disproportionate number—3 in 5—of those killed after exhibiting less threatening behavior were black or Hispanic.”

There are many things that the databases don’t track, including beatings, abuse, and sexual assaults. For example, police officer Daniel Holtzclaw’s serial raping of African-American women would not make it on this list of atrocities.

But perhaps, more than anything, both databases show that heightened visibility, in itself, will not end police killings or bring justice to its victims.

The end of 2015 is being marked by ongoing protests demanding “Justice for Tamir Rice,” a 12-year-old African-American shot to death by a white police officer while playing with a toy gun. An Ohio Grand Jury decided Monday not to indict officers Timothy Loehmann or Frank Garmback, despite video evidence that neither provided first aid to the dying child.

In a statement released Monday night, Tamir’s mother, Samaria Rice, declared: “I don’t want my child to have died for nothing and I refuse to let his legacy or his name be ignored. We will continue to fight for justice for him, and for all families who must live with the pain that we live with.”

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 2015: The Year Police Killings in America Were Counted. Media “Held Back” Key Information

The Southern California gas company is now claiming they’ve “pin pointed” a massive methane leak in Porter Ranch, California. This methane leak has led to thousands of displaced families. Of course, the term “pin pointed” is being applied in a liberal sort of way. According to the LA Times.

Workers were continuing to drill a relief well and had reached a depth of 3,800 feet about midnight Saturday when they discovered the site of the target well using a magnetic ranging tool, said Anne Silva, a spokeswoman for SoCal Gas. The well extends more than 8,000 feet below the surface.

The company is still “not sure of the exact location of the leak,” Silva said, “but suspects it is within a shallow level — within the first several hundred feet of the 8,700-foot well.”

This is a leak that the Gas Company feels could go on at least into March. Methane freely polluting the air until at least March. Have we yet to grasp the severity of this? This is a man-made natural catastrophe that may well turn out to be larger in scale than the BP oil spill. According to Erin Brockovich, the side effects, which are deep and involved, take less than a week to start feeling.

After only a week of visiting families in Porter Ranch, I am already experiencing the headaches, nausea and congestion that have plagued this community living at the center of one of the most significant environmental disasters in recent history.

We can’t even begin to fathom what the serious longterm consequences over this matter will turn out to be. Making matters worse, SoCalGas has essentially REFUSED to release information on the surrounding air quality, so we have no way of really grasping how bad this really is. The leak is supposedly residing at over 8000 feet underneath the ground, making it a complicated, complex problem to solve. With the potential of liability and litigation, attorneys are filtering responses on both sides. In just one month, this leak will have accounted for 1/4 of the total estimated methane emissions in the entire state of California.

Vomiting, nosebleeds, trouble breathing, are just the beginning of what these people are experiencing on a daily basis. The community has begun the act of transferring school children out of the area. While SoCalGas has helped with some relocation efforts, it hasn’t been nearly enough. Many people have been stuck waiting on a list to be assigned relocation, all the while, their respiratory systems being decimated by infectious gases.

And all the while, a refusal to release air quality data remains on the part of the company responsible for it all. Sick people only know they are sick, but confirmations of why seem to be vague and protected by a wall of legal jargon and advisors. SoCalGas needs to come out and take responsibility. They need to address the people who are sick and with great urgency resolve their issues. This can’t continue to go on.

What shocks me the most is that while this story has received a great deal of coverage, it really hasn’t been the top story. Maybe the holidays? Maybe people just aren’t interested? All the same, this affects us all. This could (and likely is) happen in any of our communities. Want to see what it looks like using infrared? What are people breathing in?

Four more months of this? This is unacceptable. Why do you think they declared a no-fly zone? Is it really for pilot safety or is it more that they don’t want people seeing what’s actually happening on the ground? I would go with the latter and strongly encourage any of you reading to make similar considerations. Of course, pilots likely could get sick flying over it, but this sounds a lot more like a corporation covering up a disaster of epic proportions. There is no end game here. There is no reason to believe that this gas leak won’t be responsible for mass deaths, near and far in years.

Here is Erin Brockovich speaking on behalf of the people of Porter Ranch.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Unspoken Catastrophe in Southern California: Porter Ranch Methane Gas Leak, Thousands of Displaced Families, “No Fly Zone” Declared

Russia: America’s Main Geopolitical Adversary

December 31st, 2015 by Stephen Lendman

In the wake of the 1917 Revolution, when the Soviet Union replaced Tsarist Russia, both the US and Britain wanted regime change. 

Three months before WW I ended, Britain led a multi-nation force against Soviet Russia. At the time, Lloyd George was Prime Minister. Churchill was UK Minister of War and Air. Woodrow Wilson was US president.

Thousands of US marines were involved. They invaded Russia, intervening against Bolshevik forces, remaining until April 1920, an early example of imperial American lawlessness.

On the one hand, Soviet Russia and today’s Russian Federation land mass represents a huge prize, rich in valued resources, America perhaps willing to go to war for control.

On the other, Russia today is a far cry from Soviet days:

  • hugely powerful militarily with state-of-the-art weapons, likely important ones kept under wraps; and a thermonuclear arsenal matching America’s capability – able to strike targets worldwide with precision accuracy and hugely destructive force;
  • spending judiciously – a small fraction (maybe 10%) of Washington’s bloated defense budget, wasting trillions of dollars in recent decades, money literally down the drain, one of many examples of wrongheaded US policies;
  • able to match US might, perhaps exceeding it in some respects;
  • technologically sophisticated, the equal of any potential adversary;
  • advancing politically and economically at America’s expense, a slow, steady process under Putin’s stewardship, one nation rising, the other declining, some observers believe significantly in the post-9/11 era, a process begun years earlier.

America’s rage for power is delusional, showing it failed to learn the lesson of past empires, gone on the rocks of their hubris and arrogance, the eventual fate for the self-styled “indispensable nation,” increasingly seen more as a liability than asset in the eyes of growing numbers of nations, wanting peace, stability and prosperity, not endless wars of conquest, one nation after another systematically destroyed.

America has interests, not allies, using nation states to serve its imperial agenda, mainly Pentagon controlled NATO, Israel and rogue Arab states, an alliance for endless wars of conquest, mass slaughter and destruction, countries systematically ravaged, their resources stolen, their people exploited.

Major flashpoint areas risk igniting global thermonuclear war – Ukraine, Syria, and other Middle East areas where US/Russian interests clash.

Washington transformed Ukraine into a Nazi-infested fascist dictatorship – used as a dagger targeting Russia’s heartland, along with other Eastern countries close to its border, pressured to play America’s dirty game, no matter the harm to their interests.

Preserving Syrian sovereignty is key to preventing Iran’s isolation, and the entire region becoming a US/Israeli colony, partnered with Saudi tyrants and the Erdogan-led international criminal organization running Turkey.

Riyadh and Ankara are ruthless rogue states, threatening regional peace, stability and security. They’re creating a so-called “strategic cooperation council,” focusing on military, political and economic issues.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir announced the scheme, omitting explanation of the imperial aims of both nations – saying things were arranged this week during discussions between Erdogan and Saudi King Salman in Riyadh – meeting for the third time this year, united against Syria’s Assad.

Wanting him ousted is consistent with US objectives, using these and other countries as instruments of anti-Russian policies, wanting its sovereign independence destroyed, risking possible thermonuclear confrontation to achieve its maniacal aims – a clear agenda of madness.

In a letter to the world body, Syria’s UN envoy Bashar al-Ja’afari accused Erdogan of high crimes against the Syrian Arab Republic – covertly supporting ISIS and other terrorist groups, warning of his delusional goal to “revive” the Ottoman Empire.

“Since 2011, an unprecedented terrorist war has been waged against the Syrian Arab Republic by armed terrorist groups, the members of which come from more than 100 countries,” Ja’afari explained.

Those groups are being provided with funding, weapons, materiel and logistical support by states and regimes from the region and beyond.

Bordering on Syria and Iraq, Turkey is playing a leading role, Ja’afari stressed. It’s “interference in Syria’s internal affairs t(akes) many forms including direct involvement of the regime of Erdogan, the Turkish armed forces in offensive military operations in support of terrorists.”

They’re “providing covering fire for the terrorists’ movements inside Syrian territory or along (border areas) to facilitate the infiltration of terrorist mercenaries from Turkish (to) Syrian territory.”

Erdogan continues committing heinous high crimes – with full support and encouragement from Washington. Russia’s anti-terrorism intervention foiled his northern Syria no-fly zone/safe haven scheme.

His designs on Mosul, Iraq oil fields remain, Baghdad committed to liberate the area from ISIS control and get world support against Turkish forces operating illegally cross-border.

Ja’afari’s call for the UN “to take a firm stand (to) put end to (Ankara) violations and crimes falls on deaf ears with Washington calling the shots. Its Security Council veto power lets it continue pursuing its regional agenda without official world body condemnation.

At the same time, Russia’s intervention changed things dramatically. Syrian forces continue making slow, steady gains, ISIS and other terrorist groups very much on the back foot.

Defeating them is another issue, no simple task as long as US and other outside support continue. They control Iraqi and Libyan territory, infiltrated into Central Asia, have safe havens outside Syrian territory, new recruits apparently keep coming, and their revenue sources keep supplying millions of dollars daily.

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

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

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

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia: America’s Main Geopolitical Adversary

Sino-US relations still considered most important: poll

A new poll shows that some 78 percent of Chinese believe Western countries intend to contain China.

Some 36.5 percent said the West intends to and have already moved to contain China. Some 41.7 percent say Western countries have such intentions but there exists no obvious action, according to a survey released by the Global Times’ Poll Center Tuesday.

The annual survey, “How Chinese people view the world,” involved telephone responses from 1,530 people from seven Chinese cities, including Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Changsha.

Jin Canrong, deputy dean of the School of International Studies at the Renmin University of China, told the Global Times on Tuesday that this is how the Chinese feel, following the past year’s events.

Relations between China and the US have been strained in 2015 due to issues like the South China Sea disputes and cyber security. China and Japan locked horns in disputes around the Diaoyu Islands and Japan’s attitude to face up to its wartime history.

“The US and Japan did things aimed at China, but China is not that easy to contain,” he said.

The poll also finds that some 69.4 percent consider Sino-US relations China’s most important bilateral relations. However, the number has dropped from 81.3 percent in 2009, 74.6 percent in 2012 and 72.3 percent in 2014.

Bilateral relations with Russia, Japan, and the EU ranked as China’s second, third and fourth most important diplomatic relations.

“It is no surprise to see Chinese pay more attention to Sino-US relations since it influences their lives as the two countries share common interests,” Jin said.

The survey showed that 27.8 percent agree that the South China Sea disputes have been affecting relations, while 10.5 percent think the cyber security issue soured Sino-US relations.

Other issues that may strain the Sino-US relations are the Taiwan issue, 22.6 percent, and the Diaoyu Islands, 22.1 percent.

According to the survey, 56.9 percent, most of whom are young people, are optimistic about the future of Sino-US relations while 28.5 percent believe relations will be strained.

Jin said that the positive views on the development of Sino-US relations reflect the respondents’ confidence in China.

“The conflict between China and the US is more about national interests than ideology,” Zhang Jiehai, a sociologist at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times.

Ambivalent relations

Meantime, 28.6 percent said bilateral relations with Russia are China’s second most important, and 24.9 percent said relations with Japan are the third most important.

“Sino-Russian and Sino-Japanese relations are considered the most significant neighborly relations. China and Russia have been in recent years moving in a good direction, while Japan and China are still locked in feuds, including historical issues and disputes over the Diaoyu Islands,” Zhou Yongsheng, a professor at China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times.

Zhou said that although Japan is China’s second largest trade partner, the disputes between the two countries involve national honor and interests, leaving most Chinese with little faith in the future of Sino-Japanese relations.

People who think relations between China and Southeast Asian countries remain important to China dropped by 2.5 percent, compared to 2014. And 53.6 percent agree that disputes in the South China Sea were the main cause of strained relations.

The survey also showed that 53.9 percent are optimistic about the future of China’s international relations, while 37.6 percent are concerned.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Sino-US Relations: 78% Chinese Believe West Intends to Contain China

 

US President Barack Obama’s administration is reportedly preparing fresh sanctions on international companies and individuals over Iran’s missile program. 

They would be the first financial sanctions on Iran since Tehran agreed to a landmark nuclear agreement in July and present a serious challenge to the accord’s implementation.  

According to the Wall Street Journal, the sanctions would target a number of Iranian nationals and international companies over suspected involvement in Iran’s missile program.

“We’ve been looking for some time‎ at options for additional actions related to Iran’s ballistic missile program based on our continued concerns about its activities,” an Obama administration official was quoted as saying.

“We are considering various aspects related to additional designations, as well as evolving diplomatic work that is consistent with our national security interests,” the official said, on condition of anonymity.

US officials claim the new sanctions are in line with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement, and the Treasury Department can impose new sanctions on Iran over its missile development.

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of the state, has made it clear that Iran would consider any new sanctions a breach of the JCPOA.

In an October letter to President Hassan Rouhani, outlining his conditional approval of the JCPOA, the Leader said that in case of a violation, “the government would be obliged to take necessary measures and halt JCPOA activities.”

“Imposing any sanctions at any level and under any pretext by any side of the negotiations will be considered a breach of the JCPOA,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in his letter.

Iran has also defended its right to carry out missile tests for defensive purposes, saying none of his country’s missiles are capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

“It’s our legitimate defense. These are not missiles that are designed to be capable of carrying nuclear warheads and, therefore, it is within our right to self-defense,” said Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in an interview published by The New Yorker earlier this month.

According to the Journal, the sanctions would prohibit US or foreign nationals from conducting business with targeted companies.

US banks would also be required to freeze any assets the companies or individuals hold inside the American financial system.

Tehran is already disappointed by Obama’s signing of a Congress bill this month aimed at limiting travels to Iran and trade with the country.

Iran says the law violates a July nuclear accord and amounts to new sanctions on the country.

The US Supreme Court is also mulling a case on appropriating $2 billion of Iranian assets frozen in a bank in New York.

The Obama administration has urged the tribunal not to overturn the decisions of US circuit and appeals courts to use the funds.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US preparing New Sanctions over Iran’s Missile Program

Dear Global Research Readers,

We send you our best wishes and greetings, may Peace prevail in the New Year.

Without your support we would not have survived.

We take this opportunity to express our solidarity with those who are affected by war and economic devastation, to the victims of US-NATO led wars, to the refugees which are fleeing the war theater, to the millions of people in all major regions of the World who have been impoverished under the brunt of IMF “economic medicine”, to the farmers who have lost their land, to millions of young people in the European Union who have been excluded from the job market.

At this juncture in our history, freedom of expression as an instrument of social change is threatened.

More than ever we need the support of our readers.

Our ultimate objective through Truth in Media is to reverse the tide of war and global poverty. 

CLICK IMAGE TO DONATE TO  GLOBAL RESEARCH

When focussing on war, social justice and economic devastation, pressures are being exerted on the independent media to conform to standards which serve the interests of the political and economic elites.

Truth in media is a powerful instrument, which counters mainstream media disinformation.  There can be no half-truths in our coverage of  World events.

A Worldwide “economic war” resulting in unemployment, poverty and disease is carried out through the “free market”. People’s lives are in a freefall and their purchasing power is destroyed.

The Pentagon’s “long war” is intimately related to the restructuring of the global economy. The global economic crisis is accompanied by a worldwide process of militarization, a “war without borders” led by the United States of America and its NATO allies.

 Wall Street and the Anglo-American oil conglomerates will tell you that war is “good for business”, that there are “investment opportunities” in Iraq, Syria and Libya, that war creates opportunities for the so-called defense contractors, and there is money to be made in the “reconstruction” of countries which have been destroyed. In turn, genetically modified (GMO) seeds are imposed on farmers by donors and creditors as part of the “reconstruction” process invariably leading to the devastation of agriculture.

The mainstream media will tell us that the West is involved in a humanitarian undertaking: US-NATO is waging a “global war on terrorism”.  The forbidden truth”, however, is that Western governments routinely provide support to the same terrorist entities which are the object of their fake “counter-terrorism operations”.

Ultimately all the topics which have been the object of Global Research 2015 articles are interrelated:

War, terrorism, the police state, the global economy, economic austerity, financial fraud, corrupt governments, poverty and social inequality, police violence, Al Qaeda, ISIS, media disinformation, racism, war propaganda  weapons of mass destruction, the derogation of international law, the criminalization of politics, the CIA, the FBI, climate change,  nuclear war, Fukushima, nuclear radiation, crimes against humanity, The China-Russia alliance, Syria  Ukraine, NATO, false flags, 9/11 Truth, ….  

We have been working relentlessly around the clock 7/7 to bring you the most recent news and analysis.

More than ever, over the holiday period, we remain committed to providing a diverse and wide range of opinion and analysis of a World in crisis. 

We call upon our readers to help us reverse the tide of media disinformation

Our sincere hope is that truth will ultimately prevail and will be used as an instrument of social, political and economic transformation.

We are much indebted to our readers, to our authors and members of our team for their support and commitment,

Michel Chossudovsky, 30 December 2015

Support Global Research

Please keep in mind that Global Research remains fully independent by not accepting money from public or private foundations.

If you are unable to make a donation, you can help us by cross-posting and/or forwarding Global Research articles, sending them to your friends on your e-mail lists, posting them on facebook, internet blogs., etc. This will help us reach a broad readership.

1. Online donation

Make a (one time) donation and/or become a Member (see below).  Any amount large or small will contribute to supporting Global Research

DONATE AND/OR BECOME A MEMBER   (link to donation page)

2. Donation by mail 

Kindly send your cheque or money order to the following address:

Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)
PO Box 55019
11 Notre-Dame Ouest,
MONTREAL, Qc, H2Y 4A7
CANADA

For donations from the US, the money order should be “International” payable outside the US

To reach us by email: [email protected]

On the 29th of November, 2015, Foreign Affairs – the publication of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) – published an article titled: Divide and Conquer in Syria and Iraq; Why the West Should Plan for a Partition. It was written by Barak Mendelsohn, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Haverford College and a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. In the article, he argues that the “solution” to the current crisis in Syria and Iraq is the creation of an “independent Sunni state” (or Sunnistan), in addition to separating “the warring sides:”

“The only way to elicit indigenous support is by offering the Sunnis greater stakes in the outcome. That means proposing an independent Sunni state that would link Sunni-dominated territories on both sides of the border.Washington’s attachment to the artificial Sykes–Picots borders demarcated by France and Britain a century ago no longer makes sense. Few people truly believe that Syria and Iraq could each be put back together after so much blood has been spilled. A better alternative would be to separate the warring sides. Although the sectarian conflict between Sunnis and Shias was not inevitable—it was, to some extent, the result of manipulation by self-interested elites—it is now a reality.”

Mendelsohn’s so-called “solution” for the region is in fact the strategy Western powers have been pursuing in the Middle East for years. His proposal is pretty much identical to the preferred “outcome” for Syria articulated by the former US Secretary of State and CFR member, Henry Kissinger. Speaking at the Ford School in 2013, Kissinger reveals his desire to see Syria Balkanized into “more or less autonomous regions (from 27.35 into the interview):

“There are three possible outcomes. An Assad victory. A Sunni victory. Or an outcome in which the various nationalities agree to co-exist together but in more or less autonomous regions, so that they can’t oppress each other. That’s the outcome I would prefer to see. But that’s not the popular view…. I also think Assad ought to go, but I don’t think it’s the key. The key is; it’s like Europe after the Thirty Years War, when the various Christian groups had been killing each other until they finally decided that they had to live together but in   separate units.”

Carving out Sunnistan in the region was also recently advocated by the former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, in his NY Times article: To Defeat ISIS, Create a Sunni State. Bolton wants to create an“independent Sunni State” to act as a “bulwark” against Bashar al-Assad and Baghdad. Make no mistake about it; the strategy of the US had always been to create a Sunni micro-state in Eastern Syria and Western Iraq to isolate Assad. In the 2012 declassified report from the DIA, the document reveals that the powers supporting the Syrian opposition – “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey” – wanted to create a “Salafist principality in Eastern Syria in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”

Obviously, Salafism (which some argue is synonymous with Wahhabism; whilst others argue that Wahhabism is a more extreme form of Salafism) is a branch of Sunni Islam. Many have argued that “violence” is “central” to Wahhabism and Salafism, as Catherine Shakdam expresses in her article, Wahhabism, Al Saud and ISIS – the Unholy Trinity:

“Wahhabism is no more than an engineered perversion, a division, an abomination which has but spread like a cancer onto the Islamic world and now threatens to destroy all religions… Wahhabism is not of Islam and Islam will never be of Wahhabism – it is a folly to conceive that Islam would ever sanction murder, looting and atrocious barbarism. Islam opposes despotism, injustice, infamy, deceits, greed, extremism, asceticism – everything which is not balanced and good, fair and merciful, kind and compassionate. If anything, Wahhabism is the very negation of Islam. As many have called it before – Islam is not Wahhabism.”

Shakdam continues:

“Wahhabism is merely the misguided expression of one man’s political ambition – Mohammed Abdel Wahhab, a man who was recruited by Empire Britain to erode at the fabric of Islam and crack the unity of its ummah (community). Wahhabism has now given birth to a monstrous abomination – extreme radicalism; a beast which has sprung and fed from Salafis and Wahhabis poison, fueled by the billions of Al Saud’s petrodollars; a weapon exploited by neo-imperialists to justify military interventions in those wealthiest corners of the world. ISIS’s obscene savagery epitomises the violence which is inherent and central to Wahhabism and Salafism, its other deviance. And though the world knows now the source of all terror, no power has yet dared speak against it; instead, the world has chosen to hate its designated victim – Islam.”

Fracturing Iraq

In relation to Iraq, the plan to split the country into three parts has been publicly advocated by US officials ad nauseam. The President Emeritus of the CFR, Leslie Gelb, argued in a 2003 article for the NY Times that the most feasible outcome in Iraq would be a “three-state solution: Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south.” In 2006, a potential map of a future Middle East was released by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters which depicted Iraq divided into three regions: a Sunni Iraq to the West, an Arab Shia State in the East and a Free Kurdistan in the North.

The current US Vice President, Joe Biden, also penned an article which was co-authored by Gelb titled: United Through Autonomy in Iraq. The 2006 article argues for a decentralized Iraqi state where power is held by three “ethno-religious” groups: “Kurd, Sunni Arab and Shiite Arab.” Furthermore, the NY Times published an article in 2013 titled: Imagining a Remapped Middle East; How 5 Countries Could Become 14, which envisages the Middle East and Libya completely Balkanized.

Responding to the strategy of the West in Iraq, Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, called the division of the country “unacceptable.” Lavrov stated that this was “social engineering” and “state structure manipulation from far outside,” adding that Russia believes “Iraqis – Shia, Sunnis and Kurds – should decide for themselves how to live together.”

The Western elite’s strategy is to create a Middle East (and a world for that matter) devoid of strong, sovereign, independent nation-states that can resist imperial advances.

Fracturing countries into feuding micro-states ensures Western interests are not confronted with a cohesive entity which can collectively unite to oppose this belligerent force. “Divide and conquer” as Mendelsohn’s article is titled, the ancient strategy used by an array of imperial powers, from the Roman’s to the British, remains the strategy of the Western Empire today.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Creating an “Independent Sunni State”: Washington Calls for the Partition and Fracturing of Syria and Iraq

Imperial Wars, Neoliberal Harshness: Grim New Year Tidings

December 31st, 2015 by Stephen Lendman

The new year traditionally is a time for hope and change, a new beginning, a shift from policies causing so much harm to many millions worldwide – nameless, faceless victims of imperial ruthlessness. 

New Year’s day and each successive ones assure more of the same, business as usual – a continued menu of endless imperial wars, neoliberal harshness, government serving elitist interests exclusively, and harsh crackdowns on nonbelievers, America heading toward full-blown tyranny in the name of combating terrorism – the greatest hoax in modern times.
The larger issue is whether humanity can survive the ravages of US-led imperialism – the greatest threat it ever faced in world history, power-crazed lunatics in Washington willing to risk destroying planet earth to own it.

Instead of sounding the alarm and urging a call to action, presstitutes masquerading as journalists support what demands condemnation.

Ordinary people are manipulated by bread, circuses, and daily misinformation – mindless of the dangers they face, indifferent to the risk of ending life on earth, ignorant of the pure evil Washington represents, complicit with its rogue partners.

Each new year begins with the threat of US-launched nuclear war, the unthinkable possibility able to kill us all. Power-crazed lunatics make ruthless choices.

Witness them in one war theater after another – endless mass slaughter and destruction, making the world safe for monied interests.

Madness defines US policies. Its criminal class is bipartisan. Whoever succeeds Obama in January 2017 will exceed the worst of his homeland and geopolitical agenda.

America already is thirdworldized, on a fast track toward a ruler-serf society, unfit and unsafe to live in, fundamental freedoms eliminated in plain sight, run by a gangster class serving its own interests exclusively.

It devotes more resources to homeland and foreign militarism, belligerence and confrontational policies than the rest of the world combined.

Expect more of the same in the new year, likely more than ever before, maybe looked back on as the year WW III began – if anyone survives the onslaught, a long shot at best.

Another holiday season brings no joy to the vast majority of people worldwide. Human suffering remains extreme.

US policymakers consider it a small price to pay, nothing too outlandish in serving their interests.

The horrors of their maniacal agenda is airbrushed from official and scoundrel media reports – on New Year’s and every other day.

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

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

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

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. 

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs. 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Imperial Wars, Neoliberal Harshness: Grim New Year Tidings

Year of Disenchantment: Memories of 2015

December 31st, 2015 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

Years tend to only become memorable much after the fact. This point is aptly illustrated by the observation, made by E. H. Carr, that history is read by the contemporary circumstances that give meaning to them.  Some years have been totally forgotten; others have revived.

The fall of Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire in 1453, effectively ending the Eastern imperial arrangements in place after the fall of Rome, sent shudders through Christendom. But it was only historians and their subsequent theses about the loss of Constantinople to the Ottoman Empire that made the event even more significant.  Alternative trade routes, for instance, needed to be found.  Exploration on the part of rapacious and ever hungry European powers were given a fillip.  Cause and effect led to the search for new continents, and markets.

Just a touch under four decades later, the Colombian encounter took place, one that dramatically created a transatlantic system, destroying and supplanting civilizations, while initiating various exchanges. In effect, the chance sighting by Christopher Columbus in 1492 of the Bahamas brought several continents, including Africa, into play, underdeveloping and impoverishing much of the continent in the slave trade and creating various slave regimes in the New World.  There were vast human, cultural, and biological transfers, many forced, and others the tragic consequence of situation.  At the very least, it transformed the European diet.

For all of that, 1492 was both romanticised, and demonised, again after the fact.  It was not even clear at that point that the enterprising citizen of Genoa had, in fact, found a people rather different to those of India.  The year, for that reason, is less the year to remember than one to either mourn or glorify, depending on which side of ideological fence you find yourself.

What then, for 2015?  It was another year which saw its share of calamities, its historical follies heaped up.  But it will take some time to know where the consequences will come home to roost.

For the student of history, 2015 will conjure up those fateful months leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.  The surge of Islamic State’s revolutionary aspirations, the flowing blood of the Shiite-Sunni divides across the Middle East, seem inconceivable without the invasion by the US-led coalition of the destructively willing.  The sanctimonious insistence on removing various regimes on the part of sentiment and poorly thought out strategy has proven disastrous.

An exemplary illustration of this problem is the Syrian conflict, which in 2015 moved into its next, ever more dangerous phase. Countries such as the United Kingdom extended their strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria after parliamentary debate. Russia joined the conflict in dramatic fashion, claiming to strike Islamic State targets while also targeting anti-Assad forces.

The very busy skies were bound to lead to confrontations, with Turkish jets engaging and downing a Russian Su-24 fighter in November.  The severe deterioration of relations between Ankara and Moscow provide ominous signs between various powers battling for influence in the Middle East. These, in turn, are also historical jousts.  Pessimists have already pulled out such works as Barbara Tuchman’s The Guns of August, even if such historical parallels tend to be poor, if not impossible examples to use.  Just as you will never step on the same spot of a beach, you will never replicate history in its exact sequence, let alone mimic its forms.

Having failed in Syria, diplomacy has also retreated in the face of facing one of the most prominent consequences of the war: refugees.  Millions have been displaced, and have trekked across continents, and sailed across seas.  Thousands have drowned. Countries such as Australia and Hungary have respectively sought fortress reactions, be they turning back the boats or sealing off the borders.  Others, such as Germany, have preferred accommodation. The result: uneven chaos and electorates ripe for plucking by the populists.

Not all international relations need end in blood or stalemate.  The dark chapter regarding Syria should also be read alongside the deliberations over Iran’s nuclear program.  The US and Iran, accompanied by China, Russia, France, UK and Germany, were finally convinced to come to the table, one which culminated in the July deal that ostensibly limits Teheran’s pursuit for a nuclear weapon in exchange for lifting sanctions.  Cynics, mainly among the Republicans in the United States Congress and Israel, were not convinced, desperate to see Iran bounded and bowed.

Others will prefer underlining the environmental accord of COP21, the Paris meeting that saw a mixed, albeit global attempt to forge an agreement limiting the rise in global temperatures to “well below” 2°C above pre-industrial levels.  Differentiation, as ever, remains the big problem, and whether 2015 is the year when the human race chalked up an environmental victory, or failed to avert impending catastrophe, will have to be written.

Every year has to have some historical exaggeration, a talking point that is invariably inflated to invest it with gravitas.  2015 will be one of those years where terrorism continued to receive false authority. The ledger was certainly crowded: spectacular attacks by Boko Haram in Nigeria; assaults in France by Islamic State militants; continued bombings in Iraq, to name a few.  The motivating fear in many countries has been Islamic radicalisation at home, though it is one often disengaged from the foreign policy dimension of governments.

It is striking, in fact, to listen to officials from Paris to Canberra, from Washington to Ankara, to consider terrorism in the most hermetic of vacuums, indifferent to origins and motivations.  The rather bland excuse is minted in the same school of apologetics: They hate us because of our values.  Eventually, fanaticism of any sort tends to cloud discussion, and make us all pious.

The response to this phenomenon has varied, but what is evident is an internationalisation of the surveillance state.  If 2015 is to be a year of any significance in that regard, the erosion of civil liberties, across a range of areas, must be one of them.  Civil liberties have suffered in Australia, Britain, France and Canada.  Legislation stripping the citizenship of dual-nationals has passed.  The mania for data retention and pushing Internet Service Providers into the role of deputised police over content is a trend that sees no sign of abating.

Finally, two points on economics and sovereignty.  The European Union, to take a most obvious example, continues to stutter towards doom, showing how a broad-based continental program was high-jacked by a bank-based, financial philosophy obsessed by austerity.  It has seen the most grisly of capitulations by Greece and the railroading of its financial independence before the European Central Bank, European Commission and the International Monetary Fund. Will 2015 be the year the EU began penning its obituary?

A second, and not unrelated point.  Those of the neoliberal persuasion would have been delighted by the continued push of the technocrats, typified by the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an agreement between twelve countries that nets the Asia-Pacific economic zone in an effort to combat China.  The “free trade” rationale suggests why 2015 is memorable from one, distinct perspective: the relentless, estranging rise of the corporate shadow state over the legislative competence of people’s representatives.

While twelve parliaments and assemblies will be busy implementing the text in the forthcoming year, the casualties are bound to be severe.  Environmental protections, the prices of pharmaceutical products and biologics, and the role of copyright and intellectual property, will all feature in some form.  And if companies are dissatisfied with the policies of signatory states, they will be able to sue on lost profits.  A true recipe for disenchantment, and one for continued scepticism in 2016.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Year of Disenchantment: Memories of 2015

Syria: It’s Not a Civil War and it Never Was

December 31st, 2015 by Ulson Gunnar

The weapons are foreign, the fighters are foreign, the agenda is foreign. As Syrian forces fight to wrest control of their country back and restore order within their borders, the myth of the “Syrian civil war” continues on. Undoubtedly there are Syrians who oppose the Syrian government and even Syrians who have taken up arms against the government and in turn, against the Syrian people, but from the beginning (in fact before the beginning) this war has been driven from abroad. Calling it a “civil war” is a misnomer as much as calling those taking up arms “opposition.” It is not a “civil war,” and those fighting the Syrian government are not “opposition.”

Those calling this a civil war and the terrorists fighting the Syrian state “opposition” hope that their audience never wanders too far from their lies to understand the full context of this conflict, the moves made before it even started and where those moves were made from.

When did this all start? 

It is a valid question to ask just when it all really started. The Cold War saw a see-sawing struggle between East and West between the United States and Europe (NATO) and not only the Soviet Union but also a growing China. But the Cold War itself was simply a continuation of geopolitical struggle that has carried on for centuries between various centers of power upon the planet. The primary centers include Europe’s Paris, London and Berlin, of course Moscow, and in the last two centuries, Washington.

In this context, however, we can see that what may be portrayed as a local conflict, may fit into a much larger geopolitical struggle between these prominent centers of special interests. Syria’s conflict is no different.

Syria had maintained close ties to the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. That meant that even with the fall of the Soviet Union, Syria still had ties to Russia. It uses Russian weapons and tactics. It has economic, strategic and political ties to Russia and it shares mutual interests including the prevailing of a multipolar world order that emphasizes the primacy of national sovereignty.

Because of this, Western centers of power have sought for decades to draw Syria out of this orbit (along with many other nations). With the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the fractured Middle East was first dominated by colonial Europe before being swept by nationalist uprising seeking independence. Those seeking to keep the colonial ties cut that they had severed sought Soviet backing, while those seeking simply to rise to power at any cost often sought Western backing.

The 2011 conflict was not Syria’s first. The Muslim Brotherhood, a creation and cultivar of the British Empire since the fall of the Ottomans was backed in the late 70s  andearly 80s in an abortive attempt to overthrow then Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, father of current Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The armed militants that took part in that conflict would be scattered in security crackdowns following in its wake, with many members of the Muslim Brotherhood forming a new US-Saudi initiative called Al Qaeda. Both the Brotherhood and now Al Qaeda would stalk and attempt to stunt the destiny of an independent Middle East from then on, up to and including present day.

There is nothing “civil” about Syria’s war. 

In this context, we see clearly Syria’s most recent conflict is part of this wider struggle and is in no way a “civil war” unfolding in a vacuum, with outside interests being drawn in only after it began.

The Muslim Brotherhood and its Al Qaeda spin-off were present and accounted for since the word go in 2011. By the end of 2011, Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise (Al Nusra) would be carrying out nationwide operations on a scale dwarfing other so-called rebel groups. And they weren’t this successful because of the resources and support they found within Syria’s borders, but instead because of the immense resources and support flowing to them from beyond them.

Saudi Arabia openly arms, funds and provides political support for many of the militant groups operating in Syria since the beginning. In fact, recently, many of these groups, including allies of Al Qaeda itself, were present in Riyadh discussing with their Saudi sponsors the future of their joint endeavor.

Together with Al Nusra, there is the self-anointed Islamic State (IS). IS, like the Syrian conflict itself, was portrayed by the Western media for as long as possible as a creation within a vacuum. The source of its military and political strength was left a mystery by the otherwise omniscient Western intelligence community. Hints began to show as Russian increased its involvement in the conflict. When Russian warplanes began pounding convoys moving to and from Turkish territory, bound for IS, the mystery was finally solved. IS, like all other militant groups operating in Syria, were the recipients of generous, unending stockpiles of weapons, equipment, cash and fighters piped in from around the globe.

The Syrian conflict was borne of organizations created by centers of foreign interests decades ago who have since fought on and off not for the future of the Syrian people, but for a Syria that meshed more conveniently into the foreign global order that created them. The conflict has been fueled by a torrent of weapons, cash, support and even fighters drawn not from among the Syrian people, but from the very centers of these foreign special interests; in Riyadh, Ankara, London, Paris, Brussels and Washington.

How to settle a civil war that doesn’t exist?

If the Syrian conflict was created by foreign interests fueling militant groups it has used for decades as an instrument of executing foreign policy (in and out of Syria), amounting to what is essentially a proxy invasion, not a civil war, how exactly can a “settlement” be reached?

Who should the Syrian government be talking to in order to reach this settlement? Should it be talking to the heads of Al Nusra and IS who clearly dominate the militants fighting Damascus? Or should it be talking to those who have been the paramount factor in perpetuating the conflict, Riyadh, Ankara, London, Paris, Brussels and Washington, all of whom appear involved in supporting even the most extreme among these militant groups?

If Damascus finds itself talking with political leaders in these foreign capitals, is it settling a “civil war” or a war it is fighting with these foreign powers? Upon the world stage, it is clear that these foreign capitals speak entirely for the militants, and to no one’s surprise, these militants seem to want exactly what these foreign capitals want.

Being honest about what sort of conflict Syria is really fighting is the first step in finding a real solution to end it. The West continues to insist this is a “civil war.” This allows them to continue trying to influence the outcome of the conflict and the political state Syria will exist in upon its conclusion. By claiming that the Syrian government has lost all legitimacy, the West further strengthens its hand in this context.

Attempts to strip the government of legitimacy predicated on the fact that it stood and fought groups of armed militants arrayed against it by an axis of foreign interests would set a very dangerous and unacceptable precedent. It is no surprise that Syria finds itself with an increasing number of allies in this fight as other nations realize they will be next if the “Syria model” is a success.

Acknowledging that Syria’s ongoing conflict is the result of foreign aggression against Damascus would make the solution very simple. The solution would be to allow Damascus to restore order within its borders while taking action either at the UN or on the battlefield against those nations fueling violence aimed at Syria. Perhaps the clarity of this solution is why those behind this conflict have tried so hard to portray it as a civil war.

For those who have been trying to make sense of the Syrian “civil war” since 2011 with little luck, the explanation is simple, it isn’t a civil war and it never was. Understanding it as a proxy conflict from the very beginning (or even before it began) will give one a clarity in perception that will aid one immeasurably in understanding what the obvious solutions are, but only when they come to this understanding.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Syria: It’s Not a Civil War and it Never Was

The Black Man’s Burden

December 31st, 2015 by Garikai Chengu

So much has been said of the “white man’s burden:” namely, how the collapsing American Empire and bygone British Empire have shouldered the burden of civilising Africa and driving the global economy for centuries. The opposite is true. The fact of the matter is that not only was Western civilisation invented by black Africans in ancient Egypt, Africa has driven global economic growth for centuries.

African natural resources, labour, land, slavery and skilled émigré – as any decent economic historian will tell you – have fueled the world’s economy for many, many decades. To this day, Africa is the world’s engine-room for growth. In short, driving global economic growth abroad, whilst benefiting little at home is the “black man’s burden.” That Africans know that there are immense riches just beneath their feet as well as just above their heads in High Office, only adds to the burden.

The roots of “Western” civilization, technology, religion, culture and science are to be found not in Greece, but in Black Egypt. Infact as early as 9,000 BC to 500 A.D. black empires, from the prehistoric Zingh Empire of Mauritania to ancient Khemet of Egypt, were at the forefront of development in technology, politics and culture. Far from “civilising the natives,” Europeans replaced communitarianism, cooperation and spirituality – that prevailed across Africa – with a corrupt, aggressive and inhumane form of civilisation.

First there was the brutal kidnapping of millions of Africans, so as to replace the indigenous Americans that Europeans had wiped out. The slave trade broke the back of African economies whilst creating capital for plantation owners that kick started Europe’s industrial revolution.

Africans were stripped of their land and forced down gold mines and onto rubber plantations. The naked theft of African land and minerals including gold, copper, rubber, ivory and tin continued ravenously throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This culminated in the infamous Berlin Conference of 1884, where Europe gleefully divied up Africa and formalised the “Scramble For Africa.”

After World War Two, Europeans were severely weakened by years of unremitting industrial slaughter of each other. To make matters worse, liberation movements were gaining momentum. This ultimately made the cost of containing “restless natives” greater than the benefits Europeans could extract from them. As British power wained the baton of colonialism was passed to American imperialism.

Poverty and disunity have been the essential ingredients that have allowed this neo-colonial exploitation to continue. But, thanks largely to soaring mineral prices and Chinese win-win investments, poverty levels are beginning to tumble.

Disunity however persists. America is making sure of it. Washington is fomenting disunity by funding reactionary neo-liberal political parties across the continent as well as the odd “good dictator.” A bad dictator however, named Muammar Gaddafi, was hunted down and assassinated by Washington. Not least because of his plans for an African IMF, gold backed Afro-currency and a United States of Africa. In essence, Colonel Gaddafi’s plans for African unity were as good as a hand written suicide note addressed directly to NATO. By losing Gaddafi, Africa may also have lost Libya. For, NATO will ensure that Mr. Gaddafi’s plans for African unity will be smothered in their crib.

Then ofcourse there is United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) which will almost certainly establish a military base in Libya. Infact any African government that America offered money to host AFRICOM, Mr. Gaddafi would offer double the amount to refuse.

Mr. Obama would have us believe that hundreds of highly trained US Special Forces are braving tsetse flies, dengue fever and are running around in the African bush to flush out Ugandan rebels. All for freedom and democracy. Coincidentally in one of the most oil rich enclaves on earth. Home to Sub-Saharan Africa’s biggest onshore oil discovery in 20 years of two billion barrels.

The new cold war between America and China will be over resources, not ideology. Africa will take centre stage. Should America’s hard power and divide-and-rule approach triumph, Africa may descend into one large theater of war with many actors, chapters and a tragic ending. Should China’s soft power and win-win economic approach triumph, this may end up becoming a truly African Century.

To this day, Africans produce cheap, often slave labour and ship raw materials north for peanuts. In return Africans purchase finished products at a premium from the north. This skewed trade relationship is what helped build the west and underdeveloped Africa for centuries.

Reversing this trend would allow the black man to free himself of a centuries old burden. Reversing this trend is this generation’s struggle. That said, Africa’s future looks bright, for the ingredients are present for an economic boom, which actually benefits Africans: favourable demographics, a commodities boom, a burgeoning middle class and growing enthusiasm for technology with more than 600 million mobile-phone users—more than America or Europe.

If Africans resolutely build the capacity to refine their own crude oil, gold and platinum as well as the capability to cut and polish their diamonds, they will certainly turn this into an African century. If Africans staunchly defend their resources and turn them into finished products, they will finally turn the “black man’s burden” into Africa’s renaissance.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Black Man’s Burden

As the TRAI decides the fate of Free Basics, Mark Zuckerberg is in India with ₹100 crore, in pocket change, for advertising. Facebook’s Free Basics is a repackaged internet.org, or in other words, a system where Facebook decides what parts of the internet are important to users.

Reliance, Facebook’s Indian partner in the Free Basics venture, is an Indian mega-corporation with interests in telecom, energy, food, retail, infrastructure and, of course, land. Reliance obtained land for its rural cell phone towers from the government of India and grabbed land from farmers for SEZ’s through violence and deceit. As a result and at no cost, Reliance has a huge rural, semi-urban and suburban user base — especially farmers. Although Free Basics has been banned (for the time being), Reliance continues to offer the service across its networks.

A collective corporate assault is underway globally. Having lined up all their ducks, veterans of corporate America such as Bill Gates are being joined by the next wave of philanthro-corporate Imperialists, including Mark Zuckerberg. The similarities in Gates and Zuckerberg’s perfectly rehearsed, PR firm-managed announcements of giving away’ their fortunes is uncanny. Whatever entity the Zuckerbergs form to handle the US$45 billion they will be investing will most likely end up looking a lot like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. ie: powerful enough to influence the climate negotiations, responsible for nothing.

An advertisement for Facebook's Free Basics internet service. It reads, "What Net Neutrality Activists Won't Tell You."

An advertisement for Facebook’s Free Basics internet service. It reads, “What Net Neutrality Activists Won’t Tell You.”

What could Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg have to gain from dictating terms to governments during the climate summit? “The Breakthrough Energy Coalition will invest in ideas that have the potential to transform the way we all produce and consume energy,” Zuckerberg wrote on his Facebook page. It was an announcement of Bill Gates’ Breakthrough Energy Coalition, the combined wealth of hundreds of billions of dollars of 28 private investors who will influence how the world produces and consumes energy.

At the same time, Gates is currently behind a push to force chemical, fossil fuel dependent agriculture and patented GMOs (#FossilAg) through the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). It is an attempt to lock African farmers into a dependence on fossil fuels that should be left underground, as well as creating a dependence on Monsanto for seeds and petrochemicals.

95% of the cotton in India is Monsanto’s proprietary Bt Cotton. This year, in regions from Punjab to Karnataka, 80% of this Bt crop failed  — that’s 76% of Bt Cotton farmers with no crop left at harvest time. If they had a choice, they would switch. But what resembles a choice between cotton seeds is the same Bt Cotton seed, marketed by different companies under different names, purchased in desperation as farmers try combination after combination of seeds, pesticides, herbicides, fungicides — all of which have chemical names designed to make you feel inadequate — until you have no ‘choices’ left but to take your own life.

What Monsanto has done by pushing Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) laws and patents on seeds, Zuckerberg is attempting to do to internet freedom in India. And like Monsanto, he is targeting the most marginalised Indians.

Free Basics will limit what the internet is to a vast majority of India. Already at its outset Free Basics has said it won’t allow video content on the basis that it will interfere with the telecom companies’ services (read: profits) — despite the TRAI’s own recommendation that video content is more accessible to different parts of the population.

Once allowed as a free service, what is to stop telecom companies from redefining the internet to suit their own interests, and those of their corporate partners? After all, the ban on Free Basics has not stopped Reliance from carrying on with the service to its huge user base, a large proportion of who are farmers.

Why should Mark Zuckerberg decide what the internet is to a farmer in Punjab, who has just lost 80% of his cotton harvest because Monsanto’s Bt Cotton and the chemicals he was told to spray completely failed? Should the internet allow him to see how GMO technology has failed everywhere in the world and is only kept afloat through unfair market and trade policies, or should the internet suggest the next patented molecule he should spray on his crop?

The Monsanto-Facebook connection is a deep one. The top 12 investors in Monsanto are the same as the top 12 investors in Facebook, including the Vanguard Group. The Vanguard Group is also a top investor in John Deere, Monsanto’s new partner for ‘smart tractors’, bringing all food production and consumption, from seed to data, under the control of a handful of investors.

It’s no surprise that the Facebook page March Against Monsanto, a major American movement in support of labelling and regulating GMOs, was deleted.

Recently India has seen an explosion in e-retailing. From large corporations to entrepreneurs, people all over the country are able to sell what they make to a market that was earlier unreachable to them. Craftsman have been able to grow their businesses, farms have found consumers nearby.

Just like Monsanto with patented seeds, Zuckerberg wants not just a slice, but the whole pie of the basic economy of the Indian people, especially its farmers and peasants. What would Monsanto’s monopoly over climate data mean for farmers enslaved through a Facebook gateway to Monsanto data delivered through an internet that is controlled by Facebook? What would this mean for internet and food democracy?

The right to food is the right to choose what we want to eat; to know what is in our food (#LabelGMOsNow) and to choose nourishing, tasty food — not the few packaged goods that corporations want us to consume.

The right to the internet is the right to choose what spaces and media we access; to choose spaces that enrich us — not what companies think should be our ‘basics’.

Our right to know what we are eating is as essential our right to information, allinformation. Our right to an open internet is as essential to our democracy as our right to save, exchange and sell open pollinated farmers’ seeds.

In the ultimate Orwellian doublespeak, “free” for Zuckerberg means “privatised”, a far cry from privacy — a word Zuckerberg does not believe in. And like corporate-written “free” trade agreements, Free Basics is anything but free for citizens. It is an enclosure of the commons, which are ‘commons’ because they guarantee access to the commoner, whether it be seed, water, information or internet. What Monsanto’s IPRs are to seed, Free Basics is to information.

Smart Tractors from John Deere, used on farms growing patented Monsanto seed, sprayed and damaged using Bayer chemicals, with soil and climate data owned and sold by Monsanto, beamed to the farmer’s cellphone from Reliance, logged in as your Facebook profile, on land owned by The Vanguard Group.

Every step of every process right up until the point you pick something up off a supermarket shelf will be determined by the interests of the same shareholders.

Talk about choice.

Dr. Vandana Shiva is a philosopher, environmental activist and eco feminist. She is the founder/director of Navdanya Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Ecology. She is author of numerous books including, Soil Not Oil: Environmental Justice in an Age of Climate CrisisStolen Harvest: The Hijacking of the Global Food SupplyEarth Democracy: Justice, Sustainability, and Peace; and Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development. Shiva has also served as an adviser to governments in India and abroad as well as NGOs, including the International Forum on Globalization, the Women’s Environment and Development Organization and the Third World Network. She has received numerous awards, including 1993 Right Livelihood Award (Alternative Nobel Prize) and the 2010 Sydney Peace Prize.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Facebook’s ‘Free Basics’ in India Will Take Away More Than Our Right to the Internet

Originally published by Global Research on August 28, 2014

The 2014 global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) by researchers at the University of Oxford covers 108 countries: 31 Low-Income Countries, 67 Middle-Income Countries and 10 High-Income Countries. These countries have a total population of 5.4 billion people, some 78% of the world’s population.

The MPI assesses poverty at the individual level. If someone is deprived in a third or more of ten weighted indicators, the global index identifies them as ‘MPI poor’, and the extent – or intensity – of their poverty is measured by the number of deprivations they are experiencing. Those indicators and based on health, education and living standards and comprise the following factors: years of schooling, school attendance, levels of nutrition, child mortality, access to cooking fuel, sanitation (open defecation, for example), access to water, ownership of assets, access to electricity and flooring material (eg, dirt).

Based on a rural-urban analysis, of the 1.6 billion people identified as MPI poor, 85% live in rural areas. This is significantly higher than estimates of 70-75% in poverty, where income is used as the basis for determining poverty.

Poverty reduction is not necessarily uniform across all poor people in a country or across population subgroups. An overall improvement may leave the poorest of the poor behind. The highest levels of inequality are to be found in 15 Sub-Saharan African countries and in Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia.

The researchers have paid special attention to the situation of the destitute, or what they term the poorest of the poor. Over half of the world’s poor are classed as destitute.

Countries which have reduced MPI poverty and destitution the most in absolute terms were mostly Low Income and Least Developed Countries, with Nepal making the fastest progress.

The situation in India

Eradicating poverty in India requires every person having access to safe drinking water, sanitation, housing, nutrition, health and education. According to the MPI, out of its 1.2 billion-plus population, India is home to over 340 million destitute people and is the second poorest country in South Asia after war-torn Afghanistan. Some  640 million poor people live in India (40% of the world’s poor), mostly in rural areas, meaning an individual is deprived in one-third or more of the ten indicators mentioned above (malnutrition, child deaths, defecating in the open).

In South Asia, Afghanistan has the highest level of destitution at 38%. This is followed by India at 28.5%. Bangladesh and Pakistan have much lower levels. The study placed Afghanistan as the poorest country in South Asia, followed by India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal.

India had the second-best social indicators among the six South Asian countries (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan) 20 years ago. Now it has the second worst position, ahead only of Pakistan. Bangladesh has less than half of India’s per-capita GDP but has infant and child mortality rates lower than that of India.

Writing this week in India’s Deccan Herald, Prasenjit Chowdhury notes that according to two comparable surveys conducted in Bangladesh and India in 2006, in Bangladesh, 82% of children are fully immunised, 88% get vitamin A supplements and 89% are breastfed within an hour of birth. The corresponding figures for Indian children are below 50 per cent in all case and as low as 25%t for vitamin A supplementation.

Moreover, over half of the population in India practices open defecation, a major health hazard, compared with less than 10% in Bangladesh. Bangladesh has overtaken India in terms of a wide range of basic social indicators, including life expectancy, child survival, enhanced immunisation rates, reduced fertility rates and particular schooling indicators.

What has gone wrong?

In recent times, India has experienced much publicised high levels of GDP growth. So what is going wrong? Amartya Sen and the World Bank’s chief economist Kaushik Basu have argued that the bulk of India’s aggregate growth is occurring through a disproportionate rise in the incomes at the upper end of the income ladder. To use Arundhati Roy’s term, the poor in India are the ‘ghosts of capitalism’: the ‘invisible’ and shoved-aside victims of a now rampant neoliberalism.

The ratio between the top and bottom 10% of wage distribution has doubled since the early 1990s, when India opened up it economy. According to the 2011 Organisation for Cooperation and Economic Development report ‘Divided we stand’, this has made India one of the worst performers in the category of emerging economies. The poverty alleviation rate is no higher than it was 25 years ago. Up to 300,000 farmers have committed suicide since 1997 due to economic distress and many more have quit farming.

Assets such as airports, seeds, ports and other infrastructure built up with public money or toil have been sold off into private hands.

Secretive Memorandums of Understanding have been signed between the government and resource extraction-related industries, which has led to 300,000 of the nation’s poorest people being driven from their lands in tribal areas and around 50,000 placed into ‘camps’. As a result, naxalites and insurgents are in violent conflict with the state across many of these areas.

Where have the benefits been accrued from the 8-9% year on year GDP growth in recent times?

 Sit down and read the statistics. Then step outside and see the islands of wealth and privilege surrounded by the types of poverty and social deprivations catalogued by the MPI.

Global Finance Integrity has shown that the outflow of illicit funds into foreign bank accounts has accelerated since opening up the economy to neoliberalism in the early nineties. ‘High net worth individuals’ (ie the very rich) are the biggest culprits here. Crony capitalism and massive scams have become the norm. It is not too hard to see what is going wrong.

 India’s social development has been sacrificed on the altar of greed and corruption for bulging Swiss accounts, and it has been stolen and put in the pockets of the country’s ruling class ‘wealth creators’ and the multinational vultures who long ago stopped circling and are now swooping.

Me-first acquisitiveness is now pervasive throughout the upper strata of society. Run out and buy some useless product because Kareena, Priyanka or another icon of deception says ‘because you’re worth it’… but never ever let this narcissism give way to contemplate why the rivers and soils have been poisoned and people are being been made ill in places like Punjab, agriculture is being hijacked by the likes of Monsanto, land is being grabbed on behalf of any number of corporations, the great nuclear power money fest is in full swing or why ordinary people are violently opposing state-corporate power. Much of this acceptance results from deals hammered out behind closed doors. Much of it results because too many are conditioned to be ignorant of the facts or to accept that all of the above is necessary.

This is a country where the majority sanctify certain animals, places, rivers and mountains for being representations of god or for being somehow touched by the hand of god. It’s also a country run by Wall Street sanctioned politicians who convince people to accept or be oblivious to the destruction of the same.

Many are working strenuously to challenge the selling of the heart and soul of India. Yet how easy will it be for them to be swept aside by the corrosive impacts of a rapacious capitalism and its hugely powerful corporations that colonise almost every area of social, cultural and economic life and encourage greed, selfishness, apathy, irretrievable materialism and acquisitive individualism, as well as the ignorance of reality ‘out there’ – what lies beyond the narrow concerns of spend and buy middle class India?

Western capital had known that India has always been ripe for the taking. Consumerism’s conspicuous purchasing and consumption draws on and manipulates the pre-existing tendency to buy favour, the perceived self importance deriving from caste, the sense of entitlement due to patronage, the desire nurtured over the centuries to lord it over and seek tributes from whoever happens to be on the next rung down in the pecking order. Lavish, conspicuous displays of status to reinforce difference and hierarchy have always been important for cementing social status. Now icons of capitalism, whether renowned brand products, labels or product endorsing celebrities, have also taken their place in the pantheon of Indian deities to be listen to, worshiped and acquiesced to.

And the corporations behind it all achieve hegemony by altering mindsets via advertising, clever PR or by sponsoring (hijacking) major events, by funding research in public institutes and thus slanting findings and the knowledge paradigm in their favour or by securing key positions in international trade negotiations in an attempt to structurally readjust retail, food production and agriculture. They do it by many methods and means.

Before you realise it, culture, politics and the economy have become colonised by powerful private interests and the world is cast in their image. The prevailing economic system soon becomes cloaked with an aura of matter of factuality, an air of naturalness, which is never to be viewed for the controlling hegemonic culture or power play that it really is.

 Seeds, mountains, water, forests and the biodiversity are being sold off. The farmers and tribals are being sold out. And the more that gets sold off, the more who get sold out, the greater the amount of cash that changes hands, the easier it is for the misinformed to swallow the lie of Wall Street’s bogus notion of ‘growth’ – GDP. And India suddenly becomes capitalism’s poster boy ‘economic miracle’.

India is suffering from internal hemorrhaging. It is being bled dry from both within and without. Too extreme a point of view? Tell that to the 340 million destitute who make up over half of India’s poor.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Global Multidimensional Poverty Index: Rising Poverty and Social Inequality in India

Following a series of disastrous failures in India, one of Coca-Cola’s most important markets, the company is desperate to rebuild its reputation by claiming ‘water neutrality’. But the idea is absurd, writes Amit Srivastava, and does nothing to benefit the communities that suffer from the depleted aquifers it pumps from.

The Coca-Cola company is planning to announce that it is close to replenishing all the water it uses“back to communities and nature” by the end of 2015, well ahead of schedule.

It will take more than PR puff to restore Coca-Cola's reputation in India. Wall-painted sign in Bangalore, India. Photo: Syed Nabil Aljunid via Flickr (CC BY-NC).

It will take more than PR puff to restore Coca-Cola’s reputation in India. Wall-painted sign in Bangalore, India. Photo: Syed Nabil Aljunid via Flickr (CC BY-NC).

As campaigners that have closely scrutinized Coca-Cola’s operations in India for over a decade, we find the company’s assertions on balancing water use to be misleading.

The company’s track record of managing water resources in and around its bottling operations is dismal, and the announcement is a public relations exercise designed to manufacture an image of a company that uses water sustainably – far removed from the reality on the ground.

The impetus for Coca-Cola to embark upon its ambitious water conservation programs globally stems from its experience in India, where the company has been the target of communities across the country holding it accountable for creating water shortages and pollution.

The company has faced crisis in India due to their mismanagement of water resources, including

  • the forced closure of their bottling plant by government authorities in Kerala in 2005,
  • the closure of its 15 year old plant in Varanasi last year,
  • the refusal by government authorities to allow a fully-built expansion plant to operate in Varanasi in August 2014,
  • a proposed plant in Uttarakhand cancelled in April 2014,
  • and the withdrawal of the land allocated for a new bottling plant by the government in Tamil Nadu due to large scale community protests in April 2015.

Coca-Cola’s operations in Jaipur in India are also now used as a case study in colleges and universities on the company’s profound impact on water resources.

The myth of ‘water neutrality’

The suggestion that the world’s largest beverage company can become “water neutral”, as Coca-Cola has suggested, is impossible and deceptive, as the India Resource Center has pointed out in the past. It is not possible for a company whose primary raw material is water, to have ‘neutral’ impact on water resources.

Such a disingenuous suggestion by the world’s largest beverage company is a disservice to the public, and without admission of the massive impact the company has on water resources, there can be no genuine discourse with Coca-Cola on water management.

The company’s claims of having ‘neutral’ impact on water resources are misleading for two principal reasons.

First, water issues are local in their impact unlike, for example, climate change. When Coca-Cola extracts water from a depleted aquifer in Varanasi or Jaipur, the impacts are borne by the local communities and farmers that depend upon it to meet their water needs.

Replenishing an aquifer hundreds of miles away from the point of extraction, as Coca-Cola has often done to ‘balance’ their water use, has no bearing on the health of the local aquifer which Coca-Cola depletes through its bottling operations, nor the privations suffered by those who depend upon it.

Second, the amount of water used to make Coca-Cola products, referred to as the ‘water footprint’, is much more than the water used in the bottling plants. Cane sugar is a major component of Coca-Cola products in India, and as one of the largest procurers of sugar in India, Coca-Cola is well shy of achieving any balance with the water used the production of its sugar sweetened beverages.

The Water Foot Print Network has estimated that it takes 442 liters of water to make one liter of Coca-Cola using cane sugar, and 618 liters of water to make one liter of Coca-Cola product using High Fructose Corn Syrup.

These astounding numbers are not factored into the water replenishment announcement, and Coca-Cola’s claims fall flat if they were to be included – as they ought to be. The numbers used for their announcement are about 200 times less than the actual water footprint of Coca-Cola products.

No more pumping of depleted aquifers!

One of the continuing challenges being faced by communities across India is that the Coca-Cola company has continued to operate its bottling plants in severely water-stressed areas, as well as propose new plants in water-stressed areas where the communities have very limited access to potable water – a fundamental human right.

Any company that wants to establish itself as a responsible user of water would begin by not operating in water stressed areas, a demand that has been made of Coca-Cola but which the company seems to ignore because it will deprive it of profits and access to markets.

Coca-Cola is in the habit of making tall claims and generating false opinions favorable to its own cause, whether it is on water use or public health, and this announcement on water replenishment is just that. Just last week, the company was exposed for setting up a front group, Global Energy Balance Network, to confuse the science around obesity.

Attempting to confuse and mislead regulators and scientific opinion is not new to Coca-Cola. In 2006, one of Coca-Cola’s lobbyists in India admitted that his job “was to ensure, among other things, that every government or private study accusing the company of environmental harm was challenged by another study.”

If Coca-Cola truly wishes to rebuild its reputation in India and mitigate the massive environmental damage caused by its operations, it must stop the greenwashing, stop exploiting depleted aquifers, and engage seriously with its critics and impacted communities.

Amit Srivastava is director of India Resource Center, an international campaigning organization.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Privatization of Water in India: How Coca-Cola Destroys the Aquifer

full-289552-syrian-rebels-celebrating-1451404294Syria Rebel “Opposition” Commander’s Assassination, a Major Blow to US-NATO-Saudi Agenda

By Eric Draitser, December 30 2015

News of the death of prominent anti-Assad commander (or ‘terrorist,’ ‘rebel,’ ‘opposition commander,’ etc.) Zahran Alloush has the potential to radically alter the nature of the war in Syria.

USA guerreWar and the Economic Crisis: America Is Being Destroyed By Problems That Are Unaddressed

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, December 30 2015

The failure of leadership in the United States is not limited to the political arena but is across the board.

061128-N-4953E-004Multirole Naval Platforms of the 21st Century. Naval Arms Race and Regional Conflicts

By Brian Kalman and Igor Pejic, December 30 2015

An apparent trend in many navies of the world today is the fielding of multi-purpose vessels along the lines of the traditional LHD platform, but with added capabilities. It appears that in an age of increasingly asymmetrical warfare or limited conflict, both highly modernized and developing navies are acquiring these vessels.

US MilitaryUS Military to Expand Global Operations in 2016

By Thomas Gaist, December 30 2015

The year 2015 will be remembered as a year of expanding global warfare and militarism. (…) The imperialist powers are determined to make 2016 an even bloodier and more dangerous year. Germany and Japan are openly remilitarizing, as their governments seek to whitewash and rationalize the crimes of the World War II era. All of the imperialist powers have seized on the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino to place their populations and economies on a war footing.

H.-ClintonClinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton’s State Department

By David Sirota, December 30 2015

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States’ oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: 2016 Could Be A Violent Year. “US Military to Expand Global Operations”

One hundred years ago European civilization, as it had been known, was ending its life in the Great War, later renamed World War I. Millions of soldiers ordered by mindless generals into the hostile arms of barbed wire and machine gun fire had left the armies stalemated in trenches. A reasonable peace could have been reached, but US President Woodrow Wilson kept the carnage going by sending fresh American soldiers to try to turn the tide against Germany in favor of the English and French.  

The fresh Amerian machine gun and barbed wire fodder weakened the German position, and an armistance was agreed. The Germans were promised no territorial losses and no reparations if they laid down their arms, which they did only to be betrayed at Versailles. The injustice and stupidity of the Versailles Treaty produced the German hyperinflation, the collapse of the Weimar Republic, and the rise of Hitler.

Hitler’s demands that Germany be put back together from the pieces handed out to France, Belgium, Denmark, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, and Poland, comprising 13 percent of Germany’s European territory and one-tenth of her population, and a repeat of French and British stupidity that had sired the Great War finished off the remnants of European civilization in World War II.

The United States benefitted greatly from this death. The economy of the United States was left untouched by both world wars, but economies elsewhere were destroyed. This left Washington and the New York banks the arbiters of the world economy. The US dollar replaced British sterling as the world reserve currency and became the foundation of US domination in the second half of the 20th century, a domination limited in its reach only by the Soviet Union.

The Soviet collapse in 1991 removed this constraint from Washington. The result was a burst of American arrogance and hubris that wiped away in over-reach the leadership power that had been handed to the United States. Since the Clinton regime, Washington’s wars have eroded American leadership and replaced stability in the Middle East and North Africa with chaos.

Washington moved in the wrong direction both in the economic and political arenas. In place of diplomacy, Washington used threats and coercion. “Do as you are told or we will bomb you into the stone age,” as Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told President Musharraf of Pakistan. Not content to bully weak countries, Washington threatens poweful countries such as Russia, China, and Iran with economic sanctions and military actions. Consequently, much of the non-Western world is abandoning the US dollar as world currency, and a number of countries are organizing a payments system, World Bank, and IMF of their own. Some NATO members are rethinking their membership in an organization that Washington is herding into conflict with Russia.

China’s unexpectedly rapid rise to power owes much to the greed of American capitalism. Pushed by Wall Street and the lure of “performance bonuses,” US corporate executives brought a halt to rising US living standards by sending high productivity, high value-added jobs abroad where comparable work is paid less. With the jobs went the technology and business knowhow. American capability was given to China. Apple Computer, for example, has not only offshored the jobs but also outsourced its production. Apple does not own the Chinese factories that produce its products.

The savings in US labor costs became corporate profits, executive renumeration, and shareholder capital gains. One consequence was the worsening of the US income distribution and the concentration of income and wealth in few hands. A middle class democracy was transformed into an oligarchy. As former President Jimmy Carter recently said, the US is no longer a democracy; it is an oligarchy.

In exchange for short-term profits and in order to avoid Wall Street threats of takeovers, capitalists gave away the American economy. As manufacturing and tradeable professional skill jobs flowed out of America, real family incomes ceased to grow and declined. The US labor force participation rate fell even as economic recovery was proclaimed. Job gains were limited to lowly paid domestic services, such as retail clerks, waitresses, and bartenders, and part-time jobs replaced full-time jobs. Young people entering the work force find it increasingly difficult to establish an independent existance, with 50 percent of 25-year old Americans living at home with parents.

In an economy driven by consumer and investment spending, the absence of growth in real consumer income means an economy without economic growth. Led by Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve in the first years of the 21st century substituted a growth in consumer debt for the missing growth in consumer income in order to keep the economy moving. This could only be a short-term palliative, because the growth of consumer debt is limited by the growth of consumer income.

Another serious mistake was the repeal of financial regulation that had made capitalism functional. The New York Banks were behind this egregious error, and they used their bought-and-paid-for Texas US Senator, whom they rewarded with a 7-figure salary and bank vice chairmanship to open the floodgates to amazing debt leverage and financial fraud with the repeal of Glass-Steagall.

The repeal of Glass-Steagall destroyed the separation of commercial from investment banking. One result was the concentration of banking. Five mega-banks now dominate the American financial scene. Another result was the power that the mega-banks gained over the government of the United States. Today the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve serve only the interests of the mega-banks.

In the United States savers have had no interest on their savings in eight years. Those who saved for their retirement in order to make paltry Social Security benefits liveable have had to draw down their capital, leaving less inheritance for hard-pressed sons, grandsons, daughters and granddaughters.

Washington’s financial policy is forcing families to gradually extinguish themselves. This is “freedom and democracy “ America today.

Among the capitalist themselves and their shills among the libertarian ideologues, who are correct about the abuse of government power but less concerned with the abuse of private power, the capitalist greed that is destroying families and the economy is regarded as the road to progress. By distrusting government regulators of private misbehavior, libertarians provided the cover for the repeal of the financial regulation that made American capitalism functional. Today dysfunctional capitalism rules, thanks to greed and libertarian ideology.

With the demise of the American middle class, which becomes more obvious each day as another ladder of upward mobility is dismantled, the United States becomes a bipolar country consisting of the rich and the poor. The most obvious conclusion is that the failure of American political ledership means instability, leading to a conflict between the haves—the one percent—and the dispossessed—the 99 percent.

The failure of leadership in the United States is not limited to the political arena but is across the board. The time horizon operating in American institutions is very short term. Just as US manufacturers have harmed US demand for their products by moving abroad American jobs and the consumer income associated with the jobs, university administrations are destroying universities. As much as 75 percent of university budgets is devoted to administration. There is a proliferation of provosts, assistant provosts, deans, assistant deans, and czars for every designated infraction of political correctness.

Tenure-track jobs, the bedrock of academic freedom, are disappearing as university administrators turn to adjuncts to teach courses for a few thousand dollars. The decline in tenure-track jobs heralds a decline in enrollments in Ph.D. programs. University enrollments overall are likely to decline. The university experience is eroding at the same time that the financial return to a university education is eroding. Increasingly students graduate into an employment environment that does not produce sufficient income to service their student loans or to form independent households.

Increasingly university research is funded by the Defense Department and by commercial interests and serves those interests. Universities are losing their role as sources of societal critics and reformers. Truth itself is becoming commercialized.

The banking system, which formerly financed business, is increasingly focused on converting as much of the economy as possible into leveraged debt instruments. Even consumer spending is reduced with high credit card interest rate charges. Indebtedness is rising faster than the real production in the economy.

Historically, capitalism was justified on the grounds that it guaranteed the efficient use of society’s resources. Profits were a sign that resources were being used to maximize social welfare, and losses were a sign of inefficient resource use, which was corrected by the firm going out of business. This is no longer the case when the economic policy of a counry serves to protect financial institutions that are “too big to fail” and when profits reflect the relocation abroad of US GDP as a result of jobs offshoring. Clearly, American capitalism no longer serves society, and the worsening distribution of income and wealth prove it.

None of these serious problems will be addressed by the presidential candidates, and no party’s platform will consist of a rescue plan for America. Unbridled greed, short-term in nature, will continue to drive America into the ground.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on War and the Economic Crisis: America Is Being Destroyed By Problems That Are Unaddressed

A recently announced Saudi-led “anti-terror” coalition was met with great skepticism recently.

This is not because of doubts over Saudi Arabia’s sincerity alone, but because of the fact that much of the terrorism the “coalition” is allegedly to fight is an intentional creation of Saudi Arabian foreign policy to begin with.

Image: Saudi Arabia, indisputably the premier state-sponsor of terrorism on Earth, and supplying the ideological “source code” carried forth by Al Qaeda and the so-called “Islamic State,” claims it wants to lead an “anti-terror coalition.” The world is reasonable to call this disingenuous at best, a ploy to continue, or even expand terrorism at worst. 

.

CNN’s article, “Muslim nations form coalition to fight terror, call Islamic extremism ‘disease’,” claims:

Calling Islamic extremism a disease, Saudi Arabia has announced the formation of a coalition of 34 largely Muslim nations to fight terrorism.

“This announcement comes from the Islamic world’s vigilance in fighting this disease so it can be a partner, as a group of countries, in the fight against this disease,” Saudi Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman said.

Asked whether the new coalition could include ground forces, Saudi Arabia’s top diplomat told reporters in Paris on Tuesday that “nothing is off the table.”

In reality, decades of documented evidence reveal that the Saudis are the primary conduit through which Western cash, weapons, support, and directives flow into mercenary armies of extremists, indoctrinated by Saudi Wahhabism – a politically-motivated perversion of Islam – and sent to execute joint Western-Saudi  geopolitical ambitions in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region and beyond.

In fact, over the decades, one can see a direct relation to the increasing impotence of Western conventional forces and their ability to project power across the planet, and the rise of unconventional terrorist forces that reach into otherwise inaccessible regions in their stead.

Image: The seats were still warm in Riyadh where representatives from Al Qaeda affiliates fighting in Syria sat, discussing with their Saudi sponsors future collaboration as Saudi Arabia announced its “anti-terror coalition.” 

.

This does more than the West’s feigned ignorance and surprise to explain why, after a year of allegedly battling the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh) in Syria, the United States made little progress and only after Russia’s recent intervention, has the terrorist organization’s existence been put in jeopardy.

The rise of ISIS, turns out to be the premeditated machinations of the West and its regional partners. A Department of Intelligence Agency (DIA) report drafted in 2012 (.pdf) admitted:

If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).

To clarify just who these “supporting powers” were that sought the creation of a “Salafist” (Islamic) principality” (State), the DIA report explains:

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.

The DIA report makes it clear that Saudi Arabia’s “coalition” is the source of all terrorism, not the solution, and that there already exists a coalition sincerely committed to exterminating the scourge of militant extremism in the MENA region – Russia, China, Iran, and of course Syria itself.

A Facade to Hide Continued Terrorism Behind 

Likely what Saudi Arabia is doing, is attempting to reboot a narrative that, as of late, is increasingly implicating it and many of the members of its “coalition” as the very source of global terrorism. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has become increasingly involved directly with military operations beyond its borders. Its forces are fighting in neighboring Yemen, and military forces from Saudi Arabia and its Persian Gulf neighbors have been fighting covertly and semi-covertly in operations stretching from Libya to Syria.

Creating a “coalition” to fight “terrorism,” would give the Saudis another rhetorical ploy to hide their increasingly direct role in supporting militarily the terrorist proxies they have deployed and who are now being defeated across the MENA region. Just as the US has done in Syria, using ISIS as a pretext to involve itself directly and militarily in the Syrian conflict without ever actually fighting ISIS, Saudi Arabia is seeking to create a plausible cover story to do the same.

For those interested in truly defeating terrorism globally – recognizing the state sponsors of terrorism and excluding them categorically from solving the problem until they are held responsible for creating it in the first place is essential. Saudi Arabia’s announcement was met with skepticism, even ridicule for this very reason. Second, to defeat terrorism globally, those truly interested in investing in such a battle, should do so with those demonstrating a sincere desire to eradicate this scourge.

Thanks to the US DIA, a list of nations leading the fight has already been provided.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazineNew Eastern Outlook”.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Saudi “Anti-Terror Coalition”: A Facade to Hide Yet More Terrorism

Russian air strikes had destroyed 556 militant targets in 164 combat sorties conducted since December 25. Successfully hit targets were located in Aleppo, Idlib, Latakia, Hama, Homs, Damascus, Deir ez-Zor, and Raqqa provinces. The Russian air support helped the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) to stage offensives to the north and east of Latakia Province. Three significant plateaus towards Kabbani and Sirmaniyah fell into the army control.

Separately, the pro-government forces have continued successful advances in the province of Aleppo. The SAA liberated the village of Doudyan and destroyed militant outposts and supply routes in the villages of Tal Jebin, Tal Meseybeen, Shwehene, Maaret Artiq and Shimaeya. The SAA also took control of the village of Sharba.

On Dec. 27 the Iraqi Security Forces declared victory over ISIS militants in the city of Ramadi. The declaration comes after the Iraq forces encircled the city and seized the central administration complex. However, there are many pockets of militants still entrenched in various positions throughout the city. The Iraqi security forces will also have to spend significant time to clear out the remaining improvised explosive devices that infest the city.

Pentagon confirmed that militants were cleared from the government complex. But some US experts have already noted that the Ramadi’s strategic value is repeatedly overestimated. According to them, Ramadi is just one location in the contested Anbar province and the Iraqi army will face serious problems in attempts to clear nearby ISIS locations in Fallujah, Hit and areas west of Haditha. This rapidly reaction marks that Iraq made a serious step in war on ISIS. A series of such steps could increase the Iraqi security forces independence from the US-led coalition support what definitely isn’t a goal of the US political leadership.

If you have a possibility, if you like our content and approaches, please, support the project. Our work wont be possible without your help: PayPal: [email protected] or via: http://southfront.org/donate/

Subscribe our channel!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaV1…

Visit us: http://southfront.org/

Follow us on Social Media:
http://google.com/+SouthfrontOrgNews
https://www.facebook.com/SouthFrontENTwo

Our Infopartners:

Home

Homepage


http://www.sott.net/

ИН4С портал – Вијести Црна Гора | Србија | Српска | Русија | Хроника | Политика | Регион

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russian Air Strikes: 556 Terrorist Targets Destroyed, Syrian Forces Offensive in North, Iraqi Victory against ISIS in Ramadi

US-Backed Iraqi Forces Recapture Ramadi from ISIS

December 30th, 2015 by James Cogan

The Iraqi government and its prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, have announced that its troops, backed by US air strikes, have driven Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) out of Ramadi, the capital of the country’s western province of Anbar.

Abadi’s boasting on Twitter of the “liberation” of Ramadi, combined with celebrations on state media, follows months of intense bombardment by US war planes and weeks of street-to-street fighting by US armed and trained Iraqi special forces units.

US military spokesman Colonel Steven Warren revealed in a press statement that at least 630 air strikes had been launched against ISIS targets in Ramadi since July. More than 30 were carried out in the past week to support Iraqi troops as they pushed toward the main government complex in the city centre.

No official estimates have been released of either government or ISIS casualties, or the death toll among the Ramadi residents who had not fled. As few as 400 ISIS fighters were estimated to be defending the city, seeking to prevent the government advance with little more than explosives and sniper fire. Reuters was told that 93 government troops were admitted to Baghdad hospitals on Sunday alone.

The city itself is in ruin. Even the sanitised media footage shows utter devastation to blocks of residential housing. A spokesman for the government-endorsed Anbar provincial council, Eid al-Karboly, told the Washington Post: “All the infrastructure of the city has been destroyed. It will take years to return life to the city.” Karboly estimated that 80 percent of all homes are damaged to some degree.

Many of the buildings that have been destroyed in the current efforts to retake Ramadi were only rebuilt in the last seven years, after being reduced to rubble during the US occupation of Iraq.

Anbar province was one of the centres of resistance to the US invasion. Both Ramadi and Fallujah, the other major city in the province, were bloody battlefields between American troops and Iraqi insurgents on repeated occasions between 2004 and 2007. Fighting was only brought to an end by the so-called “Awakening” policy of the US military, which effectively involved buying off the tribal leaders of many of the insurgents and placing tens of thousands of resistance fighters on the US-funded Iraqi government payroll.

The growth of support for ISIS in western Iraq stemmed in large part from the decision by the Baghdad government, which is dominated by religious-based Shiite parties, to systematically reduce support for the predominantly Sunni militias in Anbar after the US withdrawal at the end of 2011. Sunni-based political parties and Anbar tribal leaders were subsequently persecuted.

Amid hostility toward the sectarian policies of the Shiite government, areas of Fallujah and Ramadi were taken over by fighters declaring allegiance to ISIS in early 2014. At the time, the actions of the extremist Sunni movement against the Baghdad regime enjoyed the tacit sympathy, if not overt support, of many of the tribal leaderships that had enlisted into the US “Awakening.” Former US-funded tribal fighters provided much of the manpower and military expertise that ISIS employed to capture most of Anbar and the key northern Iraqi city of Mosul in July 2014, where they routed tens of thousands of poorly-motivated, US-trained government troops.

The last sectors of Ramadi came under complete ISIS control in May 2015. As in Mosul, government forces retreated in disarray, provoking US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter to publicly denounce the Iraqi Army for “a lack of will to fight.”

The recapture of the city appears linked to a new set of deals and pay-offs that US officials have struck with the Anbar tribal leaderships, who either have been alienated by ISIS or have concluded it is a lost cause. Daniel Byman, an American analyst of Islamic extremist movements, told the New York Timesyesterday that the Anbar tribes “want a high degree of independence, but they also want to be on the side of the winners.”

The Iraqi government has stressed that the forces used to assault Ramadi were not made up of the largely Shiite troops, some commanded by Iranian officers, which have borne the brunt of defending Baghdad and surrounding areas from ISIS over the past year. Instead, they were a combination of units that have been “retrained” over recent months by US and Australian advisors and what the Wall Street Journal described as a US-backed “thousands-strong force of local Sunni tribal fighters.”

Preparations are now underway for offensives by the same forces to seize back control of Fallujah, as well as, ultimately, Mosul and other ISIS-held towns and villages in the northern province of Nineveh.

Reports indicate that the Sunni tribal force will be handed control of Ramadi once it is fully cleared of ISIS fighters and that the Iraqi Army will withdraw. Such a policy dovetails with the widespread discussion in US and European military and strategic circles that the only way to maintain control over the oil-rich Middle East—after more than a decade of military setbacks and debacles for US policy—is the partition of Iraq and Syria into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish mini-states.

US-Israeli strategist Barak Mendelsohn bluntly headlined a comment in the November edition of Foreign Affairs magazine, “Divide and Conquer in Syria and Iraq: Why the West Should Plan for a Partition.” Mendelsohn declared that the US and the European powers should carve out an “independent Sunni state that would link Sunni-dominated territories on both sides of the border,” while leaving the Russian and Iranian-backed Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad in control of a small Shiite and Christian enclave centred on Damascus.

Other proposals include carving out the majority Kurdish-populated northern provinces of both Iraq and Syria into another statelet—a prospect that is ferociously opposed by the Turkish and Iranian governments, which fear an upsurge of separatist sentiment in their Kurdish regions.

The divisions that were fomented by the US occupation in Iraq to weaken resistance, and then to provoke civil war in Syria against the Assad government, are already responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and forcing millions in both countries to flee their homes. The fact that American and European strategists are contemplating redrawing borders, entrenching sectarian and ethnic conflicts and, most likely, triggering new wars, is testimony to the sheer criminality of imperialist policy in the Middle East.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US-Backed Iraqi Forces Recapture Ramadi from ISIS

Boko Haram in Nigeria: Historical and Political-Economic Exploration

December 30th, 2015 by Lawal Rafiu Adeniran

Book Title: Boko Haram in Nigeria: Historical and Political-Economic Exploration, by Kola Ibrahim, 2015

As a testament to Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilisation theory, which is also manifesting in what Mary Kaldor describes as ‘new wars’, a new dimension of conflicts has established itself in International politics. These conflicts now come in form of armed insurgency, violent secessionist, ethno-religious conflicts etc. Africa, no doubt occupies an important seat in the theatre of war.

In Nigeria, Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’ Awati Wal-Jihad popularly called Boko Haram has been responsible for the death of over 14,000 people (both combatants and civilians), displacement of over 1.5 million persons, destruction and loot of properties worth billions of naira, abduction of over 220 school girls from Chibok secondary school, bombings of several high profile institutions amongst others. With the Nigerian government and their International principals bereft of any practical solution on how to curb the menace, Kola Ibrahim’s work ‘Boko Haram in Nigeria: Historical and Political-Economic Exploration’ comes to their rescue.

The book provides a scientific analysis of the causes, escalatory factors, response efforts targeted at the conflict and chart a way forward out of this seemingly hopeless state. In what appears to be a complete departure from the conventional method of analysing the conflict, he contends that any investigation into the conflict should not be done outside of the political economy of the society. In total conformity to his hypothesis, Boko Haram and other various ethno-religious terrorist groups are offspring of capitalism and imperialism, the current socioeconomic system embraced by Nigeria and their international principals and not until this system is overthrown all efforts at combating terrorism will only be tantamount to enclosing water in a basket. Even if the government manages to defeat Boko Haram under this current arrangement, it will only enthrone negative peace if the underlining causes of the conflict are not addressed.

However, it is my view that any effort at understanding the trajectory of religious fundamentalism in Nigeria should not ignore the rise and fall of the Maitatsine movement. In the same manner that Boko Haram rise was traced in scientific details to the Uthman dan Fodio Jihad, a detailed analysis of the Maitatsine movement should be done while drawing out similarities with Boko Haram. This work provides little insight into the movement. Of course, this is compensated for by the deep and detailed analyses from various angles, of the rise of terrorism, religious fundamentalism and terrorism, and Boko Haram in particular. This gives a general understanding of various strands of religious fundamentalism and terrorism, including Maitatsine movement.

Also, the use of the word tribe in describing the uniqueness of our culture and relations may not be accurate. Of course, the author used ‘tribe’ and ‘ethnic groups’ interchangeably, which may seem simple and easy to use, especially when writing for general and varied readers, it is however necessary to state that there is a serious debate on the use of tribes in Africa ethnographic analysis. In my view, tribalism is an important element in the racist ideology of colonialism and imperialism. If not what is it that make about 14 million Hausa/Fulani a tribe and less than 4 million Norwegians an ethnic group. If looked at properly, all the characteristics that qualify a group to be tagged as a tribe also existed among the colonial/European people, ethnic groups not tribe is used to describe them. Therefore, tribalism, as much as it is not used to describe western ethnography should not be used in Africa.

Irrespective of these few observations, the book passes as a reference and important library material for understanding our society, even beyond the Boko Haram terrorism or global terrorism. The book utilized various tools to analyzing terrorism and the rise of Boko Haram. Starting with the philosophical, historical and sociological analysis of religion and the tendency of violent and fundamentalist trends developing religions, the book gave a brilliant insight into understanding religious terrorism.

Terrorism is not only a feature in Nigeria; therefore, the effort of the writer in analyzing terrorism from a global perspective gives a better understanding of the rise of religious terrorism in Nigeria in recent times. The role of capitalist geopolitics and imperialism in the rise of religious terrorism and especially Boko Haram is well documented and explained in Chapter 3 of the book.

Furthermore, a deep analysis of the rise of radical religious consciousness in the northern Nigeria, tracing it to the Usman dan Fodio jihad campaign also helps to understand the sociology and historical background to rise of various religious tendencies in the north, and the role of various actors. The book also did a political-economic analysis of Nigeria from the colonial period to the current period. This understanding is necessary in order to understand how Nigeria’s political economy provides the background to radical religious consciousness and the use of religion for political purposes.

The book also looks at the immediate causes of the rise of Boko Haram tendency especially since the beginning of civil rule in 1999 in Nigeria. It explains the role of the political actors and the Nigerian state in providing the breeding ground for the rise of Boko Haram. Furthermore, the military terror against the group, mirroring the neo-colonial and repressive nature of capitalist armed forces, is a refreshing and vivid angle to understanding the rise of Boko Haram tendency.

The book, in conclusion, just like it has provided the clues in the two articles of the Introduction, gave various proposals to the working class, labour movement and civil society in defeating the ogre of terrorism in Nigeria on a permanent basis.

By and large, in a period when scholars in terrorism studies are lost on whether terrorism could ever be abolished or defeated from our society, whether negotiations and mediations, or the killing of the leaders of terrorist organisations could save the world from its self-made mess, Kola Ibrahim brings to spotlight once again that for Boko Haram and global terrorism to be defeated on a permanent basis, we must first of all defeat capitalism. This can only be done when workers take over their unions and rebuild on democratic, anti-capitalist and revolutionary basis. Only a revolutionary socialist government that will put the commanding heights of the economy under workers control can guarantee positive and lasting peace.

I therefore recommend this classic book to students, researchers, policy makers, journalists, politicians and all those who seek alternate narrative and crave for a deeper understanding of Boko Haram, global terrorism and its relationship with capitalism beyond the current peripheral analysis found in literature.

Lawal Rafiu Adeniran, M.A Peace and Conflict Studies, Ibadan, Nigeria.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Boko Haram in Nigeria: Historical and Political-Economic Exploration

Image: USS Stethem

An apparent trend in many navies of the world today is the fielding of multi-purpose vessels along the lines of the traditional LHD platform, but with added capabilities. It appears that in an age of increasingly asymmetrical warfare or limited conflict, both highly modernized and developing navies are acquiring these vessels. These multi-use vessels are being built to provide their nations a power projection capability that is well suited to the likely asymmetrical nature of modern conflict. These vessels can respond quickly to both natural and man-made disasters, providing peace keeping troops, relief supplies, hospital facilities, water purification and helicopter rescue and evacuation. They can also respond quickly to a localized military threat, bringing a significant fighting force to bear in a short interval of time.

In an age of increased state sponsored terrorism these vessels can act as effective offshore command and control stations for anti-terrorism operations. They can accommodate and facilitate the insertion of special operations forces both via air and sea. They can support special operations teams once in the field with air support, up to date reconnaissance, logistical support, and emergency extraction in short duration. In light of the flexibility inherent in these vessels and the power projection capabilities they possess they are a force multiplier in a modern conflict.

Written by Brian Kalman and Igor Pejic exclusively for SouthFront: Analysis & Intelligence. 

Introduction

The many varied nations of the world that have maritime borders operate navies of equally varied composition and capability. From the imperial monolith of the United States to the small island nation of the Philippines or Taiwan, all such nations must maintain navies to ensure their defense, access to trade, relief in events of natural and manmade disaster and to protect their national interests. Regional powers such as India, China and Japan have different security interests and strategies, and their naval composition and capabilities reflect these realities.

China and India are growing in influence and are accordingly investing in modernizing their navies in order to protect expanding interests and to facilitate power projection capabilities. Russia finds itself in similar circumstances, and has spent decades rebuilding a viable and capable naval arm that more apply reflects its proud naval heritage. Japan has found that it must increasingly rely more on itself to ensure its defense in a region of potential adversaries that possess increasingly more capable navies and ballistic missile forces. The offensive military strategies of both the United States and NATO are fueling the decision of many nations to start new building programs, whether they are allied with these institutions or are their targets. China and Russia are reacting to an ever more obvious strategy to contain and control their national growth.

The past fifteen years has seen the United States and its allies engage in numerous military invasions and interventions in the Middle East. All of these operations have utilized strike aircraft, special operations forces and armed and unarmed UAVs as force multipliers. These force multipliers have allowed for successful prosecution of offensive operations while reducing the conventional military forces required, as well as reduced the duration of operations. The success of such operations in localized, low-intensity conflicts is especially evident. Warships that can provide a platform to transport and support small, combined arms units of strike aircraft, helicopter assault or amphibious assault infantry or marines, special operations units, and reconnaissance and attack UAVs are seen as an essential tool in prosecuting the low intensity conflicts of the future.

It is quite evident with minimal research to find that every nation with a significant naval footprint in the world is investing in new multirole vessels. These vessels come in a number of different forms and can be built to particular specifications. The military operations of the past decade and a half are influencing the naval strategy of many nations with the backdrop of two major geo-political centers of tension: the South China Sea and Syria. Conflict or future conflict in these areas will require the forces engaged to utilize these new and flexible tools of power projection in order to prevail.

The Multirole Naval Platform

There are a number of different designs that fit into the category of the Multirole Naval Platform (MRNP). Some of these designs optimize flexibility and provide a balance of command and control, strike aircraft, air and amphibious assault, or cargo space while others are designed to maximize the effect of only one or two of these capabilities. For example, the Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) is very flexible, with helicopter and amphibious assault capabilities, ample cargo space and medical facilities for Humanitarian Aid and Disaster Relief (HADR) operations and even accommodation of VSTOL strike aircraft. The Helicopter Dock Destroyer (DDH) is aviation-centric, with no amphibious capability. More space is allotted to aircraft and the fuel and armaments they require. The Landing Platform Dock (LPD) is a smaller version of the LHD in many respects, being under 20,000 tons displacement. These vessels are a good alternative to the LHD when the nation lacks the operational or economic ability to maintain the larger LHD, or the vessels will most likely be operating in shallower or more confined waterways. Greater speed and smaller size (stealth) are also benefits of this design. The Landing Ship Tank (LST) is designed to transport and land a combination of infantry and tanks or other heavy vehicles. They may also possess a small number of aircraft for reconnaissance, support and air assault.

Landing Helicopter Dock LHD

The LHD is the most balanced, and thus flexible of all of the MRNP designs. The LHD is the largest design, requiring the dimensions and space to accommodate a large number of aircraft, troops, light and heavy vehicles, cargo and amphibious assault craft. As a result, the displacement of these vessels is usually between 25,000 and 40,000 tons. A good examples of an LHD are the HMAS Canberra L02, USS Wasp LHD1 and SPS Juan Carlos I L61.

Juan Carlos I LHD

Juan Carlos I LHD

These vessels have to be large enough to accommodate the following features:

  • Large flight deck to allow helicopter assault operations and or humanitarian support/evacuation.
  • Large internal aircraft hangar deck.
  • Heavy/light vehicle deck. Often doubles as a cargo deck.
  • Floodable well deck for the launching and recovery of landing craft, LCACS and/or amphibious vehicles.
  • Accommodation and facilities for between 500 and 2,000 troops.
  • Hospital facilities.

Landing Platform Dock

The LPD is a well-balanced multirole vessel; however, on a smaller scale than the LHD. It has comparable flexibility, but at a much smaller scale it lacks the power projection capability of the LHD. It has a small aircraft component, a smaller troop carrying capacity, and less long term self-sustainability. They are designed to provide more amphibious capability than air assault. It is of smaller dimension and displacement than the LHD, coming in at between 8,000 and 20,000 tons. Although their smaller size limits the scope of their operations, they gain the benefit of being able to operate more easily in littoral waters and are less costly to build and maintain. They have a shallower draft and smaller dimensions that lend to them being more suited to more constricted coastal waterways.

San Antonio Class LPD

San Antonio Class LPD

The vessels of the LPD pattern possess the following characteristics:

  • A flight deck that allows for limited helicopter assault and or humanitarian support/evacuation.
  • Small internal hangar deck.
  • Heavy/light vehicle deck.
  • Floodable Well deck for the launching and recovery of landing craft and LCACs.
  • Accommodation and facilities for between 200 and 1,000 troops.
  • Hospital facilities.

Helicopter Dock Destroyer

The DDH is a relatively new adaptation of the MRNP. The DDH abandons all amphibious capabilities in favor of aircraft assault and aerial strike capability. The only two nations to build and operate DDHs are the United States and Japan. The JMSDF operates three DDHs currently, with a fourth vessel to enter operation in 2016. The United States has only one DDH, the USS America with another the USS Tripoli slated to be commissioned in 2018, if construction and sea trials go according to plan. Although the USS America and USS Tripoli are designated LHAs, they lack the amphibious capabilities of all other LHAs before them and should not be categorized as such. The displacement of a DDH ranges between 19,000 and 46,000 tons.

The Japanese DDHs lack a well deck and all space that would be devoted to amphibious equipment is utilized to support helicopter operations. These vessels act as command vessels in the JMSDF Escort Fleet Flotillas, are loaded with ASW helicopters and other ASW countermeasures along with a full complement of helicopter assault troops. The larger Izumo class DDHs have a large enough flight deck and internal hangar space to equip them with fixed-wing VSTOL aircraft, most likely the F-35B, if so decided in the future. The smaller Hyugaclass DDHs have both been used in HADR operations over the past few years in response to an earthquake and a major hurricane, where their helicopter support and evacuation capability proved of benefit.

Rendering of America Class LHA equipped with F-35B VSTOL strike aircraft

Rendering of America Class LHA equipped with F-35B VSTOL strike aircraft

The notable characteristics of the DDH are as follows:

  • Very large flight deck that can accommodate medium and heavy helicopters and VSTOL strike aircraft and UAVs.
  • Large internal hangar decks to service aircraft.
  • Accommodation and facilities for between 300 and 1700 troops.
  • Hospital facilities.

The USS America LHA6 has proven to be a controversial topic amongst the US Navy and Marine Corps. Many see the vessel as a small aircraft carrier and do not see the need for such a vessel for the USMC. The USMC’s traditional role as an amphibious force should not be abandoned, and the flexibility exhibited by the force of LHAs and LPDs already operated by the force offer far more flexibility to USMC expeditionary forces than theAmerica Class vessels. Why remove a tool from your toolbox? The USMC has traditionally relied on the US Navy to provide aerial strike capability when so required, and the US Navy has ten aircraft carrier strike groups in service. It has largely been accepted that the USS Tripoli LHA7 will be the last vessel in this class to lack a well deck, with all other vessels in class being redesigned to allow for amphibious operations.

Landing Ship Tank

While traditionally designed to be beached bow-first to discharge tanks and heavy combat vehicles, the LST design has matured to allow for discharge via bow ramp or well deck like the LHA and LPD. Although not really an MRNP due to the limits in its capabilities, more modern LSTs share more in common with the LPD or LHD than in the past. The Navy of the Republic of Korea operates 4 modern LSTs with bow ramps of the Go Jun Bong class, and is currently in the second phase of LST development (LST-II), having designed more capable ships. These vessels usually carry a mixture of tanks, AAVs, and small landing craft as well as support vehicles along with 200 to 300 marines. These vessels lack helicopter assault capability, with only a small helicopter deck fitted.

The JMSDF operates three LSTs; however, their design is more akin to an LPD or LHD, having a stern well deck that houses two LCACs for transporting tanks (up to 10 Type 10 MBTs), vehicles and troops ashore. The Osumiclass vessels also can carry up to eight helicopters for transporting troops or for support and evacuation in HADR operations. Funds have recently been allocated to study the feasibility of refitting these vessels with V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and AAV7s for amphibious assault.

ROK Navy Seong In Bong LST685 discharging a K1 MBT

ROK Navy Seong In Bong LST685 discharging a K1 MBT

The LST is usually close in size and displacement to the LPD, though slightly smaller. The bow-ramp LST has a very shallow draft in comparison to its size, due to the requirement to beach the vessel bow-first in order to discharge vehicles. Displacement ranges between 4,000 and 14,000 tons. The characteristics of the LST include:

  • A large bow ramp for discharging tanks, vehicles and troops while beached or a well deck for launching amphibious forces and tanks via LCAC or landing craft.
  • Limited aircraft capability.
  • Ability to carry approximately 10 to 12 MBTs and other vehicles.
  • Accommodation and facilities for between 250 and 1,000 troops.
  • Limited hospital facilities.

Naval Arms Race in Asia and the Mediterranean

It is obvious to see the benefits of the MRNP with their inherent flexibility, humanitarian support and power projection capabilities. Such vessels would be of benefit to any nation with an extensive maritime border. The benefits are obvious, but why are so many vessels now being built in such a short span of time? These naval building programs are being driven by geo-political developments in two main regions of the globe, the Mediterranean and the Asia-Pacific. This is in direct relation to the wars of regime-change and disruption in the Middle East and the U.S. “Pivot to Asia” and the disputes over contested areas in the East and South China Seas.

When identifying the driving cause, a common denominator is the hegemonic foreign policy of the United States. The wars of regime change that wrought chaos in Iraq, Libya, Egypt and now Yemen and Syria were all spearheaded by the United States and NATO. The result of these operations has been failed states and humanitarian catastrophe for those nations targeted. Syria has been laid waste by a Wahhabist invasion that was created by Saudi Arabia and their emirate allies in conjunction with the United States. The threat of direct military intervention in Syria by the United States in 2014, turned the Mediterranean into the largest possible naval battle ground in recent times.

Nations building/acquiring MRNPs in the Europe/Mediterranean:

France: 3

  • 3 x Mistral Class LHDs built between 2004 and 2012.

Spain: 3

  • 1 x Juan Carlos I Class LHD, 2 x Galicia Class LPDs built by Navantia recently acquired (2010 to present).

Russia: 2 (planned)

  • 2 x Mistral Class LHDs built by France and sold to Egypt. Sold to Egypt in 2015. Now seeking 2 x LHDs of indigenous design and manufacture.

Turkey: 1

  • Building 1 x LPD based on Juan Carlos I Class of Spanish shipbuilder Navantia starting 2015.

Egypt: 2

  • Recent purchase of 2 x Mistral Class LHDs from France in 2015.

In East and Southeast Asia the reality of a resurgent China, a nation that can trace its civilization back for over five thousand years, has been met with open hostility on the part of the United States. Apparently, the U.S. government believes that China should be allowed to expand its economic power, but not its military ability or geo-political influence. In an attempt to hamper Chinese expansion in these areas, the United States has decided to aid China’s potential adversaries at every turn. Nations such as Vietnam and the Philippines, wary of any Chinese expansion in the South China Sea and with equal claims to islands and oils and gas fields there, have been on the receiving end of U.S. support and even military assistance.

Nations in Asia building/acquiring MRSVs:

India: 1 (of 4)

  • Acquired 1 x Austin Class LPD from the U.S. in 2007. Plan to acquire a total of 4 x LPDs of a new design by 2020.

China: 4 (of 12)

  • 4 x Type 071 Class LPD built between 2007 and 2015, with 2 more being constructed. Plans to build 6 x LHDs have been in the works since 2005.

Japan: 7

  • 2 x Hyuga Class DDH and 2 x Izumi Class DDH built between 2006 and the present. 3 x Osumi Class LST built between 1998 and 2003.

South Korea: 1 (of 2)

  • 2 x Dokdo Class Landing Platform Helicopter (LPH) built between 2007 and the present. The second in class planned to handle VSTOL strike aircraft. A newer LPX design is also in the planning stage.

Indonesia: 4

  • 4 x Makassar Class LPD built between 2007 and 2011.

Philippines: 2 (of 4?)

  • 2 x LPD being built on the Makassar Class pattern in Indonesia. Delivery planned between 2016 and 2017. The Philippine Navy may decide on a total complement of 4 such vessels.

United States: 30 (of 34)

  • This includes 9 x San Antonio Class LPDs built of a planned 12 total vessels between 2006 and the present, as well as 1 x America Class LHA built of a planned 2 total vessels between 2015 and the present.

(It is important to note that the United States is building more new MRNPs than any other nation in this analysis by a wide margin. These new vessels will be added to the older class of LHDs and LSDs that were built and commissioned between 1985 and 2002.)

Geopolitical Flashpoints

There are a number of territorial disputes in the South China Sea between China and a number of other nations. These disputes are ostensibly matters of exerting sovereignty over historical territories; however, the likely presence of oil and natural gas and highly prized fishing rights are of far greater importance. The same issues are at the root of the dispute between China and Japan over the Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands.

The war in Syria that has claimed over 250,000 lives and devastated arguably the last secular nation in the Middle East, is another volatile geo-political flash point that has absorbed the efforts of most nations in the Middle East, Russia, the United States and many NATO member states. This is also a conflict centered determining what nations control the flow of oil and natural gas, in this case from the Middle East into Europe, as well as cornering that market as a whole.

The current conflict in Yemen started out as an internal one until Saudi Arabia decided to intervene on the side of the deposed Hadi administration. The Saudis refuse to allow a non-Sunni power friendly to Iran to exist in the region, especially one located on their rebellious southern border region. This conflict has continued to escalate, with numerous allies to Saudi Arabia engaging in airstrikes and naval shelling of the Houthi controlled areas of the country.

The Senkaku Islands

The sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands, known as the Daioyu Islands in China, has been in dispute for centuries. China claims that the islands were their territory centuries before they were illegally annexed by Japan at the conclusion of the Sino-Japanese War of 1894. Japan asserts that the islands were ceded to Japan as part of the ceding of Taiwan “in perpetuity” at the conclusion of the war. Japan surrendered Taiwan to the Chinese Nationalists at the conclusion of World War II, who ended up retreating to the Island at the end of the Chinese Civil War and establishing the Republic of China.

The Senkaku Islands remained in limbo as far as their ownership was concerned, until the government of Japan reasserted sovereignty when they purchased three of the islands from a private Japanese citizen in 2012, effectively legally nationalizing them. China responded by creating a new air-defense identification zone over the islands the following year. Japan upped the ante by forming the Amphibious Preparatory Unit (APU) of 700 men (to be expanded to 3,000), a force of marines that could be dispatched by air or sea to respond to any attempts to occupy the islands. The two nations have sent military aircraft over the islands, and Chinese civilian and auxiliary/research vessels have spared with Japanese Coast Guard vessels in the islands’ waters. China sent an armed vessel to the waters of the Senkakus for the first time in late December of 2015, resulting in a formal diplomatic complaint from Japan.

Senkaku-Islands-detail

Senkaku Islands detail

It is easy to see how Japan’s new DDHs and LSTs could be utilized in responding to further moves by the Chinese to exert their sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands. The new APU could be deployed to the islands in short order aboard either an Osumi class LST or Hyuga or Izumo class DDH acting as part of one of four Escort Fleet Flotillas. The large DDHs could be equipped with VSTOL F-35B in such a theoretical future conflict over the islands. China would likely use any number of the six Type 071 LPDs in a fleet of escorting warships to occupy the islands and force the issue. It is; however, unlikely that China would attempt to settle the issue militarily before the larger LHDs it has planned for the PLAN come into service in 2020.

South China Sea Disputes

A detailed explanation of the many interlaced territorial disputes in the South China Sea by all the nations involved is beyond the scope of this analysis. There are two main areas of contention: the sovereignty of the entire South China Sea and its legal status as an international waterway for purposes of uninhibited trade, and the sovereignty of particular island chains and shoals. It is theorized that a great deal of oil and natural gas are in abundance under the seabed in many of these disputed areas. Oil and gas exploration and drilling has been underway for a number of years now, most notably in waters south of Vietnam/north of Malaysia and in waters north of Brunei. In pressing its claims of sovereignty China went as far as anchoring an oil exploration rig within the EEZ of Vietnam in May of 2014. Vietnam has a conflicting claim to much of the South China Sea, including the Spratley and Paracel Islands. Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines also have disputed claims in the area .China has taken the unprecedented decision to construct man-made islands at three locations in the Spratly Islands as well as construction in the Paracel Islands and Scarborough Shoal.

China most likely started dredging and land reclamation on the first of three man-made islands in the Spratleys sometime in 2011 or 2012. Construction efforts have steadily picked up pace since 2014 and the small reefs and atolls have morphed into artificial islands of thousands of acres in size. China has been building airstrips and port facilities on Fiery Cross Reef, and both Subi and Mischief Reef are undergoing major reclamation. In addition, China is building a fuel depot on Woody Island in the Paracels. China has fought naval skirmishes with Vietnam over control of the Paracel Islands on two separate occasions, one in 1974 and another in 1988.  China has also constructed military outposts in Scarborough Shoal which is also claimed by the Philippines, the islands clearly located within that nations EEZ.

South China Sea conflicting claims

South China Sea conflicting claims

China submitted a formal claim to the United Nations to virtually the entire South China Sea in 2009, which was rejected by that body as it does not comply with established international law governing the establishment of territorial waters. All nations with conflicting claims protested, along with the United States and Indonesia who hold no claims. The building of artificial islands is obviously either an attempt by China to press their claim by occupying and utilizing these islands, or to militarily exert control over the South China Sea as their long term goal. In order to protect these holdings and to react to any threat from prospective adversaries, a navy equipped with LPDs and LHAs is essential. China undoubtedly had this in mind when it started building six LPDs of the Type071 class and designing the new LHAs. The new LHAs are comparable to the Canberra or Mistral class, but are said to be much larger in size, with a displacement approaching 40,000 tons.

The Philippine Navy has received military aid from both Australia and the United States in the face of greater Chinese resolve to solidify their claims. Australia has donated two fully refurbished Balikpapan Class heavy landing craft (LHC) to the Philippine Navy while the U.S. has announced plans to donate two vessels, a decommissioned USCG cutter and a research vessel. Two LPDs based on the Indonesian PT PAL built Makassar are already under construction and should be delivered between 2016 and 2017.

Makassar Class LPD Banda Aceh LPD593.

Makassar Class LPD Banda Aceh LPD593.

It is easy to imagine a future conflict in the South China Sea where all major parties to the conflict will benefit from utilizing newly acquired MRNPs. Vessels that can land marines or assault troops via landing craft or AAVs complete with armored support, combined with air assault elements and that can provide aircraft to provide ground attack and air superiority cover to the attack force are a tool that both China and those aligned with the United States in this dispute have decided they must have. Any asymmetrical warfare that might take place could be commanded and coordinated from LHAs or LPDs. Special forces can operate from these platforms with insertion and extraction by sea or air, with reconnaissance support from the advanced sensors and information systems onboard as well as from UAVs launched and recovered from their flight decks. If a military confrontation happens, whether a result of miscalculation or by design, these new vessels will likely play a large part. As the United States ratchets up pressure in continuous “freedom of navigation” missions with armed warships and strategic bomber forces, the Chinese will be forced to either respond in kind or back down. Hopefully, statesmanship and compromise will prevail.

Chinese Type 071 LPD underway

Chinese Type 071 LPD underway

The War in Syria

The war that has raged in Syria for 5 years now has taken a decisive turn since Russia started its air campaign to aid the Syrian Arab Army in its fight to regain the initiative in the war and destroy the mostly foreign Wahhabist elements fighting the state on behalf of foreign interests. Russia is undoubtedly aiding a longtime ally in a time of desperate need, as well as ensuring its own defense in the long run. Russia has been fighting equally unsavory and illegitimate Wahhabist forces in its own Caucasus republics, and it is reasonable to believe that those forces fighting in Syria, if victorious would turn their sights north toward Russia. They would find willing allies in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE (all of which are funding and aiding the various terrorist groups fighting against the Syrian state) and Russia cannot allow this to come to pass.

A very defined delineation of adversaries has begun to emerge in this conflict in the form of three distinct blocks. One side is made up of those forces that aim to reestablish the legitimate sovereign state of Syria. They also aim to establish a mutually beneficial logistical route of oil and natural gas transport through their nations to the European market. These nations are Syria, Iraq, Iran and Russia. Russia, most importantly seeks to maintain balance.

Combat-radius(airbase+navy)

On another side there are the nations that aim to overthrow the government of Syria and render the nation impotent and malleable to their wishes. They hope to be able to control the groups that they have armed and funded to overthrow the legitimate government in Syria, so that after the war they can leverage beneficial oil and natural gas transit contracts that will allow them to control the transport of oil and natural gas from the Middle East to Europe, while cutting out Iran and Iraq, and undercutting Russian prices. These nations are Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.

The third side is comprised of nations that hope to continue the destabilization of the entire region to the detriment of Russia and Iran. They would rather see the Saudi alliance gain control of oil and natural gas transit to Europe than the Syria-Iraq-Iran alliance. This forces Russia and Iran to invest resources into fighting regional conflicts, while they continue to militarily surround them and fund internal forces to destabilize them. This side is composed of the United States and NATO.

The Case of the Russian Mistrals

Although the much hyped reason that France reneged on the contract to deliver two Mistral Class LHDs, theVladivostok and the Sevastopol, to Russia was the Russian “invasion” of the Ukraine and the “annexation” of the Crimea. Although the invasion and annexation were the fantasy creation of a concerted western media and White House propaganda campaign, they were just a convenient cover for the real reason that the Mistralscould not be delivered to Russia. The true reason was a very possible, and by September of 2015, real Russian intervention in Syria.

The United States and NATO, at times in coordination with the Saudi Arabia/Gulf emirate alliance, had been deeply invested in the overthrow of the Syrian government since the start of conflict in 2011. Turkey, also a member of NATO, is deeply involved in the conflict for a number of reasons, and due to its geographical location stands the most to lose from a Russian intervention. It became apparent when Russia responded to a very possible direct military intervention by the United States and NATO in 2013 by moving a large number of warships into the Mediterranean, that it wasn’t just the U.S. that had a red line that could not be crossed. Russia was ready for war, but fortunately Russia was able to broker a deal to exchange Syrian chemical weapons for de-escalation. The U.S. administration should have understood at this juncture that Russia would not allow the Syrian government to be overthrown by an unlawful military campaign. If Russia was to intervene as a collapse of the Syrian government seemed likely, the addition of two Mistral Class LHDs to their naval assets could not be tolerated.

Naval variant Ka-52 Alligator landing on Mistral Class LHD during trials

Naval variant Ka-52 Alligator landing on Mistral Class LHD during trials

It is arguable that at least one of the Mistrals, the Vladivostok would be available to take part in Russia’s current operations in Syria. The crew had been training for over a year in preparation for its commissioning in 2014. This vessel would have been a great asset positioned off the Syrian coast, being able to respond to support the airbase in Lattakia or to deliver ground attack support and troop transportation along the entire Syrian coast. It could act as a powerful joint naval/land force command ship and could support aerial operations with a force of reconnaissance UAVs. If need be, Russian marines and Spetsnaz could also deploy from this floating base of operations. It would have been a force multiplier in the region, and would definitely have influenced any calculus on the part of Turkey. It could also have been position in the Black Sea or close to the Bosporus to influence the decision making of the Erdogan regime or to react to any Turkish provocations.

Russia is determined to acquire LHDs or LPDs for the Russian Navy. It has announced with the cancellation of the Mistral deal that it will be asking indigenous ship builders to provide the government with designs for a similar platform to meet the needs of the Ministry of Defense (MoD). It is interesting to note that Turkey signed a contract in May of 2015 with Navantia of Spain to build an LPD based on the Juan Carlos I LHD design. This is the same design that was used as the basis of the Royal Australian Navies newly commissioned HMAS Canberra and soon to be commissioned HMAS Adelaide. Apparently, Turkey will be receiving one of these modern power projection vessels before Russia does. Russia lost a valuable head start when they decided to trust France to honor a basic contract. Apparently two centuries of peaceful relations between the two nations after the defeat of Napoleon mean little to the French leadership of today.

The Yemen Conflict and the Indian Ocean

It appeared, with the overthrow of an illegitimate ruler who gained office in an election where there was only one candidate that Yemen was moving towards stability, after a period of civil war and terrorism. Not long after the forces of the Houthi and Saleh aligned factions forced the Saudi aligned Abd Radduh Mansur Hadi to flee the country in February of 2015, the Saudi Arabian Airforce started bombing the impoverished country. It was clear that Saudi Arabia would not tolerate a predominantly Shia Houthi movement that shares good relations with Iran to take control of the nation that is on their disputed southern border. A coalition of nations under the leadership of Saudi Arabia has since been formed partly due to Saudi inability to prevail militarily and partly to add an air of legitimacy to the illegal Saudi invasion. The Houthis have been able to hold roughly a third of the country, with the other two thirds are controlled by the Hadi government and Ansar-al Sharia and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). It is interesting to note that the Saudi-proxy terrorist groups have flourished in Yemen since Saudi Arabia started their campaign.

It was announced in September of 2015, that the two Mistral Class LHDs that were denied to Russia were purchased by Egypt. Egypt is a member of the Arab League sanctioned coalition that is engaged in the conflict in Yemen and currently has air and naval assets engaged. It remains to be seen if the conflict will see the use of the two LHDs at some future date. With the Saudi led coalition making little headway in the conflict, even with the aid of terrorist bombings by their allies in Ansar al-Sharia and AQAP, there may be time remaining to the Egyptian Navy to take delivery of the vessels, train the vessel crew and Ka-52 air crews and add these powerful vessels to the naval assets already engaged in the conflict.

Yemen-conflict

It is important to note that the entire Indian Ocean is growing in strategic importance in light of developments over the past three decades. India is positioned between a volatile Arabian Peninsula and Horn of Africa to the west and a traditional enemy in Pakistan and an ever increasingly assertive China to the east. India has wisely responded by modernizing its aircraft carrier force with the acquisition of a Soviet Era Kiev Class aircraft carrier, which was heavily modified and commissioned into the Indian Navy as the INS Vikramaditya in 2013. The INS Viraat, a former British Centaur Class aircraft carrier HMS Hermes, is also in service, but is slated to be replaced by the indigenously designed and built INS Vikrant by 2018. INS Vikrant will commence sea trials this coming year. The Indian Navy has called for proposals for its Multirole Support Vessel (MRSV) project, and has specified an LHD design of between 20,000 and 27,000 ton displacement. It appears that Navantia is the leading contender to win the contract; however the DCNS designed Mistral 140 concept, at a much smaller displacement of 14,000 tons may be a contender.

Conclusions

The world is currently faced with a number of regional conflicts that could easily and regrettably become conflicts of global proportion. Nations as small and as economically limited as the Philippines to the military juggernaut that is the United States, have moved in recent years to acquire vessels that allow them flexibility, power projection capability, and asymmetrical warfare options in an ever increasingly complex geo-political landscape. From the Middle East to East and Southeast Asia to the Indian Ocean, the world is challenged by conflicts that defy international law regardless of the claims of the perpetrators. All of these conflicts have been decades in the making.

As the nations on every side of these conflicts plan their strategy, both diplomatically and militarily, one fact stands out loud and clear. They have all either acquired or are in the process of acquiring multirole naval platforms such as the LHD,LPD,LHA or DDH to empower their navies and to provide more options to diplomats, military planners and warfighters to stay one step ahead in an ever changing geo-political landscape. These vessels are not game-changers on their own, but when employed as a component of a modern naval force, they provide an added power projection capability and a host of options to naval strategic planners. They are a force multiplier in 21st century naval warfare.

It remains to be seen how the current conflicts and disputes will be resolved by all of the assorted stakeholders. The fact that these vessels are being added to the naval inventories of many of the real or potential belligerents of these conflicts and disputes carries the probability that they will be used in the future. All we can do is hope that their inherent power and capabilities will work as a deterrent to conflict and war, and that they will one day be looked on in awe as a tool ultimately left sheathed, while intimidatingly ensuring peace.

Brian Kalman is a management professional in the marine transportation industry. He was an officer in the US Navy for eleven years. He currently resides and works in the Caribbean.

Igor Pejic graduated Political Science Foreign Affairs Department at the Faculty of Political Science and now he is a postgraduate student on the MA Terrorism, Security and Organised Crime at the University of Belgrade, Serbia.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Multirole Naval Platforms of the 21st Century. Naval Arms Race and Regional Conflicts

Part 1 of 3. Read part 2 and part 3.

Despite the end of NATO combat operations in December 2014, US drones continued to launch strikes in Afghanistan throughout 2015 as part of its (ahem) non-combat mission. British drones departed Afghanistan for the Middle-East with Adrian Chiles giving us an inside view of RAF Waddington, home of British drone operations. Meanwhile, in a classic example of having your cake and eating it, defence companies are now unashamedly marketing anti-drone devices to protect us from the drones that they are selling. With all the money sloshing around the industry, it’s perhaps no wonder that the ASTRAEA programme was denied further government funding.

purple-alphabet-letter-b2015 saw the publication of a number of excellent new books examining the technology, politics and ethics of the growing use of armed drones.  Also expanding are the number of US drone bases around the globe, with Africa being a particular focus (recent reports also suggest Suffolk in the UK is to be the site of a new US drone operations centre). Pakistan surprisingly joined the armed drone users club in 2015 with its Burraq drone launching strikes in North Waziristan.  Less surprising perhaps is the fact that despite all the media hype, Britain’s Brimstone missile has yet to be integrated onto British drones.

cCivilian casualties from drone and air strikes in Iraq and Syria are mostly invisible in mainstream media reports, yet casualty recorders like Airwars report they are growing week by week. The use of civilian contractors to maintain US military drone programs came under the spotlight in a TBIJ investigation this year – and is likely to increase with the push to increase Combat Air Patrols.  In the UK, project Claire  (CiviL Airspace Integration for RPAS in Europe) took a worrying step forward with the first flight of a military drone in unsegregated civil airspace.

dMore British drones deployed to the Middle East for operations against ISIS in Iraq and Syria at the beginning of the year. Despite calls for greater openness and transparency, the number of British drones in use against ISIS is officially asecret (but Shhh! the Defence Secretary seemed to have forgot when he told the French press that all ten are in operation).  David Cameron committed to again double the UK’s armed drone fleet (after doubling the number in operation in 2014) as part of the strategic defence and security review.  David Davis took over as Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Drones and initiated an important debate around the use of drones for targeted killing. The UK’s Cross Government Working Group on drones promised a public dialogue on drones which so far at least, has been neither public nor a dialogue.

e-a-zThe debate on whether the growing use of armed drones is an effective means of creating peace and security continued throughout the year with the rancorous TV debate between Glen Greenwald and Christine Fair being an extreme example. A US government report meanwhile found that the use of Reaper drones by US Homeland Security to protect US borders had been largely ineffective.  Enrique Iglesias needed surgery on his hand after grabbing a drone during a concert in May, one of numerous reports of injuries from civil drones.  At the end of the year Germany announced that it was taking over the leadership of the European combat drone development programme.

FFunding for drone development and operations seems limitless despite on-going spending cuts in the UK and the US.  Leaders from different faith communities spoke out against the use of drones for targeted killing with leaders writing a joint letter to President Obama and Congressional leaders.  Despite the ‘pinpoint precision’ of drone strikes, there have been a number of reported friendly firedeaths from strikes in Iraq during 2015.  Meanwhile the organisers of theFarnborough air show are keen to have a Reaper or Global Hawk drone take part in the flying display next year to “help people get comfortable with the idea” of drones.  Chances of either the drones flying, or the public being comforted, are slim to non-existent.

GA new report from Corporate Watch detailed the impact of Israeli drones in Gaza – an issue that gets little attention from most drone watchers – while Israeli security services began to use surveillance drones to monitor protests in the West Bank.  We learnt this year that RAF pilots are lent as a gift of services to the USAF in order to operate US armed drones, while leaked documents suggested GCHQ also gifting intelligence to the US for its drone strikes.  Google’s attempts to steal Amazon’s thunder ended in tears as its massive solar-powered drone crashed shortly after take-off.

letter_hThe USAF’s main drone training centre, Holloman AFB in New Mexico, is to undergoing a dramatic expansion in 2016 to match the ever expanded need for drone pilots.  21-year old British hacker Junaid Hussain was killed in a US drone strike in Syria in August 2015, one of ten Britons killed in such strikes according to TBIJ figures.  After president Obama apologised and promised an investigation into the deaths of two western hostages in a US drone strike, a coalition of human rights groups urged the same treatment for all civilian victims of US drone strikes.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A-Z of Drones 2015: Civilian Casualties, Afghanistan, Gaza

New York: Christmas Eve in The City That Never Sleeps?

December 30th, 2015 by Barbara Nimri Aziz

The city that never sleeps? Well, this Christmas eve New York is defying that moniker.

Although the metropolis may awaken after midnight, it’s presently deserted. Park and Fifth Avenues twinkle on through the evening while their residents abandon streets and highways, malls and markets, parks and bike lanes to join family and friends indoors, even on this warm winter night. Up and down the wide avenues of Manhattan millions of miniature lights still sparkle, embracing tree trunks and reaching through invisible, naked branches. Dazzling decorations that lured shoppers are now but shadows behind dimmed window panes. Curbside parking space is plentiful; taxi drivers have burrowed their cars in suburban garages; fruit vendors, the only merchants in sight, are shuttering their vans.

I pass Symphony Space with its marquee in darkness. Starbucks at 95th is lifeless; although I see lights on atMcDonalds on 96th.  Their coffee maker is off; and those employees chatting inside must be waiting to be paid their bonus. (Does McD give Christmas bonuses?). One working mother guarding McD’s door against any new customers unapologetically announces that she’s heading home early today.

Forget any last minute stocking stuffer, a bottle of perfume, chocolates, or wine. Shoppers had their chance; now workers deserve some respite. Do I detect an uncharacteristic respect for workers’ family needs this night? “We’re closed”, whispers a silent Wall Street. For one evening and a day, this mercilessly capitalist center succumbs to ‘tradition’, if not religious conviction.

I don’t remember New York streets as vacant like at 9 pm today. Broadway in lockdown! South Asian cooks in masala bars, Japanese sushi roll wrappers, and Afghan taxi drivers all bend to America’s Christmas (if not Christian) tradition and depart for distant lodgings. No quick pickups from cheap Chinese fast food joints or the Halal shawarma street-carts tonight.

After finishing my radio special after 7 o’clock, I head towards Brooklyn’s Schermerhorn subway station. The streets have emptied. Seeing a handsome brightly lit store selling fresh produce, juices, and organic cereals, I step inside for some bulgar wheat—$8.00. a pound!– but I’m unlikely to find it anywhere else tonight. Four attendants hover in the aisles with no one to serve. (Are they too awaiting their yearend bonus?)

At least the A train to Manhattan is still running and I board a near empty car. Beside me, a groggy fellow, in laborer’s clothes is either drugged or he drank too much at his company party; he teeters beside me all the way out of Brooklyn, then finally stretches himself out over five empty seats as we tunnel towards Manhattan. Three other passengers across from me emit the ambience that identifies ‘tourist’ to any native New Yorker. They’re conversing in French, as are two casually dressed men seated nearby. I spot a young woman an orange hijab browsing through her phone: intense, but not French.

That’s it. What a reversal of mood since I traveled on this very route only 6 hours earlier! Then, subway platforms on the A-Line were not only jammed with commuters; they thrummed with seasonal music proffered by a variety of ‘holiday’ entertainers who know we’re especially generous these days. A cacophony of sound behind me stirs my curiosity and, walking along the platform, I find its source– a man plucking a guitar and stomping his tambourine-wrapped foot while mouthing some unrecognizable tune. Awful. Yet a surprising number of people stop to photograph his pitiful drama. The man’s disharmony is surely a ploy to draw us to his ‘stage’, a presentation as crude as his music and unarguably below NYC’s street-music standards.

There in front of him, and us, five foot-high dolls are perched, each dressed in a colorful bra and skirt. Electrically animated by the man’s vigorous foot slapping, they shake and shimmy, while on a shelf above them, three furry toys– a rabbit, a bear and a monkey– twirl. “Oh look!” squeals a young mother, parking her baby in its stroller. Calling two older children towards the display, the enthusiastically snaps a photo. (Her daughters are less impressed.) Meanwhile passing travelers drop dollar bills into a bowl at the man’s elbow. Others raise their phone cameras towards the makeshift stage, then move on.

I step into the next train to join workers and shoppers heading to Brooklyn. The train car is crowded but four tall men somehow make their way among us, three wearing red Santa caps, followed by one shaking a small brown bag at us. The singers start with “Jingle Bells”, then shift to “Silent Night” in the genre of African American gospel music. I can’t find any singles when I reach into my purse, but the fellow handling the quartet’s ‘donations’ rushes to assist me. Seeing my $10. note, he smiles: “I can give you change”, and reaches into his own sack to help me out. Am I to announce my contribution, divided by four, to the whole train? The carolers, waiting, are into a second verse of Silent Night. An awkward moment.  How can I ask for change? So I drop my tenner into the proffered bag forthwith and murmur a blessing to his “Merry Christmas” thankyou.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on New York: Christmas Eve in The City That Never Sleeps?

News of the death of prominent anti-Assad commander (or ‘terrorist,’ ‘rebel,’ ‘opposition commander,’ etc.) Zahran Alloush has the potential to radically alter the nature of the war in Syria. 

Considering Alloush and other senior members of the leadership of the Salafist militant group Jaish al-Islam were killed in a major airstrike carried out by the Syrian air force, there is undoubtedly going to be a transformation on the ground as initiative on the battlefield, particularly in Southern Syria, shifts still further to the Syrian Arab Army and its allies.

With Alloush out of the picture and, based on reports coming from sources inside the opposition, significant disarray at the uppermost echelons of leadership of the barely cohesive “Islamic Army,” it seems clear that the Syrian government is likely to move in to reestablish control of Douma, Ghouta, and other rebel-held suburbs of Damascus.

However, while many international observers lament the loss of this “iron-fisted leader” less than a month ahead of planned peace talks set to take place in late January 2016, nearly all analyses of this development have failed (deliberately omitted?) to elucidate just what the rebel groups under his command were doing in Ghouta and Douma, the nature of the ongoing war within the war between the Syrian military and the factions in control of these key suburbs, and the propaganda about the key strategic corridor and the events that have taken place there, including the infamous “Douma market attack” of August 2015 (which I debunked here).

By examining the wealth of information about Alloush, his ideology, his organization, and their activities in the rebel stronghold suburbs of Damascus, it becomes clear that the airstrike that ultimately killed him and many of his Salafist comrades did far more than simply kill a leader of an important rebel group.  Rather, this was a monumental, and perhaps mortal, blow to an entire segment of the rebel-terrorist coalition fighting against the Syrian government and people.

Zahran Alloush: Reality vs Perception

In the days since Alloush’s death there have been, rather predictably, numerous articles written about the assassination, nearly all of which portray Alloush as something of a ‘moderate,’ a man who by the sheer force of his personality and will led an armed faction which stood as “defenders of the true revolution” in their steadfast opposition to both Assad and the Islamic State.  One could be forgiven for thinking that Alloush was a patriot doing his part to defend Syria from the Islamic State and the brutal dictatorTM rather than a vicious Salafist who committed countless war crimes against the Syrian people, among others.

Take for instance the New York Times, writing just hours after the assassination was announced:

Mr. Alloush led the Army of Islam, a group that had recently agreed to participate in a political process seeking to end the five-year-old conflict…Analysts said the strikes were in keeping with longstanding efforts by the Syrian government and its allies to eliminate groups claiming to occupy a middle ground between Mr. Assad and the Islamic State. The efforts are part of a broader objective to improve Mr. Assad’s standing among Western governments, which despise him but also see the Islamic State as an increasing menace.

Consider the implication of the phrase “groups claiming to occupy a middle ground between Mr. Assad and the Islamic State.”  While this is classic corporate media faux-objectivity, the reality is that this is cleverly constructed misinformation designed to validate and legitimize an absolutely discredited notion, namely that there is a significant difference between the ideology of Alloush’s organization and that of the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).  Indeed, the NYT here is unsurprisingly bolstering official Washington’s line that the US must support “moderate opposition” which, in the subtext of that phrase, is everyone who is not ISIS/ISIL.  But real experts on Syria recognize that this is merely political window-dressing, that in fact the difference between Jaish al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham, Jabhat al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda’s official Syrian affiliate), and the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) is just words; these organizations compete for influence and control, but do not truly differ ideologically.

Joshua Landis, Director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma and widely regarded as one of the world’s foremost experts on Syria, suffers no such delusions about Alloush.  In December 2013, Landis wrote:

Zahran Alloush’s rhetoric and propaganda videos provide much insight into his world view, attitude toward Syria’s religious minorities, and vision for Syria’s future. The difference between his ideology and that of al-Qaida groups is not profound. Rather, it is one of shades of grey. [The video linked in the article] is an anti-Shiite tirade and “bring-back-the-Umayyad-Empire” propaganda piece. It shows how sectarian Alloush is. He refers to Shiites, and reduces the Nusayris into this grouping, as “Majous”, or crypto-Iranians…  Here it is an Islamic term of abuse meant to suggest that Alawites and Iranians not only have the wrong religion but also the wrong ethnicity—they are not Arabs, but crypto-Iranians…[This] demonstrates how demonized the Alawites are in the propaganda of the new Islamic Front.  Zahran calls for cleansing Damascus of all Shiites and Nusayris… On hearing this sort of talk from the leaders of the revolution, Alawites and other non-Sunni sects worry that their struggle is a fight for their very existence [emphasis added].

This video and the language of Alloush demonstrates [sic] how difficult it is to draw a clear line between the ideology of the Islamic Front and that of the al-Qaida groups [emphasis added]. They both embrace foreign jihadists and encourage them to come Syria to join the fight. They both call for the resurrection of an Islamic Empire and they both look back to the Golden Age of Islam for the principles upon which the new state will be founded. Their political philosophy and blue print for the future is largely based on a similar reading of Islamic history and the Qur’an.

Some analysts try to draw a clear line between al-Qaida and the Islamic Front, insisting that the former support changing Syria’s borders and seek to establish a Caliphate while the latter are Syrian Nationalists. Unfortunately, this distinction is not evident in their rhetoric. Both idealize Islamic Empire, both reject democracy and embrace what they call shari’a, both welcome jihadists from the “Islamic Umma,” both fly the black flag of Islam rather than the Syrian flag as their predominant emblem. The Islamic Front is dominated by Syrians who do have clear parochial interests, whereas ISIS is run by an Iraqi. Foreigners play a dominate role in its command, but this is not so with the Islamic Front. All the same, their ideologies overlap in significant ways.

Landis, well known as a fierce critic of Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian Government, here removes the mask from Alloush and quickly debunks and thoroughly discredits any attempts to manufacture moderation in the figure of Alloush.  Far from being one of the mythical “moderates” that Obama & Co. are always prattling on about, Alloush is unmistakably a jihadist of the first order, one whose ideology, as Landis correctly noted, is not at all different from that of Al Qaeda and ISIS/ISIL.  Indeed, this is only further confirmed in this video where, as Landis points out, Alloush:

“goes to some lengths to explain that his relationship with Nusra [al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria] is one of brotherhood with only superficial ideological differences that can be settled with shari’a and discussions. This supports my argument that the ideological differences between the Front and al-Qaida are not deep.”

Of course, rhetorical flourishes aside, the question of actual crimes committed by Alloush and his jihadi comrades is critical to examine.  In late 2014 and early 2015, Alloush commanded Jaish al-Islam to fire rockets indiscriminately onto Damascus, a blatant war crime.  Many Syrians were killed in these attacks.   It is important to note that while the pro-rebel media outlets would make an equivalence between such attacks and the infamous “barrel bombs” of the Syrian Arab Army, the reality is that these are simply not comparable.  The aerial offensives carried out by Syria’s air force have targeted rebel strongholds with clear military and strategic targets, while the Jaish al-Islam rocket attacks were fired at civilians without any specific targeting.  This is not to say one has to sanction the SAA’s tactics, just to understand the difference between them and those used by the rebels.

Whether one wants to use this to absolve Assad and the Government of blame or not, the inescapable fact is that bombardment by the military was never indiscriminate.  By contrast, the purpose of Alloush’s bombardment of Damascus was solely to inflict terror on the population of Syria’s capital, and to take revenge for attacks carried out by the Syrian armed forces.  Charles Lister, a vehemently anti-Assad analyst with the Brookings Doha Center, noted in a tweet that referenced an announcement by Alloush via twitter, that “Jaish al-Islam has begun a massive mortar & Grad rocket attack on central #Damascus, to ‘cleanse the capital.’”  Indeed, the use of the word “cleanse” is instructive as it illustrates the attitude and ideology of Alloush as it is practiced on the battlefield.  His desire to ethnically cleanse Syria was never mere rhetoric.  Any way you slice it, Alloush and Jaish al-Islam committed this act that constitutes a war crime.

Interestingly, Alloush’s ideological and rhetorical brotherhood with the Nusra Front translated into on-the-ground collaboration, particularly at the infamous massacre in the Damascus suburb of Adra.  While pseudo-alternative media propagandists such as James Miller at The Intercept callously claimed that no massacre occurred at Adra, instead claiming that RT and other non-Western media that reported it were simply spreading disinformation, Miller and his ilk’s attempts to cover up what truly happened fell flat.

Award-winning journalist Patrick Cockburn, writing in the UK Independent on February 9, 2014, painted a chilling portrait of the horrors of the Mhala family and others in Adra.  Cockburn wrote:

Accounts of what happened to the rest of the population of Adra are confused. I spoke to some of the 5,000 refugees who had been allowed to leave by Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic Front on 30 December and some of whom are now squatting in a giant cement factory. They said the jihadis had ordered them to their basements and had kept them there. The number singled out for execution is put at between 32 and 80. There are accounts of the doctor in the local clinic, a Christian known locally as Dr George, being decapitated. Bakery workers who resisted their machinery being taken away were roasted in their own oven. Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic Front fighters went from house to house with a list of names and none of those taken away then has been [sic] since. This includes the head of the legal department at the Information Ministry who disappeared with his wife and daughter and whose phone is now being answered by a man saying he belongs to Jabat al-Nusra.

It is critical to note the close collaboration here between Nusra and the Islamic Front, the coalition in which Alloush’s Jaish al-Islam is a founding member and plays a central role.   A resident of Adra, the wife of a doctor in town, explained that,

“The armed men were non-Syrians. We lived terrible days, before we could escape with only the clothes that we wore…We woke up at dawn with the sound of bullets… we saw men carrying black flags of Jaish al-Islam and Jabhat al-Nusra. Some of them were singing ‘Alawites we have come to cut off your heads’ song, and this was the song they first sang at the start of the war in Idlib.”

Such egregious war crimes and crimes against humanity are par for the course for Jaish al-Islam.  In early November 2015, just weeks before Alloush was finally killed, Jaish al-Islam made international headlines after parading caged civilians through the streets of Ghouta, with cages of women being placed atop the organization’s headquarters and other key buildings to act as human shields against possible Syrian or Russian airstrikes.

According to the corporate media’s own darling, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (the one-man anti-Assad operation run by Rami Abdel Rahman which has become the primary source for much of the western media’s reporting on Syria), Jaish al-Islam “spread cages over several areas and squares in the Eastern Ghouta putting inside them regime forces’ officers, soldiers and their families.”   Despite the attempt by SOHR to soft-peddle the war crime by characterizing the victims as “regime forces and their families,” the obvious barbarity of such an act is not lost on any genuine political observer.  Such actions certainly go a long way toward debunking the spurious assertion that Alloush and Jaish al-Islam (or Alloush’s original group Liwa al-Islam) are anything that could be described as “moderate.”

Their terrorist credentials are further bolstered by the dastardly role they played in the chemical weapons attack, and subsequent attempts to derail the dismantling of the chemical weapons stockpile by the Syrian Government.  Even if one were to dispute the very provocative alleged video evidence (herehere, and here with excellent, balanced analysis here) of Alloush’s Liwa al-Islam (his organization before consolidation as Jaish al-Islam) there are clear and unmistakable connections between Alloush and the entire chemical weapons saga in Syria.

According to military and strategic analyst, and retired Brigadier General, Ali Maqsoud, the Liwa al-Islam forces arrayed in Jobar included “the so-called ‘Chemical Weapons Front’ led by Zahran Alloush [the supreme leader of Liwaa al-Islam]. That group possesses primitive chemical weapons smuggled from al-Qaida in Iraq to Jobar, in the vicinity of Damascus…[they used]rockets [which] were manufactured domestically to carry chemicals. They were launched from an area controlled by Liwaa al-Islam.”

Maqsoud’s analysis was substantiated by a comprehensive report released in January 2014 (more than four months after the incident), by former UN weapons inspector Richard Lloyd and Prof. Theodore Postol of MIT which effectively debunked the claims of the US government (along with Human Rights Watch and a number of other organizations) that the Syrian military carried out the attack.  The Lloyd/Postol report showed definitively that US intelligence and conclusions regarding the incident were grossly inaccurate. The report, entitled Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013, notes that:

The Syrian improvised chemical munitions that were used in the August 21 nerve agent attack in Damascus have a range of about 2km…[The evidence] indicates that these munitions could not possibly have been fired at East Ghouta from the ‘heart’, or from the eastern edge, of the Syrian Government-controlled area shown in the intelligence map published by the White House on August 30, 2013…The UN independent assessment of the range of the chemical munitions is in exact agreement with our finding.

In other words, Lloyd and Postol confirmed with their findings that the chemical attack of August 21, 2013, which almost led to a direct US military intervention, was carried out from area controlled by Alloush and Liwa al-Islam.  This is further substantiated in Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh’s infamous April 2014 exposé The Red Line and the Rat Line which noted that:

The American and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of 2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons… Defense Intelligence Agency issued a highly classified five-page ‘talking points’ briefing…[which] drew on classified intelligence from numerous agencies: ‘Turkey and Saudi-based chemical facilitators,’ it said, ‘were attempting to obtain sarin precursors in bulk, tens of kilograms, likely for the anticipated large-scale production effort in Syria.’

Naturally, this must be seen in connection with the now well established fact that Alloush is essentially an agent of Saudi Arabia.  Without funding and support from Riyadh, Alloush’s organization would never have even gotten off the ground at the outbreak of the war in Syria in early 2011. Christof Lehmann of nsnbc wrote in October 2013 that:

Several commanders of al-Qaeda brigades in Syria have stated that Zahran Alloush receives his orders directly from Saudi Intelligence. Russian diplomatic sources stated… that people of many different political observances have provided information to Russian diplomats.  Statements to the effect that Zahran Alloush receives his orders directly from the Saudi Intelligence are corroborated by the fact that both Alloush and the Liwa-al-Islam are financed by the Saudi Interior Ministry. The group was literally established with Saudi money after Alloush was released from prison in 2011 [just weeks before the first unrest in Syria began].  According to international law, this fact alone is sufficient to designate Alloush and the Liwa-al-Islam as Saudi mercenaries.

There was an obvious direct line between Riyadh and Ghouta with Alloush and his organization.  That line has now been permanently severed with his death and those of other key figures of the organization.  This will have major implications for the future of the war in Syria, especially with the beginning of a peace process coming at the end of January 2016, less than four weeks from the time of publication.

Part Two of this article will focus on the implications of Alloush’s elimination for the future of this war.  How will this major setback for the rebel/terrorist factions impact any negotiations?  How will it affect the military situation on the ground?  The article will also attempt to place into a broader narrative the “war within the war” between the Syrian military and the Alloush-led rebel groups in the Damascus suburbs.

For now, one thing is certain: this assassination marks a major turning point in this bloody, nearly five year old war.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Syria Rebel “Opposition” Commander’s Assassination, a Major Blow to US-NATO-Saudi Agenda

In last week’s review of the Russian military intervention in Syria I wrote that Kerry had lost every single negotiation he ever had with the Russians and that he had a record of agreeing to A only to come back to the US and then declare non-A. This time again, the Americans did not change their modus operandi, except that it was Obama himself who declared, yet again, that Assad must go, resulting in some commentators speaking of a “White House Schizophrenia”. Others, however, noted that this could be simply a case of face saving denials. Personally, I think that both of these explanations are correct.

There is no doubt that Obama is an exceptionally weak, and even clueless, President. The man has proven to have no vision, no understanding of international relations, his culture is minimal while his arrogance appears to be infinite – he is all about form over substance. This is the ideal mix to win a Presidential election in the USA, but once in the White House this is also a recipe for disaster.

When such a non-entity is placed at the top of the Executive branch of government, the different part of government do not get a clear message of what the policy is and, as a result, they each begin doing their own thing without worrying too much about what the POTUS has to say. The recent article by Sy Hersh “Military to Military” is a good illustration of that phenomenon. Being weak and lacking vision (or even understanding) Obama’s main concern is conceal his limitations and he therefore falls back on the oldest of political tricks: he tells his audience whatever it wants to hear. Exactly the sames goes for Kerry too. Both of these man will say one thing to the Russian rulers or during an interview with a Russian journalist, and the exact opposite to an American reporter. That kind of “schizophrenia” is perfectly normal, especially in the USA.

Christmas celebration in the streets of Latakia, Syria. Credit: The Saker.

Christmas celebration in the streets of Latakia, Syria. Credit: The Saker.

To use the expression coined by Chris Hedges, the USA is an “Empire of Illusion”. The US society has an apparently infinite tolerance for the fake as long as the fake looks vaguely similar to the real thing. This is true on all levels, ranging from the food Americans eat, to the way they entertain themselves, to the politicians they elect and to the putative invincibility of the armed forces their taxes pay for. It is all one gigantic lie, but who cares as long as it is a fun, emotionally reassuring lie. In the Syrian context, this ability to ignore reality results in the support of terrorism in the name democracy, the conduct of an “anti-Daesh” campaign which results in Daesh dramatically increase its territory, the accusation that Assad used chemical weapons and now the “Assad can stay but he must go” policy. This ability to completely decouple rhetoric and reality can sometimes have a positive side-effect. For example, even if this week saw a Zag! From the US Administration in terms of rhetoric, this does not necessarily mean that the USA will continue to attempt to overthrow Assad. The opposite is also true, however. The fact that the US has said that Assad can stay in no way implies that the US will stop trying to overthrow him.

The bottom line is this: yes, there was definitely a Zag! this week, but only time will tell how much of a zag we are dealing with.

In this context I highly recommend the recent article by Alexander Mercouris entitled “Russian diplomacy achieved a trio of Security Council Resolutions over the last month which give Russia a decisive advantage” in which he explains how Russia has achieved victory after victory at the UN Security Council. What is important here is that with each of these Russian-sponsored Resolutions the number of available options for the USA are gradually reduced.

Another factor also reducing the US options are all the tactical successes of the Syrian military whose progress is slow, but steady. The intensive pace of Russian airstrikes is having an effect on Daesh and the Syrians are slowly advancing on all fronts. There has been no Daesh collapse yet, but if the Syrians continue to advance as they have done so far their offensive will eventually reach a critical point when the quantity of their small (tactical) victories will end up triggering a qualitative (operational) reaction and Daesh will begin to collapse. Of course, the Daesh fighters will have the option of finding safety in Turkey, Jordan, Iraq and elsewhere, but the psychological impact of a Daesh defeat in Syria will be huge.

So far there are no signs of a possible Turkish invasion of northern Syria, no signs that anybody is still thinking about imposing a no-fly zone, and besides the murder of Samir Kuntar in an Israeli airstrike (which I discussed here), it appears that the S-400s are achieving the desired deterrent effect.

In other words, while US leaders have their heads stuck deep up into their own delusions, the events on the ground are slowly but steadily reinforcing the Russian position and vindicating Russia’s stance.

In the meantime, the Syrian Christians who follow the Gregorian Calendar are celebrating Christmas in the streets of Latakia in a clear sign that a multi-confessional Syria still exists and has a future.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Week Twelve of the Russian Intervention in Syria. “Obama, An Exceptionally Weak and Clueless President”

US Military to Expand Global Operations in 2016

December 30th, 2015 by Thomas Gaist

The year 2015 will be remembered as a year of expanding global warfare and militarism. It began with discussions of the possibility of “total war” against Russia over the Ukraine crisis, saw new provocations against China in the South China Sea, and draws to a close amid the escalation of the US and European war in Iraq and Syria and the spread of conflict to Yemen, Libya and other parts of Africa.

The imperialist powers are determined to make 2016 an even bloodier and more dangerous year. Germany and Japan are openly remilitarizing, as their governments seek to whitewash and rationalize the crimes of the World War II era. All of the imperialist powers have seized on the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino to place their populations and economies on a war footing.

The most dangerous factor is the US drive for global domination. The United States has its hands in virtually every country, employing drone assassinations, Special Forces operations and a network of military bases and agreements aimed at establishing unchallenged military domination over the planet, along with cyberspace and outer space.

More plans are afoot. Washington is preparing to expand its global basing system through the addition of a “larger network envisioned by the Pentagon,” which will include at least four new Special Forces hubs and numerous new “spoke” bases, according to a New York Times article published Monday.

The commando network will be centered on Eurasia and Africa but will be global in scope, according to Pentagon officials. Among the new bases will be a permanent establishment in Afghanistan, which will function as “a hub for Special Operations troops and intelligence operatives throughout Central and South Asia.”

The record of the US special units, which have emerged as the spearhead of the so-called “war on terror” since 2001, makes clear the murderous nature of the escalating commando war. US Special Forces have been granted a general license to carry out violence and mayhem in every part of the world with total disregard for international law. Thousands of US commandos are already operating in between 85 and 130 countries worldwide, according to varying estimates by US media sources.

The enlarged Special Forces network is only one element of a broader strategic escalation by Washington. US weapons manufacturers are collaborating with the government to channel an expanding war chest of arms to allied governments and proxy forces, with American weapons sales surging in recent years. In 2014, total US arms sales jumped by $10 billion to a total of $35 billion, giving US corporations control over 50 percent of the world weapons market, according to a congressional report released last week.

The intensified drive for a redivision affects every region of the world.

Europe

Washington is pre-positioning military equipment and deploying conventional forces and military “advisors” and trainers throughout Europe in preparation for war against Russia.

The US Army plans to double the number of tanks it has deployed to Europe, sending another full armored brigade to the continent, accompanied by infantry fighting vehicles and other heavy weapons as well as an additional full Army division dedicated to joint operations with NATO and European militaries.

In Ukraine, US Army forces are training five battalions of active-duty forces and US Special Forces are partnering with the Ukrainian military to develop Ukraine commando units.

Asia Pacific

South Korea, a country that has been tapped to serve as a staging area for US war preparations against China, was the leading importer of US arms in 2014, purchasing nearly $8 billion worth of American-made weaponry.

In December, the Obama administration approved the sale of $1.8 billion worth of weapons to Taiwan, including warships previously used by the US Navy and several advanced missile systems. The sale was the first weapons transfer to Taiwan in years and was clearly intended as a provocation against Beijing.

In the Pacific, the US Army’s “Pacific Pathways” program is coordinating joint operations with Asia-Pacific militaries. In the course of 2015, the program saw the US conduct joint drills with units from Australia, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, Malaysia, Mongolia, South Korea and Thailand.

Middle East

Leading purchasers of US weapons in 2014 included the ultra-reactionary regimes of Saudi Arabia, which purchased $4 billion worth of TOW missiles, and Qatar, which purchased $9.8 billion worth of US arms. Qatar has been a major backer of Islamist forces in Syria in the US-backed civil war against Assad.

The US has spearheaded a new imperialist carve-up of the entire region, with Britain, France and Germany piling into the wars in Iraq and Syria toward the end of 2015 and Saudi Arabia leading a US-backed war in Yemen.

Africa

Total arms sales to Africa—particularly in the oil-rich regions—increased by 50 percent between 2010 and 2014 over the previous five-year period. Cameroon and Nigeria, which are collaborating with the growing US intervention in West Africa in the name of the “fight against Boko Haram,” were among the leading importers of weapons. Preparations are underway to relaunch military operations in Libya, already devastated by the US-NATO war that overthrew and murdered Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.

Cyber and outer space

Even cyberspace and outer space are not exempt from the US-led militarization drive. In November, the US was one of only four countries to vote against a United Nations resolution, “No First Placement of Weapons in Outer Space,” which was supported by more than 120 member states. In a presentation earlier this year, US Undersecretary of Defense Robert Work outlined Pentagon plans to deploy a range of space weapons, which Work claimed are necessary to ensure military dominance over Russia.

***

The experience of the Obama administration has underscored the impossibility of opposing imperialist war outside of a struggle against the capitalist system and all of its political representatives. Having won office in 2008 as an antiwar candidate, presenting himself as an opponent of the war in Iraq and an antidote to the militarism of the Bush administration, President Obama has presided over an escalation of the war in Afghanistan, wars for regime change in Libya and Syria, and a new war in Iraq.

Obama’s talk about ending the war in Afghanistan has been exposed by his decision to keep thousands of US troops in the country and the plans to establish permanent US bases there. All of his pledges of “no ground troops” or “boots on the ground” in Iraq and Syria have been exposed as lies.

The divisions that exist within the US ruling elite and the state over foreign and military policy concern the focus and methods of US efforts to dominate the territory and resources of the world, with the Obama White House arguing for a concentration on the struggle against China and his opponents demanding a larger commitment of troops and weapons to turn the Middle East into a de facto US colony. But there is no “peace faction” within the corporate and political establishment, or either of the two big-business parties.

One side of the global crisis is the slide toward a new world war. The other is the development of revolutionary struggles by the working class. Vast resources are allocated to destruction and war, while growing sections of the US population are pushed into poverty and forced to struggle for basic necessities such as housing, education, nutrition and health care.

The struggle against war can be conducted only on the basis of the independent mobilization of the working class in the US and internationally against imperialism on the basis of a socialist and internationalist revolutionary program.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Military to Expand Global Operations in 2016

Hilary Wainwright and Leo Panitch in conversation with Jeremy Corbyn, the new leader of the UK Labour Party. They talk about the meaning of ‘new politics’, Tony Benn’s legacy, and opening up Labour’s policymaking to the people.

Hilary Wainwright is a member of Red Pepper‘s editorial collective and a fellow of the Transnational Institute. Leo Panitch is distinguished research professor at York University, Canada. This interview was conducted on a train ride from Birmingham to London, 12 November 2015.

Leo Panitch (LP): Your remarkable campaign for the leadership not only doubled the party membership but galvanized some 400,000 people overall to associate with the party. This is frankly unheard of anywhere in terms of party mobilization on the left in recent decades. What do you think this reflects about the possibilities for a new politics, not only in Britain but more broadly – especially in Europe?

Jeremy Corbyn (JC): I think our campaign excited people who were very depressed by the election result and very depressed by the analysis that was being offered at the end of it, which was essentially that Labour wasn’t managerial enough and we had to be better managers in order to do better in the future. I only really got on the ballot paper because of a combination of people – from those who just absolutely wanted an alternative to be put, to those who thought that there ought to be a democratic debate in the party. This kicked off the social media campaign that encouraged others to get involved.

Jeremy Corbyn speaking at a rally.

We finally made it into the ballot – which required 35 MPs to sign on to a nomination – with one vote to spare and one minute to go. Then at the hustings where the party leadership debates were held, the point of view I put got quite a good reception. And as we started organizing fringe meetings around them, the campaign suddenly took off. The first one was Nottingham, where we organized a meeting in a room for 100, and 300 turned up. From then on they just grew and so by the end of July, beginning of August, we were getting 1,000 people at every rally we organized. Most of them were filled up with one day’s notice. One place, we filled a hall for 1,500 with only four hours of notice on Facebook.

LP: Is it your sense that the same type of thing is happening elsewhere?

JC: Yes. Because this wasn’t anything to do with me. This was to do with people wanting a different way of doing politics – particularly the young people who came in and were very enthusiastic. Our campaign was a combination of the young and the old, very little in between, the middle-aged weren’t there. They were either under 30 or over 60, most of the people that came in to work on the campaign, and the phone-banking they did was quite extraordinary. There was one of them where I witnessed this 18-year-old Asian girl with a burka explaining to a 90-year-old white woman how to operate the mobile phone to make calls, and they were both getting on just fine. And it was kind of lovely.

We had 400 people on a phone bank one night. It was quite extraordinary. I’m not sure how much phoning they did – they did a great deal of chatting to each other. Most of our funding was raised by crowd-funding, small donations, the average donation was £25, and we got union money in. So about half of it was union-funded and the other half was fundraised.

Hilary Wainwright (HW): What was it exactly that you were tapping in public consciousness?

JC: The basis of the campaign was anti-austerity – that was the whole basis of it.

HW: And the appeal for the ‘new politics’, the new way of organizing politics – how do you see the connections between these two themes?

JC: Oh, they’re two sides of the same coin. Austerity is essentially making the social systems of all of Europe pay for the banking crisis, and with this comes a popular sense of either resignation or anger. So the idea that there is an alternative, that we can do things differently, is very important. That is why we have had the most unremitting attacks on me from day one of the campaign. Some of it is so bizarre it’s funny.

LP: Worse than what Tony Benn experienced?

JC: Hard to tell, different time, different age. It feels bad at times, although I just never respond to any of it, whereas Tony tried to at times and I think that’s a mistake. I mean, I don’t blame him for it. At that time, those days, I was with Tony in responding to all this. But if you respond to these kind of ludicrous personal attacks you then end up in a swamp or a trench with these people.

I’ll give you an example… I was accused of not bowing properly to the queen. I decided I wouldn’t respond. Had I responded, the debate would have been about at what angle one should bow. And by now, five days on from it [at the time of this interview], anyone who hadn’t followed the story closely would say, why is the leader of the Labour Party engaged in a public debate about how one should bow to the queen? They’d think, is that all he’s interested in? I’m about to lose my house and he, the leader of the Labour Party, has got nothing to say about that. So I just took the view from the very beginning that I’m not responding to any of it.

HW: That links to a question I was going to put, which was that you have this reputation that’s sometimes symbolized – for example in Steve Bell’s cartoons in the Guardian by you facing Darth Vader in Star Wars – or as the wise wizard in Harry Potter. You appear fearless. Have you always been fearless, is it something that comes from your family and background – or is it something you’ve gradually, intuitively learned or cultivated through your experiences, your 30 years as an MP? When you’ve been taking on powerful interests, diving in at the deep end every day as an MP, have you ever been fearful?

JC: There’s two points here, really. One is that I have this 18th century religious view that there is some good in everybody. Sometimes you have to search quite hard for it. Sometimes it’s very hard to find and you wonder if it really is there. Secondly, because I’ve never had any higher education of any sort, I’ve never held in awe those who have had it or have a sense of superiority over those who don’t. Life is life. Some of the wisest people you meet are sweeping our streets.

A friend of mine, a building worker – he sadly died, committed suicide last year, I was very sad about that and I’m very sad I wasn’t there for him at the time – whose house was very simple, lots of reused this and reused that, and somebody said to him: “Jim, why do you live like this?” He said, very wise, he said: “I live simply, that others might simply live.” And you think, hang on, that’s actually very profound. So you’ve got to have a bit of respect for people. I do have a respect for people and I actually, genuinely enjoy meeting the wide variety of people I do. My constituency has probably about 70 different languages spoken within it, people from all over the world. There’s the great, there’s the good and there’s lots of people who have been in the prison system. They’re all there.

What is fundamental is the attitude with which you approach people, it’s an attitude toward your environment, your attitude toward other people. Interestingly, the first leader of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie, who was a more thoughtful man than he’s often given credit for, was much more bothered about education and opportunities for women than about nationalisation.

LP: It’s interesting in that connection that before you were elected in 1983, you were already associated with the attempt to change the Labour Party’s old statist and parliamentarist politics. Tony Benn had articulated very well in the 1970s the notion that the real problem is not about more state or less state, it’s about a different kind of state and, above all, a much more democratic British state that would be capable of introducing a cooperative, egalitarian and democratic economy. He would be so proud of you for having achieved what he wanted so badly – to be the Labour Party leader committed to this.

JC: I wish he was still here. I knew Tony very, very well for a very long time. The difference between Tony and me was that whereas he was one of those very unusual politicians who was actually very successful in a conventional career pattern, I have been monumentally unsuccessful in the conventional career pattern.

The first time I met Tony was 1969-70 period, when he was reflecting on his experiences as a cabinet minister in the 60s. What was interesting about him then was that, whereas most of the cabinet ministers reflecting on the experience talked about the ministerial car, the mendacity of the opposition, and how they were going to win again, Tony had quite different and more interesting personal reflections on what he had done or not done.

LP: Yes, and on the basis of such reflections, he wrote a Fabian pamphlet in 1970 called The New Politics: A Socialist Reconnaissance, in which he surveyed all the anti-authoritarian social movements in the late ‘60s – black power, women’s movement, anti-Vietnam War – and said, we need to bring that spirit into the party, that’s what we’re missing.

JC: I remember those discussions with him, and then I worked very closely with him in the mid-70s on industrial democracy. Sometimes he was idealistically too excited. He’d sort of say: “Yes, it’s all going to happen now.”

LP: You were quoted in Tony’s diaries as saying that you attributed the defeat in the 1983 election to “the great incompetence of the party machine.” So what I want to ask you is, did you mean this in the sense of its incapacity to project the promise of the new politics you shared with Tony beyond the active party membership – and does this remain the case today?

JC: I honestly can’t remember saying that but I can imagine the thought-processes I was having, which was that the party in ’83 presented a very interesting electoral platform but lots of people in the party were quite frightened of it, and the Tories were running essentially a fairly xenophobic election surrounding the Falklands war which we never challenged. We also were faced with the SDP being set up by those leading Labour parliamentarians who left the Labour Party at that time, so it was a very interesting period. I felt the party didn’t really understand what was happening.

LP: But what about the incompetence of the machine?

JC: In some cases just the actual organization on the ground was very poor.

LP: Are you worried about this now?

JC: No, not at all. The party now is in a very different place. The ground operation, as we call it, in the General Election was actually very good.

LP: Was it?

JC: Oh, yeah. We had more people active than many I can remember. I went to quite a lot of constituencies, key constituencies. And the membership is now much bigger, it’s double what it was. What I am worried about now is that the party needs to reach out and involve a wider range of people. That’s my main message.

I’ve just been speaking in Birmingham, to a very big Unite shop stewards’ conference. I said actually every one of you in this room is an expert, every one of you has an opinion, every one of you has optimism, every one of you has hopes. I want a party structure and a union structure that allows your intelligence to come forward and be part of our policy-making. So we don’t go through to 2020 where I, as the leader, go away and write a manifesto. We go through to 2020 where its patently obvious to everyone in the country what our manifesto is going to be – on housing, on health, on jobs, all those things – because everybody’s had a part in it. So the need is to reach, to widen our organization to make us a community-based party.

LP: And you think the party’s regional organizers know how to do this?

JC: Well, it’s not so much do organizers know how to do it – do we all know how to do it? I’m not an expert on this but I’ll try. We’re going to try various experiments in how we reach out and how we involve people, how we use social media, how we use digital tools to share ideas and knowledge. The idea is that we have a community conference on policy in which some people are there, some people are on Skype, some people are on a livestream feed, some people are sending in emails, whatever. All saying something, because they’ve all got something to say.

It’s reaching out to people and understanding that what we couldn’t do in ’83 was win parts of the national media because the story was written by the Radio 4 Today programme and The Sun. Radio 4 Today is still there and it’s influential, The Sun is still there and it’s influential, but they’re both much less influential than they were.

I do this weekly YouTube video, the lowest viewing figures we’ve had have been 400,000, the highest we’ve had is over a million. That’s the numbers of people who want to watch it. So, we’re doing all of that, and I’m spending a lot of time as well travelling around on trains, like this.

HW: This links in to what we’ve done to prepare this interview. Inspired by your approach to Prime Minister’s Question Time in the House of Commons, we’ve asked people what questions they want us to ask you.

JC: Dave from Witney, what’s his question?

HW: Well, Dave from Witney did not come up with anything, but Tim, from Barking, has a question about democratization of the state: he asks what your views are on a federal UK, given that new politics and democratization surely involve sharing power?

JC: Yeah, I’m glad that question has come up because of the problems that have arisen out of the UK being such a highly centralized state. It is changing, because Scotland is obviously very different now – as government in Scotland is devolved, it now has tax-raising powers which they may or may not want to use. But whatever the outcome in Scotland – whether independence or otherwise – England is still not decentralized at all. [Secretary of State] George Osborne is offering city-devolution to some places – over which I have some concerns because it is devolution to big cities and it doesn’t necessarily include adequate funding of the services that have been devolved. So you could end up with a form of devolution that doesn’t include any kind of financial autonomy or alternative source of income. You negotiate every year on limited funding with a central government which relies on you running even more services on its behalf.

The other end of the scale is the total federal model that Germany has, with not only the very powerful ‘Lander’ levels of regional governments but also very powerful cities and a relatively weak federal state. I think there is a very interesting debate on federal models to be had here. I don’t want us to go into government in 2020 saying simply that we are going to think about it. So I’ve asked Jon Trickett to set up a constitutional convention, which he’s doing – it’s under way now. It is looking at powers of government, powers of parliament, powers of the House of Lords, an elected second chamber. Then issues of rights and accountability in society, bill of rights kind of thing – protecting the Human Rights Act but moving on from that, of course, to how you sort English regional government.

Because there are no effective regional voices it means there is a disproportionate level of capital investment in London and the south-east compared to the north-west and north-east, for example. The East Midlands actually does the worst of every region. I put some ideas together on this during the leadership campaign as one of our consultative papers. I did 13 consultative papers on lots of different stuff. They are on the Jeremy4Leader website. Look at those and you’ll see some ideas there. All of those are open to comment. The difficulty we have at the moment is simply the capacity we have to respond to all this, because of the volume of stuff we’re getting in.

LP: And to raise the stakes even higher, what about democratizing European institutions?

JC: Well, European institutions – I want us to approach the European referendum on the basis of demands for a social Europe, demands for workers’ rights across Europe, demands for environmental protection across Europe, and turn it into a debate about: do you want a free market Europe that controls people or do you want a Europe where the people control the market? Essentially advancing that kind of alternative.

Now I’m not sure how far we’ve got with that debate, there’s a long way to go. I’m having a lot of discussion with a lot of union people on this at the moment. Our problem is simply the capacity to respond to everything. After only two or three weeks in office we discovered we had a backlog of a hundred thousand emails sent to me. We had a backlog of a thousand invitations to speak at places all over the country, and all over the world for that matter. We started from scratch with our office, so just the sheer management of issues off this is huge. It’s now much better, it’s getting better. We’ve got more staff in place, a better team in place, it’s growing but it is quite difficult.

Also I’m quite concerned that if I spend time in the office someone will always find something for you to do. There’s always a crisis that needs your urgent attention. If I wasn’t there, either the crisis wouldn’t happen or it wouldn’t need your urgent attention. But the fact I’m there means that it becomes my problem, not somebody else’s. So I’m quite assertive about the need to ensure I go travelling round the country. I’m doing basically three days travelling every week. So we’re going everywhere. I did over a hundred events during the leadership campaign and by the end of the year I will probably have done 400 to 500 public meetings.

HW: How do you organize the input you get through those meetings?

JC: That’s the hard part. That is the hard part. It can’t all reside in my brain – it’s not capable of retaining all this information. That is actually the problem area, how we deal with all this. And so, when we’ve finally got the rest of the team in place, we’re going to look at much more interactive websites and interactive ideas. A lot of it is depending on computers and social media. You couldn’t do this without computers and social media.

I think back to the Tony Benn deputy leadership campaign in 1981. I think of the miners’ strike in 1984. I think back to the industrial democracy movement in the early 1970s. All of which I was very involved with, but they would have been so much more successful and so much better if we’d had better forms of communication. We had to write letters to everybody, and spent a lot of time licking stamps.

HW: This leads into another question concerned with the party. It’s from Thomas Barlow: his question is how are you going to open up the party – both the party apparatus and the Parliamentary Party – to democratic inputs and participation in policy-making? And I might add, how far could your own Islington North constituency party be a participatory model for the rest of the party?

JC: There’s no perfect model, but what I say to anyone active in the party is that we’ve recruited 200,000 new members, but please don’t take them to the branch meetings. You get to your average branch meeting and you’re discussing the minutes of the last meeting but one, it’s not necessarily very attractive. My constituency party is not perfect but we have a very large membership. We’ve got 3,300 members in my CLP and 2,000 registered supporters. So we’ve got 5,000 people and the Labour vote is 30,000 – so one in six of the Labour vote are members of the party.

HW: So how do you involve them?

JC: We have thought a lot about how we conduct meetings. Our normal monthly meeting has a guest speaker, a discussion, a report from me and then after an hour and three quarters, we do the business in 20 minutes.

LP: So have you sent this out to other CLPs, to the regional organizers?

JC: This is where it’s going. We’ve organized a very interesting national executive ‘away day’ where I’ll be presenting ideas on this.

LP: This isn’t widely known…

JC: It will be, don’t worry. The word will get out there and one day the BBC will mention it.

HW: Maybe you could do a little film of sort of your local party in action showing what meetings could be like…

JC: Yeah, but the whole thing should not be personal around me…

HW: Then, moving on beyond the personal, how far could this model influence the Parliamentary Labour Party – so the issue is less whether MPs will be reselected as candidates for the next election by each of their constituency parties, but more that they face local parties that are so full of energy and capacity that they can’t resist the new politics agenda by clinging to the old politics.

JC: Abraham Lincoln had a point when he said: “With charity to all and malice toward none, we go forward.”

LP: Are there red lines you won’t cross, apropos of this?

JC: Yeah, I mean, my views on nuclear weapons are very well known. My views on social justice are very well known. My problem is all my views are extremely well known on everything. To be fair, you get a lot of noise from a small number of members of the Parliamentary Labour Party. But there’s a much larger group that are actually very interested – very interested in who has joined the party, very interested in the fact that their membership has doubled. Some are nervous, some are concerned, some are excited. We’re all humans. We have to try and understand people. My natural, default position is to work with somebody, not against them. It does make my life quite busy.

HW: So this relates to another crowdsourced question which is from Finn Smith, who is asking how you envisage changing the present political culture? He says that you’re “respected because you’re humble, modest and caring but you’re up against a dominant narrative of personal gain, competition, private entrepreneurship. How do we change the mentality of this neoliberal sort of narrative?”

“Is socialism just about state power, state control, state ownership and so on, or is socialism about a state of mind of people.”

JC: Well it’s about the psychology of our society. It’s exactly where we started. Is socialism just about state power, state control, state ownership and so on, or is socialism about a state of mind of people. I think the response across Europe to the humanitarian crisis of Syrian refugees is very interesting. The Hungarian government are not very nice people, and very nasty toward asylum seekers and refugees. But when those poor Syrians were trying to walk through Hungary to get to Austria, ordinary people came out and gave them clothes and water. They could’ve been throwing rubbish at them. They could’ve been attacking them. They weren’t. There is a basic humanity toward other people.

Of course, you have to unlock this when young people are brought up to understand their history and their culture largely in terms of consumerism, competition and self-advancement. So my absolute passion is that, starting with pre-school facilities, the emphasis should be on schools as places of social interaction, where people learn to play together, and where they are asked, is the advance of a community the ability of somebody to get very rich at the expense of others; or is the advance of the community when there is nobody homeless, nobody unemployed, nobody sleeping rough? We have to insist it is only about ‘getting ahead’ if we all get ahead.

Somebody said to me “you don’t speak for aspiration.” So I said, “Oh yeah I do, I’ve got a real aspiration.” And he said: “Okay, so what’s that?” And I said: “Everybody to have a house.”

HW: What about how to appeal to UKIP voters. Does it require redefining patriotism?

JC: No, it just requires reaching out and saying, well actually, the housing shortage is created by not enough houses, the doctors shortage is created by not enough doctors, the limits on school places by not enough schools. Stop blaming people. Look to ourselves how we solve it.

LP: So, it sounds like you are actually enjoying yourself in this new leadership position?

JC: Yeah, of course I am.

LP: Seriously?

JC: Yeah, I was pushed into this, but I’m happy I was.

HW: Are there any surprises? I mean, is it as you expected? Or are there things that are different, for good or ill?

JC: I feel constantly concerned that I’m spending all this time doing everything involved in all my leadership activity and sometimes I feel a tear between that and my responsibilities to the community that I represent. So I have a weekly fight over the schedule set out in my diary. That’s where I do get quite assertive, because I insist on spending time with those people and groups I always have represented even while now also travelling across the country – and also I make sure that I have time for myself. Half a day, or a day a week, so I can dig my allotment.

HW: OK, just one final question. You are known for your exemplary lack of sectarianism. You work with whoever is on board for the cause. You worked with the Greens, for example, in Stop the War, on anti-austerity platforms and so on. Now people are worried – and this is reflected in the crowdsourced questions – about the party’s electoral approach to the Greens, and in particular whether the Labour Party should stand down in the next election from challenging their leader, Caroline Lucas, in the Brighton constituency she is MP for. How does a non-sectarian ethic extend to that level as a party leader?

JC: That’s tomorrow’s problem, that’s not today’s. We’ve got to build the ideas, then develop the movement, and then we’ll see. Today is what we’ve achieved so far. •

This interview is jointly published with Red Pepper and Jacobin.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “What We’ve Achieved So Far”: An Interview with Jeremy Corbyn

The Fracturing of the European Union

December 29th, 2015 by Peter Schwarz

It is 70 years since large parts of Europe lay in ruins. Great power aspirations, nationalism and fascism made the continent the focus of two world wars, which together claimed nearly 100 million victims. Now, these same tendencies are spreading once again.

Everywhere in Europe, the ruling elites are moving sharply to the right. They are boosting military spending, taking part in the imperialist wars in the Middle East and Africa, sealing up borders and inciting xenophobic sentiments against refugees. They are developing authoritarian forms of rule and building up a police state in order to suppress growing social tensions.

After the attacks in Paris, the Socialist Party government imposed a state of emergency for three months, stationed thousands of soldiers on the streets and deployed the military’s only aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf to bomb Syria. The beneficiary of this policy has been the right-wing National Front, which became the strongest party in the first round of the recent regional elections.

In Hungary and Poland, governments openly profess their admiration for the authoritarian regimes of the 1920s and 1930s.

In Germany, leading politicians and academics demand that the country again take on the role of a “hegemon” and “disciplinarian” in Europe and aspire to be a major power in the world, as if the crimes of the Nazi regime never happened. The austerity policies that Berlin has imposed on the economically weaker EU members for years have aggravated social and political tensions throughout Europe.

Even the Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, who otherwise is a political follower of the German chancellor, criticized Angela Merkel in the Financial Times this week for pushing economic policies that are fanning the flames of populism and damaging incumbent governments across the continent—and are based on double standards favoring Germany and hurting Italy. Governments in Warsaw, Athens, Lisbon and Madrid had lost their jobs because they followed the policy of fiscal discipline without true growth, Renzi complained.

Numerous recent comments in the media focus on the potential break-up of the EU under the pressure of growing contradictions and tensions.

Reuters correspondent Paul Taylor writes under the headline “Europe’s year from hell may presage worse to come”: “The crises of 2015 have threatened to tear the Union apart and left it battered, bruised, despondent and littered with new barriers.”

EU Parliament President Martin Schulz warned in Die Welt that no one can say “if the EU will exist in this way in a decade”. The alternative, he writes, is “a Europe of nationalism, a Europe of borders and walls. That would be devastating, because such a Europe has led our continent in the past repeatedly into disaster.”

An editorial in the Süddeutsche Zeitung even demands a “Plan B” in the event that the EU breaks apart. The main danger comes less from Greece and the refugee crisis or an exit of Britain than from “neo-nationalism”, the newspaper states.

While these and other comments warn of a break-up of the EU and the possible consequences, they do not answer the question of why nationalism and militarism are flaring up again in Europe. Indeed, they do not even pose the question.

Contrary to the claims of official propaganda, the EU has never overcome the conflicts that made Europe the center of two world wars. The EU does not unite the peoples of Europe, but has always been a weapon of the most powerful economic and financial interests against the working class at home and international rivals abroad. It is a hotbed of nationalism, inequality, dictatorship and war.

The EU is living proof that it is impossible to unite the continent on a capitalist basis. The defence of capitalist private property and the free movement of capital and profits, which are the focus of the EU treaties, inevitably have the consequence that the most powerful corporations in the EU set the tone and the strongest states impose their will on the weaker. Instead of alleviating national and social contradictions, the EU exacerbates them to the extreme.

The enlargement of the EU into Eastern Europe a decade ago did not bring democracy and prosperity. The new members have served the major European corporations as a source of cheap labor. Their welfare programs are being destroyed, wages kept low and unemployment high, while a small corrupt elite enjoy prosperity.

The EU, and especially Germany, took advantage of the financial crisis of 2008 to dictate unprecedented social cuts in the name of fiscal consolidation. In Greece, which was made an example, the average standard of living declined by 40 percent in a few years.

The EU and its members have responded to the growing social tensions with militarism and increased repression. The real or supposed danger of terrorist attacks have served as a pretext for further anti-democratic measures.

With the refugee crisis, the consequences of imperialist wars in the Middle East and North Africa have returned to Europe. The refugee issue has further polarized Europe. While large sections of the population react with solidarity, the ruling circles have unleashed a furious campaign against refugees, building up border fences and fighting each other.

The dangers arising from the break-up of the EU are very real. New wars and dictatorships, even within Europe, loom. This danger cannot be prevented by defending the EU, but only in a relentless struggle against it and the capitalist system upon which it is predicated.

The only way to unite Europe in the interests of its peoples, to use its vast resources in the interest of all and to prevent further wars, is through the United Socialist States of Europe. Only the independent mobilization of the European working class on the basis of a socialist programme can halt the impending disaster.

Peter Schwarz

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Fracturing of the European Union

Aparentemente, o ano de 2015 marca o início da revolução no interior do FMI. Primeiro, se aprovou a inclusão do yuan, a moeda chinesa, entre os DEG, a cesta de divisas criada em 1969 para servir de suplemento das reservas oficiais dos países-membros. Agora, graças à aprovação do Congresso dos Estados Unidos, o FMI poderá implementar finalmente a reforma do sistema de quotas de representação, com o qual a China e outras potências emergentes ganharão peso na tomada de decisões, enquanto os países do continente europeu perderão relevância. Não obstante, ainda é prematuro concluir que se trata de uma transformação radical na correlação de forças dentro do FMI: os Estados Unidos continuarão mantendo seu poder de veto.

Os Estados Unidos parecem ter compreendido que para conservar sua liderança global é impossível desconhecer o crescente protagonismo da China e outras potências emergentes, e que é preciso compartilhar responsabilidades na gestão das finanças internacionais. Por isso Washington não teve outra alternativa senão outorgar importantes concessões aos seus adversários através do Fundo Monetário Internacional (FMI).

Na última semana de novembro, o FMI adotou a decisão de incorporar o yuan nos Direitos Especiais de Giro (DEG, sigla traduzida do nome em inglês ‘Special Drawing Rights’), a lista de divisas criada nos Anos 60 para complementar as reservas oficiais dos seus membros. Embora vários funcionários estadunidenses do Fundo tenham tentado se opor à medida desde um princípio, no final Pequim se comprometeu a seguir avançando na liberalização do seu setor financeiro.

Até agora, o Banco Popular da China já assinou cerca de quarenta acordos bilaterais de permuta de divisas (‘currency swaps’). Este ano, os bancos centrais do Suriname, África do Sul e Chile começaram a promover o abandono do dólar entre as empresas dos seus países. Aos poucos, o yuan vai suplantando a moeda norte-americana nos intercâmbios comerciais do gigante asiático.

Essa estratégia permite que o yuan seja hoje a segunda moeda mais utilizada no financiamento comercial, e a quarta nos pagamentos transfronteiriços, segundo os dados da Sociedade de Telecomunicações Financeiras Interbancárias Mundiais (SWIFT, por suas siglas em inglês). E, mais cedo que tarde, a moeda chinesa será plenamente conversível, ou seja, intercambiada livremente no mercado, sem nenhum tipo de restrição.

Assim, os dirigentes do Partido Comunista da China conseguiram acabar com as suspeitas da diretora executiva do FMI, Christine Lagarde: a partir do dia 1º de outubro de 2016, o yuan se tornará a terceira divisa mais relevante na composição dos DEG. A “moeda do povo” (‘renminbi’) terá um peso maior dentro da lista do FMI que o yen japonês e a libra esterlina, embora ainda deva se manter abaixo do dólar e do euro.

No dia 18 de dezembro, o Congresso dos Estados Unidos deu luz verde para que o FMI implemente a reforma do sistema de quotas de representação. Sem dúvidas, é a mudança mais importante dentro do FMI desde 1944, o ano em que se construíram os acordos de Bretton Woods. O novo sistema de quotas significa um grande respiro para o Fundo em termos de legitimidade.

Depois do colapso econômico de 2008, ficou evidenciado que o FMI não contava com os recursos suficientes para encarar às crises de liquidez. Nenhum país soberano tinha intenções de solicitar ajuda. O FMI se desprestigiou por completo após sua atuação nas crises de dívida na América Latina e no Sudeste asiático: havia demostrado que operava como o braço armado do Departamento do Tesouro dos Estados Unidos, e não como um fundo multilateral encarregado de estabilizar as balanças de pagamentos dos seus aderentes.

Por isso, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, diretor do FMI entre 2007 e 2011, convenceu os países emergentes a realizar novos depósitos em troca de incrementar suas quotas. O Diretório Executivo do FMI aceitou a proposta em 2010, durante a XIV Revisão Geral das quotas.

Logo depois, foi apresentada a iniciativa de reforma, diante da Junta de Governadores (integrada por todos os membros), para se submeter à aprovação dos parlamentos nacionais. Então, o governo dos Estados Unidos fez valer seu poder de veto – para uma decisão ser adotada pelo Fundo precisa de uma maioria de 85% da votação, e os Estados Unidos sozinho conta com 16,7% dos votos.

Porém, há alguns dias, após cinco anos de fervente oposição do Congresso norte-americano, a inércia finalmente se rompeu. A reforma do sistema de quotas será uma realidade. Os recursos à disposição do FMI se duplicarão, elevando-se a 659,67 bilhões de dólares. Vale destacar que a quota que se entrega a um país determina o nível máximo dos seus compromissos financeiros com o FMI, e o seu número de votos na instituição, sendo um fator determinante no acesso ao financiamento.

O avanço mais importante é o da China, cujo direito de voto passará de 3,8% a 6%, com o qual, será o terceiro país com mais poder, atrás somente dos Estados Unidos e do Japão. O Brasil subiu quatro posições, enquanto Índia e Rússia entraram na lista dos dez mais influentes. Por outra parte, a participação da Europa caiu. Com exceção à quota da Espanha, que passará de 1,68% a 2%, Alemanha, França, Itália e Reino Unido diminuirão sua participação.

“As reformas incrementam significativamente os principais recursos do FMI e nos permitem dar uma resposta mais eficaz às crises, e ao mesmo tempo melhoram la estrutura de governo institucional, ao refletir melhor o crescente papel que desempenham os países emergentes e em desenvolvimento, e a dinâmica da economia mundial”, disse Lagarde num comunicado à imprensa.

Contudo, lamentavelmente, os Estados Unidos conservará seu poder de veto: seu direito de voto diminuirá dois décimos, de 16,7% para 16,5%. Até agora, tudo parece indicar que os dirigentes de Pequim não desejam confrontar a dominação dos Estados Unidos no FMI, instituição que há mais de setenta anos se mantém como o “prestamista de última instância” mais importante na escala mundial, tendo em conta o volume de recursos que maneja.

A disputa entre China e Estados Unidos é somente tangencial. Pequim busca incrementar sua influência financeira através dos seus poderosos bancos estatais (Banco de Desenvolvimento da China, ICBC, Banco da China, etc.), e através dos bancos regionais de desenvolvimento nos que participa: o Banco Asiático de Investimentos em Infraestrutura (AIIB, por sua sigla em inglês), o Banco da Organização de Cooperação de Shanghai (SCO, por sua sigla em inglês) e o banco dos BRICS (que reúne Brasil, Rússia, Índia, China e África do Sul).

Tanto na Ásia-Pacífico quanto na África e na América Latina e no Caribe não há dúvida de que a China compete cara a cara com o Banco Mundial e os bancos regionais de desenvolvimento respaldados por Washington (Banco Asiático de Desenvolvimento, Banco Africano de Desenvolvimento, Banco Interamericano de Desenvolvimento, etc.) no financiamento de projetos de infraestrutura e extração de matérias-primas (‘commodities’).

Entretanto, os mecanismos de cooperação financeira impulsados por Pequim que oferecem liquidez aos países em conjunturas críticas, tais como a Iniciativa Chiang Mai (integrada por China, Japão, Coreia do Sul e dez economias da ASEAN) e o Acordo de Reservas de Contingência dos BRICS (também conhecido como o “mini-FMI”), possuem escassos recursos monetários, operam em dólares, e dependem do aval do FMI para outorgar empréstimos a partir de certo limite.

Portanto, se bem é uma excelente notícia para o mundo que China e outros países com elevadas taxas de crescimento do Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) consigam ver incrementada sua participação no FMI, com dois postos a mais entre os vinte e quatro do Diretório Executivo, os Estados Unidos continuarão exercendo uma dominação esmagadora.

Se Washington não concordar com algum mínimo detalhe poderá rechaçar qualquer proposta dos países emergentes, graças ao poder de veto. É claro que em algum momento, a China deverá exercer pressão para evitar que um só país escreva as regras do jogo, mas até lá dará tempo ao tempo…

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez

 

 

Tradução do espanhol : Victor Farinelli.

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez Economista formado pela Universidade Nacional Autônoma do México.

  • Posted in Português
  • Comments Off on O Congresso dos Estados Unidos dá o braço a torcer e aprova a reforma de cotas do FMI

Atentados de París: no es terrorismo, es geopolítica

December 29th, 2015 by Ariel Noyola Rodríguez

Gracias a las redes sociales y los cables desclasificados por Wikileaks, es que la población mundial sabe hoy que cuando los movimientos populares ponen en entredicho la presencia hegemónica de Washington y el lobby pro-Israel en sus países de origen, entonces muy posiblemente se convertirán en víctimas de la intervención foránea.

El modus operandi imperialista consiste en financiar y entrenar guerrillas internas y grupos rebeldes locales que, a través de  la insurrección armada, la violación de los derechos humanos y el ataque a organizaciones y grupos con vocación democrática, consigue destituir los liderazgos locales y, de paso, atemorizar a la población para que sea ésta quien clame por la intervención occidental.

Entre estos grupos armados se encuentra Daesh (ISIS en inglés), secta fundamentalista sunita que es liderada por el yihadista Abubaker al Bagdadi desde el año 2010, y que busca consagrar el califato mundial. La ortodoxia de esta minoritaria organización militar autoriza el castigo y el exterminio de todos los infieles que no comulguen con la interpretación literal del Corán.

De esta manera, entre los “infieles” no solamente se encuentran todos aquellos que se niegan a alabar a Alá (las principales víctimas del mal denominado “Estado Islámico”), sino los más de dos billones de musulmanes chiítas o sunitas que entienden al Islam como lo que es: una religión absolutamente pacifista.

Su entrenamiento, que se remonta a la guerra afgano-soviética (1978-1992), ha sido similar al que recibieron grupos militares latinoamericanos bajo la denominada “Doctrina del shock”  promovida desde la Escuela de las Américas, que ejercía la tortura a sangre fría a quienes osaran apoyar a los gobiernos populares en las décadas de 1970 y 1980.

Esta organización mercenaria prefabricada ha recibido una instrucción militar brutal por parte de la Agencia Central de Inteligencia (CIA, por sus siglas en inglés), el MOSSAD y el M-16 que, al despojarlos de su condición humana, les permite perpetrar atrocidades bélicas contra todos los “infieles”.

Fundamentalmente, en contra de quienes están más cerca: el pueblo sirio y su gobernante chiíta, Bashar al-Assad, confirmado por el electorado nacional como Presidente de Siria en los años 2000, 2007 y 2014.  Esta guerra civil mantiene a la población atemorizada y luchando desesperadamente por exiliarse en algún país de Occidente.

Cabe destacar que para concretar las acciones bélicas de Daesh no sólo se requiere instrucción, sino también financiamiento. El derribo del avión ruso Su-24 por parte de Turquía ha develado un torrente de información suministrado por el Gobierno ruso y sus aliados sobre las estrechas relaciones entre el Daesh y la Organización del Tratado del Atlántico Norte (OTAN), organización en la que Israel y Turquía juegan un rol clave.

Los pozos de petróleo incautados al gobierno sirio de Bashar al-Assad y a los campos petrolíferos iraquíes de la región de Mosul por ISIS, son explotados y su crudo es enviado a Turquía en caravanas de  camiones-cisterna. Una vez en los puertos de Beirut y Ceyhan, el hidrocarburo es vendido a países de Asia y el Medio Oriente, principalmente a Israel, a través de la naviera BMZ Group Denizcilik, entidad de la cual Bilal Erdogan, hijo del actual presidente turco Recep Tayip Erdogan, es propietario mayoritario con casi un 30% de participación.

Esta compra de petróleo a Daesh permite el flujo millonario de dinero que es destinado a financiar la insurgencia y los atentados perpetrados por los yihadistas. Es así como se puede comprender entonces por qué ISIS nunca ha atacado Israel, Turquía, Arabia Saudita, Dubai, Bahrein, Estados Unidos o Qatar.

¿Quiénes resultan beneficiados de las atrocidades cometidas por Daesh? Definitivamente, los musulmanes no.  La creciente ola de islamofobia ha incentivado el cierre de fronteras, el agudizamiento de la política migratoria y la discriminación hacia la población árabe.  Además, ha permitido el surgimiento de grupos racistas que avalan el apartheid y las atrocidades cometidas por Israel en contra del pueblo palestino. La población mundial, cegada por la manipulación mediática, contempla con terror a las naciones y grupos libertarios que componen el Eje de la Resistencia.

El pasado jueves 17 de diciembre, en una encuesta realizada por la compañía Public Policy Polling (PPP) de opinión ciudadana estadounidense, un 30% de los simpatizantes del partido republicano votó a favor de bombardear Agrabah (la ciudad ficticia de Aladdín). Gracias a la campaña comunicacional global constante respecto al “islamismo radical” es que la respuesta instantánea de la población es apoyar la invasión, la protección y el cierre fronterizo, sin cuestionar el sentido de la acción, ni tomar en cuenta las miles de vidas de civiles que están en riesgo. Basta con que una palabra suene a origen árabe para que parezca peligrosa.

Sin lugar a dudas, el acto más representativo de la artillería comunicacional islamófoba es el haber denominado “Estado Islámico” al principal grupo insurgente Yihadista-Taliban-Al qaedista, designación ilegítima desde su origen ya que este grupo de sicarios, tal como lo menciona la corresponsal argentina Karen Marón “no posee ni la estructura organizacional de un Estado, ni está sujeto a derecho internacional, es decir que, Estado no es, islámico tampoco, porque contradice todo lo que señala el Corán y lo que profesa Mahoma”.

Sus actos tampoco son terroristas, puesto que el término “terrorismo” hace referencia a una sucesión de actos de violencia ejecutados con el único objetivo de infundir terror; mientras que para las cúpulas que están detrás de los atentados, el fin último de sus actos no es el provocar pánico, sino generar repercusiones políticas y acciones armamentistas concretas con el consentimiento de la población acosada por la sensación de vulnerabilidad.

Es así como el atentado a las Torres Gemelas perpetrado por Al-Qaeda en septiembre de 2001, así como los atentados a París en noviembre de 2015 por Daesh, legitiman los bombardeos e invasiones a Irak y a Siria respectivamente. El leitmotiv  de la OTAN por lo tanto, no es tanto detener a Daesh, sino contenerlo.

En definitiva, Estados Unidos, Israel, la familia real saudí –que es sionista– y Turquía, esta última motivada por los intereses económicos y la posibilidad de ampliar su territorio a Siria, han logrado consagrar que entre los 6 puntos que estableció la comunidad internacional de las Naciones Unidas en el Plan de Solución Política a la Crisis en Siria suscrito recientemente en Nueva York,  se le exija a Damasco la elaboración de una nueva constitución política que rija al país en un plazo máximo de seis meses y celebrar, además, elecciones presidenciales antes de año y medio.

En suma, hay que destacar que los atentados son completamente premeditados. A través de un pretexto, buscan legitimar la intervención, con lo cual, construyen un nuevo ordenamiento geopolítico acorde a sus intereses. ISIS es una organización mercenaria instrumentalizada para responder a un mandato específico.

En los atentados a París la víctima no fue el Estado galo, sino los ciudadanos franceses utilizados como carne de cañón. Los atentados están inmersos dentro de un contexto geopolítico bien delimitado, y sobre todo, guardan un origen espurio que debe combatirse. Nuestra tarea pendiente es diseñar un mundo más justo y seguro para todos sin intervención imperialista, sí es posible…

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez

Gabriela Riveros Medina

 

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez es economista, egresado de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Gabriela Riveros Medina es economista, egresada de la Universidad de Santiago de Chile.

Fuente: Agencia Latinoamericana de Información (ALAI).

  • Posted in Español
  • Comments Off on Atentados de París: no es terrorismo, es geopolítica

Benzina sul cessate il fuoco

December 29th, 2015 by Manlio Dinucci

La Risoluzione 2254 sulla Siria, approvata all’unanimità dal Consiglio di sicurezza dell’Onu, sottolinea «lo stretto legame tra un cessate il fuoco e un parallelo processo politico». Disinnescando il conflitto, ciò favorirebbe un allentamento delle tensioni in Medio Oriente. C’è però un problema: sui cinque membri permanenti del Consiglio di sicurezza, tre – Stati Uniti, Francia e Gran Bretagna – sono quelli che hanno più pesantemente violato «la sovranità e integrità territoriale della Repubblica Araba di Siria», che nella risoluzione dicono di «sostenere fortemente». Quelli che hanno organizzato «il crescente afflusso di terroristi in Siria», per il quale nella risoluzione «esprimono la più grave preoccupazione».

Il «cessate il fuoco» dipende quindi soprattutto da queste tre potenze della Nato e dalla Turchia, avamposto della guerra coperta contro la Siria, e dagli altri membri dell’Alleanza a partire dalla Germania. Dipende anche da un’altra potenza, Israele, che ha le mani in pasta in questa e altre guerre. Quali sono le loro intenzioni? Più delle parole valgono i fatti.

Il 18 dicembre, il giorno stesso in cui il Consiglio di sicurezza varava la «road map per la pace» in Siria, la Nato annunciava l’invio di navi da guerra tedesche e danesi e aerei radar Awacs in Turchia per rafforzare le sue «difese al confine con la Siria», mossa diretta in realtà contro la Russia il cui intervento contro l’Isis sta cambiando l’esito della guerra a favore di Damasco. E il giorno dopo la Nato annunciava che è pronto il primo dei droni Global Hawk che saranno schierati a Sigonella, insieme a quelli Usa, per la «sorveglianza terrestre», ossia per lo spionaggio nei paesi inquadrati nel mirino strategico Usa/Nato. Sempre lo stesso giorno in cui il Consiglio di sicurezza varava la «road map per la pace» in Medio Oriente, la Germania annunciava la consegna a Israele del quinto sottomarino da attacco nucleare.

Come documenta Der Spiegel, sono Dolphin modificati per il lancio di missili cruise nucleari, i Popeye Turbo con raggio di 1500 km, derivati da quelli statunitensi. Con il nuovo sottomarino ribattezzato Rahav (Poseidone) – il cui costo supera i 2 miliardi di dollari, un terzo dei quali finanziato dal governo tedesco – Israele rafforza la sua posizione di unica potenza nucleare della regione, mentre l’Iran (che a differenza di Israele aderisce al Trattato di non-proliferazione) rinuncia alle armi nucleari e la Siria consegna le armi chimiche costruite quale deterrente contro quelle nucleari di Israele.

Il 19 dicembre, il giorno dopo che il Consiglio di sicurezza aveva riaffermato «la sovranità e integrità territoriale» della Siria, Israele distruggeva a Damasco un intero palazzo con missili lanciati da due caccia, assassinando (insieme a diversi civili) il militante libanese Samir Kuntar: dopo 30 anni di carcere in Israele per aver combattuto per l’indipendenza del Libano e della Palestina, rilasciato in uno scambio nel 2008, aveva aderito agli Hezbollah andando a combattere l’Isis e per questo era stato iscritto da Washington nella lista dei «terroristi globali».

Contemporaneamente la Francia, sostenitrice al Consiglio di sicurezza del cessate il fuoco in Siria, annunciava di aver ricevuto l’acconto sui 7 miliardi di dollari per la fornitura di 24 cacciabombardieri Rafale al Qatar: il regime che ha alimentato, anche con commandos infiltrati, la guerra in Siria dopo quella che ha demolito la Libia. Insieme all’Arabia Saudita che, dopo aver finanziato con miliardi di dollari l’Isis e altri gruppi terroristi, partecipa alla coalizione a guida Usa «contro l’Isis» e ha promosso una «coalizione islamica anti-terrorismo».

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Benzina sul cessate il fuoco

Le 300 Hiroshima dell’Italia

December 29th, 2015 by Manlio Dinucci

Mentre la parola «sicurezza» ci rintrona gli orecchi amplificata dai megafoni politico-mediatici, le parole del ministro della difesa russo Shoigu sul sempre più pericoloso confronto nucleare in Europa sono cadute nel silenzio. Nessun allarme, nessuna reazione governativa in Italia riguardo a ciò che ha detto: «Circa 200 bombe nucleari Usa sono schierate in Italia, Belgio, Olanda, Germania e Turchia, e questo arsenale nucleare è soggetto a un programma di rinnovamento».

Per tale ragione, «le forze missilistiche strategiche russe mantengono oltre il 95% dei lanciatori pronto in ogni momento al combattimento». E mentre un sottomarino russo lancia dal Mediterraneo contro obiettivi Isis in Siria missili cruise Kalibr (che percorrono circa 3mila km a bassa quota accelerando nella fase finale a tre volte la velocità del suono), il presidente Putin avverte che «i missili Kalibr possono essere armati sia con testate convenzionali sia con testate nucleari», aggiungendo che «certamente ciò non è necessario nella lotta ai terroristi, e spero non sarà mai necessario». Questo chiaro messaggio diretto in realtà alla Nato, in particolare ai paesi europei in cui sono schierate le armi nucleari Usa, viene presentato dai media come la «battuta» di un Putin che «mostra i muscoli». Non si allarma così la popolazione, lasciandola all’oscuro del pericolo cui è esposta.

Le circa 70 bombe nucleari Usa B-61, pronte all’uso nelle basi di Aviano e Ghedi-Torre, stanno per essere sostituite dalle B61-12. A tale scopo — documenta la Federazione degli scienziati americani (Fas) con foto satellitari — è stato effettuato l’upgrade delle due basi, dove nel 2013 e 2014 si è svolta la Steadfast Noon, l’esercitazione Nato di guerra nucleare con la partecipazione anche di caccia F-16 della Polonia, che si è offerta di ospitare le nuove bombe nucleari Usa.

La B61-12 è una nuova arma nucleare che, sganciata a circa 100 km dall’obiettivo, è progettata per «decapitare» il paese nemico in un first strike nucleare. Si cancella così la differenza tra armi nucleari strategiche a lungo raggio e armi tattiche a corto raggio.

Non si sa quante B61-12 saranno schierate in Italia ma, con una stima per difetto, si calcola che la loro potenza distruttiva equivarrà a quella di circa 300 bombe di Hiroshima. Secondo le regole del Gruppo di pianificazione nucleare della Nato, di cui fa parte l’Italia, i paesi che ospitano le armi nucleari Usa «mettono a disposizione aerei equipaggiati per trasportare bombe nucleari e personale addestrato a tale scopo», ma «gli Stati uniti mantengono l’assoluto controllo e la custodia di tali armi nucleari». La Fas conferma che a Ghedi sono stoccate le bombe nucleari Usa «per i Tornado italiani» e che piloti italiani vengono addestrati al loro uso.

Poiché si prevede di sostituire i Tornado con gli F-35, i primi piloti italiani, che hanno completato in novembre l’addestramento sugli F-35 nella base Luke della U.S. Air Force in Arizona, vengono addestrati anche all’uso delle B61-12.

L’Italia viola così il Trattato di non-proliferazione ratificato nel 1975, che la «impegna a non ricevere da chicchessia armi nucleari, né il controllo su tali armi, direttamente o indirettamente» (Art. 2). È divenuta di conseguenza base avanzata della strategia nucleare Usa/Nato e, quindi, bersaglio di rappresaglia nucleare. Vitale è la battaglia per la denuclearizzazione dell’Italia, senza di cui la generica richiesta dell’abolizione delle armi nucleari diventa copertura demagogica per chi non vuole affrontare la questione nodale. A dimostrazione che l’assopimento delle coscienze ha portato anche alla perdita dell’istinto di sopravvivenza.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Le 300 Hiroshima dell’Italia

La Nato si allarga ancora

December 29th, 2015 by Manlio Dinucci

La «storica» decisione del Consiglio Nord Atlantico di invitare il Montenegroa iniziare la procedura di accesso per divenire il 29° membro dell’Alleanza, costituisce una ulteriore mossa della strategia Usa/Nato mirante all’accerchiamento della Russia. Che importanza ha per la Nato il Montenegro, l’ultimo degli Stati (2006) formatisi in seguito alla disgregazione della Federazione Jugoslava, demolita dalla Nato con l’infiltrazione e la guerra? Lo si capisce guardando la carta geografica. Con una superficie un po’ inferiore a quella della Puglia (a soli 200 km sulla sponda opposta dell’Adriatico) e una popolazione di appena 630 mila abitanti (un sesto di quella della Puglia), il Montenegro ha una importante posizione geostrategica. Confina con Albania e Croazia (membri della Nato), Kosovo (di fatto già nella Nato), Serbia e Bosnia-Erzegovina (partner della Nato). Ha due porti, Bar e Porto Montenegro, utilizzabili a scopo militare nel Mediterraneo. Nel secondo fece scalo, nel novembre 2014, la portaerei Cavour.

Il Montenegro è strategicamente importante anche come deposito di munizioni e altro materiale bellico. Sul suo territorio si trovano dieci grandi bunker sotterranei costruiti all’epoca della Federazione Jugoslava, dove restano oltre 10mila tonnellate di vecchie munizioni da smaltire o esportare, e hangar fortificati per aerei (bombardati dalla Nato nel 1999). Con milioni di euro forniti anche dalla Ue, è iniziata da tempo la loro ristrutturazione (i primi sono stati quelli di Taras e Brezovic). La Nato disporrà così in Montenegro di bunker che, ammodernati, permetteranno di stoccare enormi quantità di munizioni, comprese anche armi nucleari, e di hangar per cacciabombardieri.

Il Montenegro, la cui entrata nella Nato è ormai certa, è anche candidato a entrare nell’Unione europea, dove già 22 dei 28 membri appartengono alla Nato sotto comando Usa.

Un importante ruolo in tal senso lo ha svolto Federica Mogherini: visitando il Montenegro in veste di ministro degli esteri nel luglio 2014, ribadiva che «la politica sull’allargamento è la chiave di volta del successo dell’Unione europea — e della Nato — nel promuovere pace, democrazia e sicurezza in Europa» e lodava il governo montenegrino per la sua «storia di successo». Quel governo capeggiato da Milo Djukanovic che perfino l’Europol (l’Ufficio di polizia della Ue) aveva chiamato in causa già nel 2013 perché il Montenegro è divenuto il crocevia dei traffici di droga dall’Afghanistan (dove opera la Nato) all’Europa e il più importante centro di riciclaggio di denaro sporco. Una «storia di successo», analoga a quella del Kosovo, che dimostra come anche la criminalità organizzata può essere usata a fini strategici.

Continua così l’espansione della Nato ad Est.

Nel 1999 essa ingloba i primi tre paesi dell’ex Patto di Varsavia: Polonia, Repubblica ceca e Ungheria.
Nel 2004, la Nato si estende ad altri sette: Estonia, Lettonia, Lituania (già parte dell’Urss); Bulgaria, Romania, Slovacchia (già parte del Patto di Varsavia); Slovenia (già parte della Jugoslavia).
Nel 2009, la Nato ingloba l’Albania (un tempo membro del Patto di Varsavia) e la Croazia (già parte della Jugoslavia).

Ora, nonostante la forte opposizione interna duramente repressa, si vuole tirar dentro il Montenegro, seguito da alcuni «Paesi aspiranti» – Macedonia, Bosnia-Erzegovina, Georgia, Ucraina – e da altri ancora cui viene lasciata «la porta aperta».

Espandendosi ad Est sempre più a ridosso della Russia, con le sue basi e forze militari comprese quelle nucleari, la Nato apre in realtà la porta a scenari catastrofici per l’Europa e il mondo.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on La Nato si allarga ancora

Aparentemente el año 2015 marca el inicio de la revolución en el interior del FMI. Primero se avaló la inclusión del yuan en los DEG, la canasta de divisas creada en 1969 para servir de suplemento de las reservas oficiales de los países miembros. Y ahora, gracias a la aprobación del Congreso de Estados Unidos, el FMI podrá implementar finalmente la reforma del sistema de cuotas de representación, con lo cual, China y otras potencias emergentes ganarán peso en la toma de decisiones, mientras que los países del continente europeo perderán relevancia. No obstante, todavía es prematuro concluir que se trata de una transformación radical en la correlación de fuerzas dentro del FMI: Estados Unidos seguirá manteniendo su poder de veto.  

Estados Unidos parece haber comprendido por fin que para conservar su liderazgo global resulta más contraproducente desconocer el creciente protagonismo de China y otras potencias emergentes, que compartir responsabilidades en la gestión de las finanzas internacionales. Por esa razón, y muy a su pesar, Washington no ha tenido otra alternativa que otorgar importantes concesiones a sus adversarios a través del Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI).

En un primer momento, la última semana de noviembre, el FMI adoptó la decisión de incorporar el yuan en los Derechos Especiales de Giro (DEG, ‘Special Drawing Rights’), la canasta de divisas que creó a finales de la década de 1960 para complementar las reservas oficiales de sus miembros. Aunque en el interior del Fondo varios funcionarios estadounidenses se opusieron desde un principio, al final de cuentas Pekín se comprometió a seguir avanzando en la liberalización de su sector financiero.

Hasta la fecha el Banco Popular de China ha firmado cerca de cuarenta acuerdos bilaterales de permuta de divisas (‘currency swaps’). Este año los bancos centrales de Surinam, Sudáfrica y Chile comenzaron a promover entre las empresas de sus países el abandono del dólar. De modo creciente, el yuan suplanta a la divisa norteamericana en la facturación de los intercambios comerciales del gigante asiático.

Esta estrategia ha permitido que el yuan sea hoy la segunda moneda más utilizada en el financiamiento comercial y la cuarta en los pagos transfronterizos, según los datos de la Sociedad de Telecomunicaciones Financieras Interbancarias Mundiales (SWIFT, por sus siglas en ingles). Y más temprano que tarde la moneda china será plenamente convertible, es decir, intercambiada libremente en el mercado sin ningún tipo de restricción.

Es así como los dirigentes del Partido Comunista [de China] consiguieron echar abajo las suspicacias de la directora ejecutiva del FMI, Christine Lagarde: a partir del próximo 1º de octubre de 2016 el yuan se convertirá en la tercera divisa más relevante en la composición de los DEG. La “moneda del pueblo” (‘renminbi’) tendrá un peso mayor dentro de la canasta del FMI en comparación con el yen japonés y la libra esterlina, aunque se ubicará todavía por debajo del dólar y el euro.

Y en un segundo momento, el pasado viernes 18 de diciembre, el Congreso de Estados Unidos dio luz verde para que el FMI implemente la reforma del sistema de cuotas de representación. Sin lugar a dudas, es el cambio más importante dentro del FMI desde 1944, el año en que se construyeron los acuerdos de Bretton Woods. El nuevo reparto de cuotas significa, además, un gran respiro para el Fondo en términos de legitimidad.

Es que después del colapso económico de 2008 se puso en evidencia que el FMI no contaba con los recursos suficientes para hacer frente a las crisis liquidez. Ningún país que se dijera soberano tenía intenciones de solicitar su ayuda. El FMI se desprestigió por completo tras su actuación en las crisis de deuda de América Latina y del Sudeste asiático: había demostrado que operaba como el brazo armado del Departamento del Tesoro de Estados Unidos, y no como un fondo multilateral encargado de estabilizar las balanzas de pagos de sus adherentes.

Por ello, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, quien se desempeñó como director gerente del FMI entre 2007 y 2011, convenció a los países emergentes de realizar nuevos depósitos a cambio de incrementar sus cuotas. El Directorio Ejecutivo del FMI avaló la propuesta el año 2010 en el marco de la XIV Revisión General de cuotas.

Luego se presentó la iniciativa de reforma ante la Junta de Gobernadores (integrada por la totalidad de los miembros), para someterse por último a la aprobación de los parlamentos nacionales. Y entonces el Gobierno de Estados Unidos hizo valer su poder de veto. Es que para que una decisión sea acreditada por el Fondo necesita una mayoría del 85% de la votación, y Estados Unidos por sí solo contaba con 16.7% del total.

Pero hace unos días, tras cinco años de ferviente oposición de parte del Congreso norteamericano la inercia finalmente se rompió. La reforma del sistema de cuotas será una realidad. Los recursos a disposición del FMI se duplican, se elevarán a 659,670 millones de dólares. Cabe destacar que la cuota que se asigna a un país determina el nivel máximo de sus compromisos financieros frente al FMI y su número de votos en la institución, y es un factor que determina su acceso al financiamiento del FMI

El avance más importante corresponde a China, cuya derecho de voto pasará de 3.8 a 6%, con lo cual, será el tercer país con más poder, únicamente por detrás de Estados Unidos y Japón. Brasil sube cuatro posiciones, mientras que India y Rusia lograron entrar en la lista de los diez más influyentes. En cambio, las asignaciones de Europa cayeron. A excepción de la cuota de España, que pasará de 1.68 a 2%, Alemania, Francia, Italia y el Reino Unido disminuirán su participación.

“Las reformas incrementan significativamente los principales recursos del FMI y nos permiten desplegar una respuesta más eficaz ante las crisis, a la vez que mejoran la estructura de gobierno institucional al reflejar mejor el creciente papel que desempeñan los países emergentes y en desarrollo dinámicos en la economía mundial”, apuntó Lagarde en un comunicado de prensa.

Con todo, lamentablemente Estados Unidos conservará su poder de veto: su derecho de voto disminuirá únicamente dos décimas, de 16.7 a 16.5%. Hasta ahora todo parece indicar que los dirigentes de Pekín no desean confrontar la dominación de Estados Unidos en el seno del FMI, institución que a más de setenta años de ponerse marcha, se mantiene como el “prestamista de última instancia” más importante en escala mundial tomando en cuenta el volumen de recursos que maneja.

La disputa entre China y Estados Unidos es solamente tangencial. Pekín ha buscado incrementar su influencia financiera a través de sus poderosos bancos estatales (China Development Bank, China Ex-Im Bank, ICBC, Bank of China, etc.), y a través de los bancos regionales de desarrollo en los que participa: el Banco Asiático de Inversiones en Infraestructura (AIIB, por sus siglas en inglés), el Banco de la Organización de Cooperación de Shanghái (SCO, por sus siglas en inglés) y el banco de los BRICS (acrónimo de Brasil, Rusia, India, China y Sudáfrica).

Tanto en Asia-Pacífico, África, como en América Latina y el Caribe, no hay duda de que China compite cara a cara con el Banco Mundial y los bancos regionales de desarrollo respaldados por Washington (Banco Asiático de Desarrollo, Banco Africano de Desarrollo, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, etc.) en el financiamiento de proyectos de infraestructura y extracción de materias primas (‘commodities’).

Sin embargo, los mecanismos de cooperación financiera impulsados por Pekín que proveen liquidez a los países en coyunturas críticas (problemas de liquidez), tales como la Iniciativa Chiang Mai (integrada por China, Japón, Corea del Sur y diez economías de la ASEAN) y el Acuerdo de Reservas de Contingencia de los BRICS (también conocido como el “mini-FMI”) poseen escasos recursos monetarios, operan en dólares, y además dependen del aval del FMI para otorgar préstamos a partir de cierto límite.

Por lo tanto, si bien es una excelente noticia para el mundo que China y otros países con elevadas tasas de crecimiento del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB) hayan conseguido ver incrementada su participación en el FMI y tener dos puestos más entre los veinticuatro del Directorio Ejecutivo, Estados Unidos seguirá ejerciendo una dominación aplastante.

Si Washington no está de acuerdo en algún detalle, por mínimo que sea, podrá vetar cualquier propuesta de los países emergentes gracias a su poder de veto. Es indudable que en algún momento, China deberá ejercer presión para evitar que un solo país escriba las reglas del juego, tiempo al tiempo…

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez

 

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez : Economista egresado de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

 

  • Posted in Español
  • Comments Off on El Congreso de Estados Unidos da su brazo a torcer y aprueba la reforma de cuotas del FMI

Selected Articles: “Power Politics” in the Middle East

December 29th, 2015 by Global Research News

531px-Syrian_Arab_Army_Flag.svgVideo: Syrian Military Operations against ISIS Terrorist Positions Near Turkish Border

By South Front, December 29 2015

Last weekend, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and its allies continued their counter-attack at the Al-Sina’a District (Industrial District) in the Deir Ezzor province’s capital, striking ISIS militants at east of this area. According to the ground reports, the Syrian…

Jewish-only roadIsrael’s First “Jewish-Only Road”. Palestinians are Banned from Using the Road”

By Ariyana Love, December 29 2015

Israel has announced the construction of a new, Jewish-only road that will connect two Jewish colonies, according to a report by the Middle East Monitor.

global-economyThe Power Politics behind the Islamic State (ISIS/Daesh) and the “Trade” Agreements

By Chandra Muzaffar and Hassanal Noor Rashid, December 29 2015

The protracted conflicts in Syria and many parts of West Asia have been a fertile ground for the rise of extreme militants professing their own barbaric distortion of the Islamic Faith.

Foreign-and-Expatriates-MinistryWho are the State Sponsors of Terrorism? “Terrorism Is the Outcome of Generous Support by Countries Like Turkey and Saudi Arabia to Terrorist Organizations. Syrian Foreign Ministry

By SANA, December 29 2015

Foreign and Expatriates Ministry on Monday sent two letters to the UN Secretary-General and President of UN Security Council regarding the persistence of ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra, and other terrorist organizations in committing crimes against civilians in Syrian cities.

tim_anderson3The Dirty War on Syria: Washington Supports the Islamic State (ISIS)

By Prof. Tim Anderson, December 29 2015

Reports that US and British aircraft carrying arms to ISIS were shot down by Iraqi forces (Iraqi News 2015) were met with shock and denial in western countries. Yet few in the Middle East doubt that Washington is playing a ‘double game’ with its proxy armies in Syria.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: “Power Politics” in the Middle East

Image: Ellen Brown

While the mainstream media focus on ISIS extremists, a threat that has gone virtually unreported is that your life savings could be wiped out in a massive derivatives collapse. Bank bail-ins have begun in Europe, and the infrastructure is in place in the US.  Poverty also kills. 

At the end of November, an Italian pensioner hanged himself after his entire €100,000 savings were confiscated in a bank “rescue” scheme. He left a suicide note blaming the bank, where he had been a customer for 50 years and had invested in bank-issued bonds. But he might better have blamed the EU and the G20’s Financial Stability Board, which have imposed an “Orderly Resolution” regime that keeps insolvent banks afloat by confiscating the savings of investors and depositors. Some 130,000 shareholders and junior bond holders suffered losses in the “rescue.”

The pensioner’s bank was one of four small regional banks that had been put under special administration over the past two years. The €3.6 billion ($3.83 billion) rescue plan launched by the Italian government uses a newly-formed National Resolution Fund, which is fed by the country’s healthy banks. But before the fund can be tapped, losses must be imposed on investors; and in January, EU rules will require that they also be imposed on depositors. According to a December 10th article on BBC.com:

The rescue was a “bail-in” – meaning bondholders suffered losses – unlike the hugely unpopular bank bailouts during the 2008 financial crisis, which cost ordinary EU taxpayers tens of billions of euros.

Correspondents say [Italian Prime Minister] Renzi acted quickly because in January, the EU is tightening the rules on bank rescues – they will force losses on depositors holding more than €100,000, as well as bank shareholders and bondholders.

. . . [L]etting the four banks fail under those new EU rules next year would have meant “sacrificing the money of one million savers and the jobs of nearly 6,000 people”.

That is what is predicted for 2016: massive sacrifice of savings and jobs to prop up a “systemically risky” global banking scheme.

Bail-in Under Dodd-Frank 

That is all happening in the EU. Is there reason for concern in the US?

According to former hedge fund manager Shah Gilani, writing for Money Morning, there is. In a November 30th article titled “Why I’m Closing My Bank Accounts While I Still Can,” he writes:

[It is] entirely possible in the next banking crisis that depositors in giant too-big-to-fail failing banks could have their money confiscated and turned into equity shares. . . .

If your too-big-to-fail (TBTF) bank is failing because they can’t pay off derivative bets they made, and the government refuses to bail them out, under a mandate titled “Adequacy of Loss-Absorbing Capacity of Global Systemically Important Banks in Resolution,” approved on Nov. 16, 2014, by the G20’s Financial Stability Board, they can take your deposited money and turn it into shares of equity capital to try and keep your TBTF bank from failing.

Once your money is deposited in the bank, it legally becomes the property of the bank. Gilani explains:

Your deposited cash is an unsecured debt obligation of your bank. It owes you that money back.

If you bank with one of the country’s biggest banks, who collectively have trillions of dollars of derivatives they hold “off balance sheet” (meaning those debts aren’t recorded on banks’ GAAP balance sheets), those debt bets have a superior legal standing to your deposits and get paid back before you get any of your cash.

. . . Big banks got that language inserted into the 2010 Dodd-Frank law meant to rein in dangerous bank behavior.

The banks inserted the language and the legislators signed it, without necessarily understanding it or even reading it. At over 2,300 pages and still growing, the Dodd Frank Act is currently the longest and most complicated bill ever passed by the US legislature.

Propping Up the Derivatives Scheme

Dodd-Frank states in its preamble that it will “protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts.” But it does this under Title II by imposing the losses of insolvent financial companies on their common and preferred stockholders, debtholders, and other unsecured creditors. That includes depositors, the largest class of unsecured creditor of any bank.

Title II is aimed at “ensuring that payout to claimants is at least as much as the claimants would have received under bankruptcy liquidation.” But here’s the catch: under both the Dodd Frank Act and the 2005 Bankruptcy Act, derivative claims have super-priority over all other claimssecured and unsecured, insured and uninsured.

The over-the-counter (OTC) derivative market (the largest market for derivatives) is made up of banks and other highly sophisticated players such as hedge funds. OTC derivatives are the bets of these financial players against each other. Derivative claims are considered “secured” because collateral is posted by the parties.

For some inexplicable reason, the hard-earned money you deposit in the bank is not considered “security” or “collateral.” It is just a loan to the bank, and you must stand in line along with the other creditors in hopes of getting it back. State and local governments must also stand in line, although their deposits are considered “secured,” since they remain junior to the derivative claims with “super-priority.”

Turning Bankruptcy on Its Head

 Under the old liquidation rules, an insolvent bank was actually “liquidated” – its assets were sold off to repay depositors and creditors. Under an “orderly resolution,” the accounts of depositors and creditors are emptied to keep the insolvent bank in business. The point of an “orderly resolution” is not to make depositors and creditors whole but to prevent another system-wide “disorderly resolution” of the sort that followed the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. The concern is that pulling a few of the dominoes from the fragile edifice that is our derivatives-laden global banking system will collapse the entire scheme. The sufferings of depositors and investors are just the sacrifices to be borne to maintain this highly lucrative edifice.

In a May 2013 article in Forbes titled “The Cyprus Bank ‘Bail-In’ Is Another Crony Bankster Scam,” Nathan Lewis explained the scheme like this:

At first glance, the “bail-in” resembles the normal capitalist process of liabilities restructuring that should occur when a bank becomes insolvent. . . .

The difference with the “bail-in” is that the order of creditor seniority is changed. In the end, it amounts to the cronies (other banks and government) and non-cronies. The cronies get 100% or more; the non-cronies, including non-interest-bearing depositors who should be super-senior, get a kick in the guts instead. . . .

In principle, depositors are the most senior creditors in a bank. However, that was changed in the 2005 bankruptcy law, which made derivatives liabilities most senior. Considering the extreme levels of derivatives liabilities that many large banks have, and the opportunity to stuff any bank with derivatives liabilities in the last moment, other creditors could easily find there is nothing left for them at all.

As of September 2014, US derivatives had a notional value of nearly $280 trillion. A study involving the cost to taxpayers of the Dodd-Frank rollback slipped by Citibank into the “cromnibus” spending bill last December found that the rule reversal allowed banks to keep $10 trillion in swaps trades on their books. This is money that taxpayers could be on the hook for in another bailout; and since Dodd-Frank replaces bailouts with bail-ins, it is money that creditors and depositors could now be on the hook for. Citibank is particularly vulnerable to swaps on the price of oil. Brent crude dropped from a high of $114 per barrel in June 2014 to a low of $36 in December 2015.

What about FDIC insurance? It covers deposits up to $250,000, but the FDIC fund had only $67.6 billion in it as of June 30, 2015, insuring about $6.35 trillion in deposits. The FDIC has a credit line with the Treasury, but even that only goes to $500 billion; and who would pay that massive loan back? The FDIC fund, too, must stand in line behind the bottomless black hole of derivatives liabilities. As Yves Smith observed in a March 2013 post:

In the US, depositors have actually been put in a worse position than Cyprus deposit-holders, at least if they are at the big banks that play in the derivatives casino. The regulators have turned a blind eye as banks use their depositors to fund derivatives exposures. . . . The deposits are now subject to being wiped out by a major derivatives loss.

Even in the worst of the Great Depression bank bankruptcies, noted Nathan Lewis, creditors eventually recovered nearly all of their money. He concluded:

When super-senior depositors have huge losses of 50% or more, after a “bail-in” restructuring, you know that a crime was committed.

Exiting While We Can

How can you avoid this criminal theft and keep your money safe? It may be too late to pull your savings out of the bank and stuff them under a mattress, as Shah Gilani found when he tried to withdraw a few thousand dollars from his bank. Large withdrawals are now criminally suspect.

You can move your money into one of the credit unions with their own deposit insurance protection; but credit unions and their insurance plans are also under attack. So writes Frances Coppola in a December 18th article titled “Co-operative Banking Under Attack in Europe,” discussing an insolvent Spanish credit union that was the subject of a bail-in in July 2015. When the member-investors were subsequently made whole by the credit union’s private insurance group, there were complaints that the rescue “undermined the principle of creditor bail-in” – this although the insurance fund was privately financed. Critics argued that “this still looks like a circuitous way to do what was initially planned, i.e. to avoid placing losses on private creditors.”

In short, the goal of the bail-in scheme is to place losses on private creditors. Alternatives that allow them to escape could soon be blocked.

We need to lean on our legislators to change the rules before it is too late. The Dodd Frank Act and the Bankruptcy Reform Act both need a radical overhaul, and the Glass-Steagall Act (which put a fire wall between risky investments and bank deposits) needs to be reinstated.

Meanwhile, local legislators would do well to set up some publicly-owned banks on the model of the state-owned Bank of North Dakota – banks that do not gamble in derivatives and are safe places to store our public and private funds.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute, and author of twelve books including the best-selling Web of Debt. Her latest book, The Public Bank Solution, explores successful public banking models historically and globally. Her 300+ blog articles are at EllenBrown.com. Listen to “It’s Our Money with Ellen Brown” on PRN.FM.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Crisis Worse than ISIS? Bank “Bail-Ins” Begin…”Your Life Savings Could be Wiped out in a Massive Derivatives Collapse”.

[Featured image: Head of US armed forces General Martin Dempsey, Senate Armed Forces Committee Chairman Senator Lindsey Graham and US Vice President Joe Biden have all admitted that their close regional allies (especially the Saudis, Qatar and Turkey) finance ISIS.]

“It is always difficult to play a double game: declaring a fight against terrorists and simultaneously trying to use some to place pieces on the Middle Eastern chess board to pursue their own interests … [but do the] so-called moderate bandits behead people moderately?” – Vladimir Putin (2015)

Reports that US and British aircraft carrying arms to ISIS were shot down by Iraqi forces (Iraqi News 2015) were met with shock and denial in western countries. Yet few in the Middle East doubt that Washington is playing a ‘double game’ with its proxy armies in Syria. A Yemeni AnsarAllah leader says ‘Wherever there is U.S. interference, there is al Qaeda and ISIS. It’s to their advantage’ (al-Bukaiti 2015). However key myths remain important, especially to western audiences. Engaging with those myths calls for reason and evidence, not just assertion.

There is no doubt that the Arab and Muslim peoples of the Middle East hate the terrorist monstrosity called ISIS, ISIL or DAESH. Polling by the Washington-based Pew Research Centre found that 99% of Lebanese, 94% of Jordanians and 84% of Palestinians had an ‘unfavourable’ view of ISIS. As Lebanon’s constitutional system requires sectarian identification it was also found that 98% of Lebanese Sunni Muslims rejected ISIS (Poushter 2015). That latter finding discredits the common western assertion that ISIS somehow springs from Sunni communities. Less than 1% in Lebanon, 3% in Jordan and 6% in Palestine viewed the banned terrorist group favourably. The remainder did not express an opinion. Of all Syria’s neighbours, Turkey had the lowest ‘unfavourable’ view of ISIS, at 73%; the favourable score was 8% (Poushter 2015). The aim of this chapter is to help clarify what role Washington has had in creating or turning loose this Frankenstein’s monster.

Washington maintains two closely linked myths as regards terrorism in the Middle East. Then there is a ‘fall-back’ story. The first ‘existential myth’ is that, from 2014, the US became engaged in a war against extremist terrorists, in both Iraq and Syria. This followed several years of trying to topple the Syrian Government by backing illegal armed groups, which it calls ‘moderate’. Through this myth the US claims to be playing a protective role for the benefit of the peoples of the region. The second myth is that there is a significant difference between the ‘moderate rebels’ the US arms, finances and trains, and the extremist terrorists (DAESH or ISIS) it claims to be fighting.

These claims represented a shift in the rationale for the war on Syria, from one of ‘humanitarian intervention’ to a revival of the Bush era ‘war on terror’. The ‘fall back’ story, advanced by some of Washington’s domestic critics, is that US practice in the region has created a climate of resentment amongst orthodox Sunni Muslim communities, and the extremist groups emerged as a type of ‘organic reaction’ from those communities to repeated US interventions. This story hides the more damaging conclusion that Washington and its allies directly created the extremist groups.

However there is little point in simply asserting that last version, without evidence. The ‘existential myth’ of a western war on terrorism is so insistent and pervasive, and backed by such a commitment in political capital, arms and finance, that it is very difficult for western audiences to accept this new ‘war’ might be a charade. Further, diplomacy requires that stated policy positions be pursued to their logical conclusions, and that the aims be tested. For these reasons I suggest we should document the key elements of evidence, on Washington’s relationship with the sectarian terrorists. After that we can draw better informed conclusions.

It is certainly true that prominent ISIS leaders were held in US prisons. The Afghan recruiter for ISIS, Abdul Rahim Muslim Dost, spent three years in the US prison at Guantanamo (Bienaimé 2015). ISIS leader, Ibrahim al-Badri (aka Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi) is said to have been held for between one and two years at Camp Bucca in Iraq (Giovanni 2014). In 2006, as al-Baghdadi and others were released, the Bush administration announced its plan for a ‘New Middle East’, a plan which would employ sectarian violence as part of a process of ‘creative destruction’ in the region (Nazemroaya 2006). While there have been claims that al-Baghdadi is a CIA or Mossad trained agent, these have not yet been backed up with evidence.

Nevertheless, according to Seymour Hersh’s article, ‘The Redirection’, the US planned to make use of ‘moderate Sunni states’, in particular the Saudis, to contain alleged ‘Shiia gains’ in Iraq brought about by the 2003 US invasion. These ‘moderate Sunni’ forces would carry out clandestine operations to weaken Iran and Hezbollah, key enemies of Israel (Hersh 2007). This plan brought the Saudis and Israel closer as, for somewhat different reasons, both fear Iran.

In mid-2012, US intelligence reported two important facts about the violence in Syria. Firstly, most of the armed ‘insurgency’ was being driven by extremist al Qaeda groups, and second, the sectarian aim of those groups was ‘exactly’ what the US and its allies wanted. The DIA wrote:

‘The Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria … There is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers [The West, Gulf monarchies and Turkey] to the [Syrian] opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime’ (DIA 2012).

The US also observed (and certainly did not stop) the channelling of arms from Benghazi in Libya to ‘al Qaeda groups’ in Syria, in August 2012. These arms were detailed as including 500 Sniper rifles, 100 RPG launchers with 300 rounds and 400 howitzers missiles, of 125mm and 155mm calibre, all shipped to the Ports of Banias and Borj Islam, in Syria (Judicial Watch 2015). According to Michael Flynn, the former head of the DIA, and consistent with that intelligence, President Obama made a ‘wilful decision’ to support al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and other ‘jihadist’ groups (Newman 2015). This all confirms motive, complicity and consistency of the process, from the early days of the Syrian conflict, building on former President Bush’s ‘New Middle East’ plan. Washington covertly approved the arming of al Qaeda groups in Syria, seeing its own advantage in that.

Probably the most convincing confirmation of US complicity with its terrorist ‘enemy’ has been the admissions from several senior officials that their main regional allies have financed ISIS. Those officials include the US Vice-President, the head of the US Armed Forces and the Chair of the US Armed Forces Committee. In September 2014 General Martin Dempsey, head of the US military, told a Congressional hearing ‘I know major Arab allies who fund [ISIS]’ (Rothman 2014). Senator Lindsey Graham, of the Armed Services Committee, responded with a justification, ‘They fund them because the Free Syrian Army couldn’t fight [Syrian President] Assad, they were trying to beat Assad’ (Rothman 2014; Washington’s Blog 2014). These were honest, if criminal, admissions.

The next month, US Vice President Joe Biden went a step further, explaining that Turkey, Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia ‘were so determined to take down Assad … they poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad … [including] al Nusra and al Qaeda and extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world … [and then] this outfit called ISIL’ (RT 2014; Usher 2014). Once again, these were consistent and credible admissions, except that Biden sought to exempt the US from this operation by blaming key allies. That caveat is simply not credible. The Saudis in particular are politically dependent on Washington and could not mount any major initiative without US approval. Not only that, the US systematically controls, by purchase contract and re-export license, the use of its weapons (Export.Gov 2015).

Washington’s relationship with the Saudis, as a divisive sectarian force in the region against Arab nationalism, goes back to the 1950s, when Winston Churchill introduced the Saudi King to President Eisenhower. More recently, British General Jonathan Shaw acknowledged the contribution of Saudi Arabia’s extremist ideology: ‘this is a time bomb that, under the guise of education. Wahhabi Salafism is igniting under the world really. And it is funded by Saudi and Qatari money’, Shaw said (Blair 2014). He was right.

Other evidence undermines western attempts to maintain a distinction between what came to be called the ‘moderate rebels’, by 2013 openly armed and trained by the US, and supposedly more extreme groups such as Jabhat al Nusra and ISIS. While there has indeed been some rivalry, the absence of real ideological difference is best shown by cooperation and mergers. For example the collection of US-backed groups called the ‘Free Syrian Army’ fought alongside ISIS and against the Syrian Army for several months in 2013, to gain control of Syria’s Menagh air base, near Aleppo (Paraszczuk 2013). Hoff points out that one of the ISIS commanders in the Menagh operation, Chechen Abu Omar al Shisani, ‘received American military training as part of an elite Georgian army unit in 2006’ and continued to receive US support in 2013, through his FSA alliance (Hoff 2015).

Long term cooperation between these ‘moderate rebels’ and the foreign-led Jabhat al-Nusra was seen around Daraa in the south, along the mountainous Lebanese border, in Homs-Idlib, along the Turkish border and in and around Aleppo. The words Jabhat al Nusra actually mean ‘support front’, that is, foreign support for the Syrian Islamists. Back in December 2012, as Jabhat al Nusra was banned in various countries, 29 of these groups reciprocated the solidarity in their declaration: ‘We are all Jabhat al-Nusra’ (West 2012). Soon after the 29 group signatories became ‘more than 100’ (Zelin 2012). There was never any real ideological difference between these sectarian anti-government groups.

The decline of the ‘Free Syrian Army’ network and the renewed cooperation between al Nusra and the string of reinvented US and Saudi backed groups (Dawud, the Islamic Front, the Syrian Revolutionary Front, Harakat Hazm) helped draw attention to Israel’s support for al Nusra, around the occupied Golan Heights. Since 2013 there have been many reports of ‘rebel’ fighters, including those from al Nusra, being treated in Israeli hospitals (Zoabi 2014). Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even publicised his visit to wounded ‘rebels’ in early 2014. That led to a public ‘thank you’ from a Turkey-based ‘rebel’ leader, Mohammed Badie (Israel Today 2014). Semi-covertly, Israel backed all the armed groups against Syria, occasionally assisting them with its own missile attacks (Kais 2013).

The UN peacekeeping force based in the occupied Golan reported its observations of the Israeli Defence Forces ‘interacting with’ al Nusra fighters at the border (Fitzgerald 2014). At the same time, Israeli arms were captured by Syrian forces from the extremist groups (Kais 2012; Winer 2013). In November 2014 members of the Druze minority in the Golan protested against Israeli hospitals being used to help wounded al Nusra and ISIS fighters (Zoabi 2014). This led to questions by the Israeli media, as to whether ‘Israel does, in fact, hospitalize members of al-Nusra and Daesh [ISIS]’. A military spokesman’s reply was hardly a denial: ‘In the past two years the Israel Defence Forces have been engaged in humanitarian, life-saving aid to wounded Syrians, irrespective of their identity’ (Zoabi 2014). In fact, not even a humble farmer gets across the heavily militarised Occupied Golan border to retrieve a stray goat. ‘Humanitarian’ treatment for al Qaeda terrorists is different.

The artificial distinction between ‘rebel’ and ‘extremist’ groups has been mocked by multiple reports of large scale defections and transfer of weapons, to the extremists. In July 2014 one thousand armed men in the Dawud Brigade defected to ISIS in Raqqa (Hamadee and Gutman 2014; Ditz 2014). In November defections to Jabhat al Nusra from the US-backed Syrian Revolutionary Front were reported (Newman 2014; Sly 2014).

In December, Adib Al-Shishakli, representative at the Gulf Cooperation Council of the exile ‘Syrian National Coalition’, said ‘opposition fighters’ were ‘increasingly joining’ ISIS ‘for financial reasons’ (Zayabi 2014). In that same month, the Al Yarmouk Shuhada Brigades, backed and trained for two years by US officers, were reported as defecting to ISIS, which had by this time began to establish a presence in Syria’s far south (OSNet 2014). Then, over 2014-2015, three thousand ‘moderate rebels’ from the US-backed ‘Harakat Hazzm’ collapsed into Jabhat al Nusra, taking a large stock of US arms including anti-tank weapons with them (Fadel 2015a). Video posted by al-Nusra showed these weapons being used to take over the Syrian military bases, Wadi Deif and Hamidiyeh, in Idlib province (Bacchi 2015). Debka File, a site linked to Israeli intelligence, says the heavy weaponry provided to the Syrian ‘opposition’ by the USA, Israel, the Saudis, Jordan, Turkey and Qatar includes tanks, armoured vehicles, rockets launchers, machine-guns, anti-aircraft weapons and ‘at least four types of anti-tank weapons’ (Debka 2015). The scale and consistency of the ‘defections’ strongly suggests management to channel these arms, along with fighters, to make ISIS the best equipped group. A similar conclusion was noted by US Senator John Kiriakou (Sputnik 2015b).

Recruitment of fighters for ISIS was certainly a heavily financed affair, and not an ‘organic’ drift of resentful ‘Sunni’ youth. In late 2014 the Afghan Abdul Rahim Muslim Dost was said to be ‘leading efforts in northern Pakistan to recruit fighters for ISIS’ (Bienaimé 2015). Soon after this report, Syrian jihadist Yousaf al Salafi, arrested in Pakistan, said he had been hired to recruit young men in Pakistan to fight with ISIS in Syria. He says he received $600 for each fighter he sent, working with a Pakistani sheikh and using US money (Variyar 2015). Who knows what the middle-men took, but this sum is several times the salary of an average Syrian soldier. As with Jabhat al Nusra, recruits came from a wide range of countries. Cuban journalists interviewed four captured ISIS jihadists from Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan. They were recruited in a larger group which had passed freely through Turkey and across the border into Syria. They were assisted to participate in this ‘holy war’ by offers of a house, a good salary and a bride. More than 300 people were killed by their car bombs (PL 2015).

ISIS had US weapons by various means in both Iraq and Syria when, in late 2014, a ‘non-aggression pact’ was reported in the southern area of Hajar al-Aswad between ‘moderate rebels’ and ISIS, as both recognised a common enemy in Syria: ‘the Nussayri regime’, a sectarian way of referring to Alawi Muslims. Some reported ISIS had purchased weapons from the ‘rebels’ (AFP 2015).

With ‘major Arab allies’ directly backing ISIS and a steady stream of fighters and arms passing to ISIS from the collapsing US-backed ‘moderate rebel’ groups, it is a small leap to recognise that US and ‘coalition’ flights to ISIS areas (supposedly to ‘degrade’ the extremists) might also have become covert supply lines. That is precisely what senior Iraqi sources began saying, in late 2014 and early 2015 (Iraq News 2014). In mid-2014 ISIS began seizing US weapons, but this was put down to incompetence on the part of the Iraqi Army (Sharma and Nestel 2014).

However, soon after that, US air drops of arms were seized by ISIS troops on the ground. Was this US incompetence or US planning? As reported by both Iraqi and Iranian media, Iraqi MP Majid al-Ghraoui said in January that ‘an American aircraft dropped a load of weapons and equipment to the ISIS group militants at the area of al-Dour in the province of Salahuddin’ (Sarhan 2015). Photos were published of ISIS retrieving the weapons. The US admitted seizures of its weapons but said this was a ‘mistake’ (MacAskill and Chulov 2014). Then in February Iraqi MP Hakem al-Zameli said the Iraqi army had shot down two British planes which were carrying weapons to ISIS in al-Anbar province. Again, photos were published of the wrecked planes. ‘We have discovered weapons made in the US, European countries and Israel from the areas liberated from ISIL’s control in Al-Baqdadi region’, al-Zameli said (FNA 2015a).

The Al-Ahad news website quoted Head of Al-Anbar Provincial Council Khalaf Tarmouz saying that a US plane supplied the ISIL terrorist organization with arms and ammunition in Salahuddin province (FNA 2015b). Also in February an Iraqi militia called Al-Hashad Al-Shabi said they had shot down a US Army helicopter carrying weapons for ISIL in the western parts of Al-Baqdadi region in Al-Anbar province. Again, photos were published (FNA 2015a). After that, Iraqi counter-terrorism forces were reported as having arrested ‘four foreigners who were employed as military advisors to the ISIL fighters’, three of whom were American and Israeli (Adl 2015). Israel’s link to ISIS seems to have passed well beyond its border areas. In late 2015 an Israeli Colonel Yusi Oulen Shahak was said to have been arrested with an ISIS group in Iraq.

The Iraqi Government linked militia said Shahak, from the Golani brigade, was a colonel who ‘had participated in the Takfiri ISIL group’s terrorist operations’ (FNA 2015c). Six senior Iraqi officials have been cited detailing US weaponry and intelligence support for ISIS. Captured ISIS fighters said the US had provided ‘intelligence about the Iraqi forces’ positions and targets’ (FNA 2015d). The western media avoided these stories altogether, because they are very damaging to Washington’s ‘existential myth’ of a ‘War on ISIS’. However they certainly help explain why Baghdad does not trust the US military.

In Libya in 2015 a key US collaborator in the overthrow of the Gaddafi government announced himself the newly declared head of the ‘Islamic State’ in North Africa (Sputnik 2015a). Abdel Hakim Belhaj was held in US prisons for several years, then ‘rendered’ to Gaddafi’s Libya, where he was wanted for terrorist acts. As former head of the al-Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, then the Tripoli-based ‘Libyan Dawn’ group, Belhaj was, in the past, defended by Washington and praised by US Congressmen John McCain and Lindsey Graham (Sputnik 2015a).

Evidence of the covert relationship between Washington and ISIS is substantial and helps explain what Syria’s Deputy Foreign Minister Faysal Mikdad called Washington’s ‘cosmetic war’ on ISIS (SANA 2015). The terrorist group was herded away from the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq but allowed to operate freely in Eastern Syria, against the Syrian Army (Fadel 2015b). The extremist group is used to justify a foothold Washington keeps in the region, weakening both Syria and Iraq. But Washington’s ‘war’ on ISIS has been ineffective. Studies by Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgent database showed that ISIS attacks and killings in Iraq increased strongly in the months after US air attacks began (Lestch 2014). The main on-the-ground fighting has been carried out by the Syrian Army, with its allies, and the Iraqi armed forces, with support from Iran (Lister 2015).

All this has been reported perversely in the western media. The same channels that prominently report (virtually celebrating) the ISIS killing of Syrian soldiers have also claimed the Syrian Army was avoiding or ‘not fighting’ ISIS (Richter 2014; Vinograd and Omar 2014). That alleged ‘unwillingness’ was part of the justification for US bombing inside Syria, another false pretext. While it is certainly the case that Syrian priorities remained in the heavily populated west, multiple media reports make it clear that, well before the strikes by the Russian air force in October 2015, the Syrian Arab Army was the major force engaged with ISIS (YNet 2014; al Arabiya 2014; Reuters 2015), as also suffering the worst casualties from that terrorist group (Webb 2014). When it comes to avoiding ISIS, the reverse has been the case. The evidence tells us that Washington’s lack of will against ISIS is linked to the fact that the terrorist group remains a key tool against the Syrian Government. That also explains why the US refuses to coordinate with the Syrian Army against ISIS (King 2015). This is consistent with the central ongoing aim of ‘regime change’ in Damascus or, failing that, dismemberment of the country. Such an aim was rejected by the US and others at a Vienna conference (Daily Star 2015); but US practice speaks louder than its words.

The contradictions of the US position – of claiming to fight ISIS while covertly protecting it – were thrown into sharp relief when in late September 2015 Russia decided to add air power to the Syrian Army’s efforts, against all the terrorist groups. When the US refused to cooperate with Russia, Washington’s media and NGO cheer squads immediately shifted their chorus of Syrian Government ‘killing civilians’ to that of Russia ‘killing civilians’. That had little effect on matters. At the time of writing, with that powerful Russian assistance, ISIS and the others are retreating and the Syrian Arab Army and its allied militia are gradually reclaiming areas that have been occupied for some time (AFP 2015).

Closer cooperation between Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon’s Hezbollah threaten to seriously degrade US dominance in the region. In the Iraqi military’s recent offensive on ISIS-held Tikrit, the Iranian military emerged as Iraq’s main partner. Washington was sidelined, causing consternation in the US media. General Qasem Suleimani, head of Iran’s Quds Force was said to have been a leading player in the Tikrit operation (Rosen 2015). Not least amongst the new developments has been the creation of an intelligence centre based in Baghdad and shared by Russia, Syria, Iraq and Iran plus Hezbollah (4+1). This signals a new measure of independence for the Baghdad government, long thought to be a puppet captured by Washington (Boyer and Scarborough 2015).

This article has presented sufficient evidence for us to safely draw these conclusions.

First, Washington planned a bloody wave of regime change in its favour in the Middle East, getting allies such as the Saudis to use sectarian forces in a process of ‘creative destruction’.

Second, the US directly financed and armed a range of so-called ‘moderate’ terrorist groups against the sovereign state of Syria while its key allies the Saudis, Qatar, Israel and Turkey financed, armed and supported with arms and medical treatment every anti-Syrian armed group, whether ‘moderate’ or extreme.

Third, ‘jihadists’ for Jabhat al Nusra and ISIS were actively recruited in many countries, indicating that the rise of those groups was not due to a simple anti-western ‘Sunni’ reaction within the region.

Fourth, NATO member Turkey functioned as a ‘free transit zone’ for every type of terrorist group passing into Syria.

Fifth, there is testimony from a significant number of senior Iraqi officials that US arms have been delivered directly to ISIS.

Sixth, the ineffective, or at best selective, US ‘war’ against ISIS tends to corroborate the Iraqi and Syrian views that there is a controlling relationship. In sum we can conclude that the US has built a command relationship with all of the anti-Syrian terrorist groups, including al Nusra ISIS, either directly or through its close regional allies, the Saudis, Qatar, Israel and Turkey. Washington has attempted to play a ‘double game’ in Syria and Iraq, using its old doctrine of ‘plausible deniability’ to maintain the fiction of a ‘war on terrorism’ for as long as is possible.

References:

Adl, Carol (2015) ‘US, Israeli Military Advisors Arrested In Iraq, Accused Of Aiding ISIS’, Your News Wire, 7 March, online: http://yournewswire.com/us-israeli-military-advisors-arrested-in-iraq-accused-of-aiding-isis/

AFP (2014) ‘Syria rebels, IS in ‘non-aggression’ pact near Damascus’, Global Post, 13 September, online: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/140912/syria-rebels-non-aggression-pact-near-damascus

AFP (2015) ‘Syria gaining ground in ‘nearly every front’’, The Daily Star, 23 November, online: http://www.thedailystar.net/world/syria-gaining-ground-nearly-every-front-176662

Anderson, Tim (2015) ‘Daraa 2011: Syria’s Islamist Insurrection in Disguise’, Global Research, 5 July, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/daraa-2011-syrias-islamist-insurrection-in-disguise/5460547

Arabiya al (2014) ‘Syrian Govt. bombs ISIS stronghold of Raqqa, 63 killed’, 25 November, online: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/11/26/-Syrian-government-airstrikes-kill-63-in-Raqqa-monitor.html

Bacchi, Umberto (2015) ‘Syria: al-Qaeda Nusra Front shows off huge cache of US weapons seized from moderate Harakat Hazm rebels’, International Business Times, 4 March, online: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/syria-al-qaeda-nusra-front-shows-off-us-weapons-seized-moderate-harakat-hazm-rebels-1490378

Bienaimé, Pierre (2014) ‘ISIS Now Has A Point Man Recruiting Fighters In Pakistan’, Business Insider, 20 November, online: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/isis-now-has-a-point-man-recruiting-fighters-in-pakistan-2014-11

Blair, David (2014) ‘Qatar and Saudi Arabia ‘have ignited time bomb by funding global spread of radical Islam’, Telegraph, 4 October, online: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11140860/Qatar-and-Saudi-Arabia-have-ignited-time-bomb-by-funding-global-spread-of-radical-Islam.html

Blanford, Nicholas (2011) ‘Assad regime may be gaining upper hand in Syria’, Christina Science Monitor, 13 May, online: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0513/Assad-regime-may-be-gaining-upper-hand-in-Syria

Boyer, Dave and Rowan Scarborough (2015) ‘White House alarmed as Iraq uses intelligence center operated by Russia, Iran, Syria’, Washington Times, 13 October, online: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/13/iraq-uses-intelligence-center-operated-by-russia-i/?page=all

Bukaiti al, Mohammed (2015) ‘Yemen’s Hidden War’, Rolling Stone, October, Issue 767, p.82; also online: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/yemens-hidden-war-20150730

Curtis, Mark (2012) Secret Affairs: Britain’s collusion with radical Islam, Serpent’s Tail, London

Daily Star (2015) ‘Moallem welcomes Vienna statement on Syria’, 2 November, online: https://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Nov-02/321197-moallem-welcomes-vienna-statement-on-syria.ashx

Debka (2015) ‘Assad loses battles as US, Israel, Turkey, Jordan, Qatar and UAE arm Al Qaeda’s Syrian branches’, 4 May, online: http://www.debka.com/article/24578/Assad-loses-battles-as-US-Israel-Turkey-Jordan-Qatar-and-UAE-arm-Al-Qaeda%E2%80%99s-Syrian-branches

DIA (2012) Intelligence Report ‘R 050839Z Aug 2012’ in Judicial Watch, Pgs. 287-293 (291) JW v DOD and State 14-812, 18 May, online: http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-287-293-291-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812-2/

Ditz, Jason (2014) ‘1,000-Strong Syrian Rebel Brigade Defects to ISIS: FSA Rebels Demand US Arms, Threaten to Quit War’, Anti-War.Com, 8 July, online: http://news.antiwar.com/2014/07/08/1000-strong-syrian-rebel-brigade-defects-to-isis/

Export.Gov (2015) ‘Dual Use Export Licenses’, US Export Agency, online: http://www.export.gov/regulation/eg_main_018229.asp

Fadel, Leith (2015a) ‘The Last of the “Moderates” – Harakat Hazzm Disbands to Join Islamists’, Al Masdar, 2 march, online: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/last-moderates-harakat-hazzm-disbands-join-islamists/

Fadel, Leith (2015b) ‘Anti-ISIS Coalition Uses ISIS to Fight Assad in Favor of the Rebels’, Al Masdar, 2 October, online: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/anti-isis-coalition-uses-isis-to-fight-assad-in-favor-of-the-rebels/

Fitzgerald, Denis (2014) ‘UN peacekeepers observe IDF interacting with al Nusra in Golan’, UN Tribune, 4 December, online: http://untribune.com/un-peacekeepers-observe-idf-interacting-al-nusra-golan/

FNA (2015a) ‘Iraq’s Popular Forces Release Photo of Downed US Chopper Carrying Arms for ISIL’, Fars News Agency, 28 February, online: http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13931209001345

FNA (2015b) ‘Iraqi Army Downs Two British Planes Carrying Weapons for ISIL Terrorists’, Global research, 24 February, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraqi-army-downs-two-british-planes-carrying-weapons-for-isil-terrorists/5433089

FNA (2015c) ‘Israeli Colonel Leading ISIL Terrorists Captured in Iraq’, Fars News Agency, 22 October, online: http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940730000210

FNA (2015d) ‘Captured ISIL leaders in Iraq confess receiving intelligence support from US’, Fars New Agency, SOTT, 25 October, online: http://www.sott.net/article/304825-Captured-ISIL-leaders-in-Iraq-confess-receiving-intelligence-support-from-US

Giovanni di, Janine (2014) ‘Who Is ISIS Leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi?’ Newsweek, 8 December, online: http://www.newsweek.com/2014/12/19/who-isis-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-290081.html

Hamadee al, Mousab and Roy Gutman (2014) ‘1,000 Syrian rebels defect to Islamic State in sign it’s still strengthening’, McClatchy, 8 July, online: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/middle-east/article24770164.html

Hersh, Seymour (2007) The Redirection’, The New Yorker, 5 March, online: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/03/05/the-redirection

Hoff, Brad (2015) ‘ISIS Leader Omar al-Shishani Fought Under U.S. Umbrella as Late as 2013’, Levant Report, 18 September, online: http://levantreport.com/tag/menagh-airbase/

Iraqi News (2015) American aircraft dropped weapons to ISIS, says MP, 4 January, online: http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/american-aircraft-airdropped-weapons-to-isis-says-mp/

Israel Today (2014) ‘Syrian Rebels Thank Netanyahu for Israel’s Compassion’, 23 February, online: http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/24453/Default.aspx

Judicial Watch (2015) ‘Judicial Watch: Defense, State Department Documents Reveal Obama Administration Knew that al Qaeda Terrorists Had Planned Benghazi Attack 10 Days in Advance’, 18 May, online: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-defense-state-department-documents-reveal-obama-administration-knew-that-al-qaeda-terrorists-had-planned-benghazi-attack-10-days-in-advance/

Kais, Roi (2012) ‘Syria: Rebels use Israeli arms’, YNet, 27 January, online: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4181733,00.html

Kais, Roi (2013) ‘US confirms: Israel attacked Syrian missile base’, YNet, 31 October, online: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4448123,00.html

King, Justin (2015) ‘Mounting Evidence Shows US Does Not Want ISIS Defeated’, Mint Press, 24 February, online: http://www.mintpressnews.com/mounting-evidence-shows-us-does-not-want-isis-defeated/202479/

Lestch, Corrinne (2014) ‘U.S. airstrikes fail to slow down brutal ISIS attacks: report’, Daily News, 14 November, online: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/u-s-airstrikes-fail-reduce-brutal-isis-attacks-report-article-1.2011021

Lister, Tim (2015) ‘Battle for Tikrit: Despite billions in aid, Iraqi army relies on militia, and Iran’, CNN, 11 March, online: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/11/middleeast/lister-iraq-iran/

MacAskill, Ewen and Martin Chulov (2014) ‘Isis apparently takes control of US weapons airdrop intended for Kurds’, Guardian, 22 October, online: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/22/isis-us-airdrop-weapons-pentagon

Nazemroaya, Mahdi Darius (2006) Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a ‘New Middle East’, Global Research, 18 November, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/plans-for-redrawing-the-middle-east-the-project-for-a-new-middle-east/3882

Newman, Alex (2014) ‘“Moderate” Rebels Armed by Obama Join al-Qaeda, ISIS’, New American, 21 November, online: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/19583-moderate-rebels-armed-by-obama-join-al-qaeda-isis

Newman, Alex (2015) ‘U.S. Defense Intel Chief: Obama Gave “Wilful” Aid to Al-Qaeda’, New American, 11 August, online: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/21384-u-s-defense-intel-chief-obama-gave-willful-aid-to-al-qaeda

Paraszczuk, Joanna (2013) ‘Syria Analysis: Which Insurgents Captured Menagh Airbase — & Who Led Them? EA Worldview, 7 August, online: http://eaworldview.com/2013/08/syria-feature-which-insurgents-captured-the-menagh-airbase/

PL (2015) ‘Yihadistas revelan cómo se reclutan militantes para el Estado Islámico’, CubaDebate, 25 June, online: http://www.cubadebate.cu/noticias/2015/06/25/yihadistas-arrestados-en-siria-revelan-como-ee-uu-recluta/#.ViwjaSv9iF_

Poushter, Jacob (2015) ‘In nations with significant Muslim populations, much disdain for ISIS’, Pew Research Centre, 17 November, online: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/17/in-nations-with-significant-muslim-populations-much-disdain-for-isis/

Putin, Vladimir (2015) ‘Who are Syria’s moderate rebels?’ Daily Star, 24 October, online: http://www.thedailystar.net/world/who-are-syrias-moderate-rebels-161989

OSNet (2014) ‘Syrian rebels in the Golan defect to ISIS’, OS Net daily, December, online: http://osnetdaily.com/2014/12/syrian-rebels-golan-defect-isis/

Reuters (2015) ‘Syrian air strike kills two Islamic State commanders’, 7 March, online: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/07/uk-mideast-crisis-syria-islamicstate-idUKKBN0M30F320150307

Richter, Greg (2014) ‘Syrian National Coalition President: Assad, ISIS Not Fighting Each Other’, NewsMax, 30 September, online: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/syrian-coalition-assad-isis/2014/09/30/id/597645/

Rosen, James (2015) ‘Quds force leader, commanding Iraqi forces against ISIS, alarms Washington’, Fox News, 5 March, online: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/05/iran-quds-force-leader-commanding-iraqi-forces-against-isis-alarms-americans/

Rothman, Noah (2014) ‘Dempsey: I know of Arab allies who fund ISIS’, YouTube, 16 September, online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA39iVSo7XE

RT (2014) ‘Anyone but US! Biden blames allies for ISIS rise’, 3 October, online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11l8nLZNPSY

SANA (2015) ‘Mikdad: US Turkish agreement to arm and train terrorists means failure of de Mistura initiative’, Syrian Arab News Agency, 21 February, online: http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=29385

Sarhan, Amre (2015) ‘American aircraft dropped weapons to ISIS, says MP’, Iraqi News, 4 January, online: http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/american-aircraft-airdropped-weapons-to-isis-says-mp/

Sharma, Versha and M.L. Nestel (2014) ‘Terrorists Seize U.S. Weapons in Iraq’, Vocativ, 16 June, online: http://www.vocativ.com/world/iraq-world/terrorists-seize-u-s-weapons-iraq/

Sly, Liz (2014) ‘U.S.-backed Syria rebels routed by fighters linked to al-Qaeda’, Washington Post, 2 November, online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-backed-syria-rebels-routed-by-fighters-linked-to-al-qaeda/2014/11/02/7a8b1351-8fb7-4f7e-a477-66ec0a0aaf34_story.html

Sputnik (2015a) ‘US Ally in Libya Joins ISIL and Leads Its Forces in the Country – Reports’, 3 May, online: http://sputniknews.com/news/20150305/1019074958.html

Sputnik (2015b) ‘US Congress Arms ISIL in Syria Via ‘Moderate’ Opposition – ex-CIA Officer’, 7 October, online: http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151007/1028130762/US-congress-arms-ISIL-in-syria-via-moderate-opposition.html

Usher, Barbara Plett (2014) ‘Joe Biden apologised over IS remarks, but was he right?’ BBC News, 7 October, online: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29528482

Variyar, Mugdha (2015) ‘Funds for ISIS Recruitment Came From US, Says Pakistani ISIS Commander’, IB Times, 29 January, online: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/funds-isis-recruitment-came-us-says-pakistani-isis-commander-621906

Vinograd, Cassandra and Ammar Cheikh Omar (2014) ‘Syria, ISIS Have Been ‘Ignoring’ Each Other on Battlefield, Data Suggests’, NBC News, 11 December, online: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/syria-isis-have-been-ignoring-each-other-battlefield-data-suggests-n264551

Washington’s Blog (2014) ‘Top U.S. Military Official: Our Arab “Allies” Support ISIS’, 16 September, online: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/top-u-s-military-official-arab-allies-support-isis.html

Webb, Sam (2014) ‘Up to 70 Syrian army chiefs beheaded by ISIS after jihadis make advance on second city of Idlib that has been held by Assad’s forces for more than a year’, Daily Mail, 28 October, online: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2810598/Up-70-Syrian-army-chiefs-beheaded-Isis-jihadis-make-advance-second-city-Idlib-held-Assad-s-forces-year.html

West, Diana (2012) ‘Syrian Rebels: We Are All Jabhat Al Nusra (Al Qaeda)’, Free Republic, 12 December, online: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2967671/posts

Winer, Stuart (2013) ‘Syria says it captured Israeli weapons from rebels’, Times of Israel, 21 August, online: http://www.timesofisrael.com/syria-says-it-captured-israeli-weapons-from-rebels/

YNet (2014) ‘Syrian strikes on ISIS stronghold kill 29’, 6 September, online: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4568098,00.html

Zayabi al, Adib (2014) ‘Syrian rebels increasingly joining ISIS: Coalition ambassador’, Asharq al-Awsat, 25 December, online: http://english.aawsat.com/2014/12/article55339780/syrian-rebels-increasingly-joining-isis-syrian-national-coalition-ambassador

Zelin, Aaron Y. (2012) ‘Rally ‘Round the Jihadist’, Washington Institute, 11 December, online: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/rally-round-the-jihadist

Zoabi, Hiba (2014) ‘Israel said to treat wounded members of IS and radical Syrian groups’, i24News, 10 November, online: http://www.i24news.tv/app.php/en/news/israel/diplomacy-defense/50457-141110-israel-said-to-treat-wounded-members-of-is-and-radical-syrian-groups

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Dirty War on Syria: Washington Supports the Islamic State (ISIS)