Geopolitics

[SeanAU]

Bolsonaro’s Butchery: CIA Fingerprints Are All Over Brazil’s Indigenous Genocide

From April 1964 to March 1985, a military junta ruled Brazil with an iron fist. Its crimes against humanity throughout this period were extensive, including institutionalized torture, imprisonment, forced disappearances and mass murder. Typically, the victims were political opponents of the regime, although the country’s indigenous population was a specific, dedicated target.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/bolsonaro-butchery-cia-fingerprints-brazil-indigenous-genocide/285536/

In 1988, Brazil peacefully returned to democracy, adopting a new constitution that remains in force today. This constitution acknowledges the right of indigenous peoples to preserve and safeguard their rich cultural heritage and to maintain exclusive ownership of “traditional lands.” While challenges persisted, their situation gradually improved, particularly during the initial terms in office of left-wing President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva from 2003 to 2010.

However, as a July report from Conselho Indigenista Missionário (Indigenous Missionary Council – CIMI) makes disturbingly clear, four years of far-right President Jair Bolsonaro’s rule undid decades of modest advancements and progress on indigenous rights and protections in the most grotesque manner imaginable.

CIMI found Bolsonaro’s 2019 – 2022 term was characterized by unrelenting violations of these communities’ rights and a deliberate dismantling of legal, regulatory, and welfare safeguards. This callousness precipitated a shocking upsurge in acts of violence perpetrated against indigenous people by state and non-state actors.

There are compelling reasons to believe this abrupt regression was neither incidental nor a mere reflection of Bolsonaro’s shameless disregard for human rights and the rule of law. The President’s rise to power was primarily owed to Operation Lava Jato, a lawfare conspiracy orchestrated by U.S. intelligence, known outside of Brazil as “Operation Car Wash,” that successfully dragged Brazil back to its submissive and tumultuous Cold War-era state.

An era in which the CIA ran roughshod over Latin American sovereignty. An obvious question then arises. Did the CIA direct Bolsonaro’s ruthless crackdown on indigenous communities?

CIMI’s report makes clear these grave crimes initiated by Bolansaro remain a daily reality for Brazil’s indigenous communities in the present. Each year during Bolsonaro’s tenure, the number and frequency of abuses grew dramatically. Yet his last in office was particularly blood spattered.

Throughout 2022, the organization recorded 29 cases of abuse of power by Brazilian authorities against indigenous communities, 180 assassinations, 28 attempted murders, 17 “wrongful deaths,” 17 aggravated assaults, 38 instances of ethnic-cultural racism and discrimination, and 20 cases of sexual violence.

Overall, a total of 416 incidents of violence targeting indigenous individuals were documented in 2022, a significant increase from the average of 374 cases recorded over the preceding three years. By comparison, during Dilma Rousseff’s tenure from January 2011 to August 2016, this number stood at 242. Disturbingly, instances of abuses of power exhibited a more than twofold surge each year.

This exponential escalation was sadly predictable. As CIMI’s records attest, Bolsonaro orchestrated a comprehensive alignment of the country’s administrative, judicial, and state entities against its indigenous population. This sweeping effort even encompassed the National Foundation for Indigenous Peoples (FUNAI).

The government failed to fulfill several legal mandates concerning the official demarcation and acknowledgment of the rightful borders of indigenous lands. The courts, tainted by political considerations, consistently rendered verdicts that undermined the rights of indigenous communities. Environmental safeguards were callously disregarded, leading to a deliberate dismantling of the Amazon’s ecological protections.

Anatomy of a Coup

In 2012, Brazil’s federal government created the National Truth Commission to investigate political crimes committed by the junta. It rapidly became clear that the number of indigenous people killed during the military government’s 20-year rule was at least 20 times greater than historical estimates. As noted, the CIA-created Rural Indigenous Guard was primarily responsible.

In service of this carnage, the Guard’s operatives received extensive training in CIA torture techniques and a variety of weapons and vehicles used in genocidal “raids” on indigenous territory during the late 1970s. This included bombing campaigns. Often, the lethal load was CIA-supplied napalm, dropped on residents of the Amazon and elsewhere to drive them from their lands and make way for new highways and other industrialization. Thousands were killed, many more scarred for life by chemical burns.

Was the CIA, along with major Western corporations and investors, again directing and expediting the slaughter and displacement of indigenous communities under Bolsonaro? He visited CIA headquarters and repeatedly met with high-ranking Agency officials throughout his Presidency. Yet, there are even more compelling grounds to view the state-sanctioned, encouraged and facilitated genocide of indigenous people under his rule as a 21st-century continuation of the CIA’s Cold War campaign of mass destruction against these communities.

Bolsonaro became President as an explicit result of Operação Lava Jato (Operation Car Wash). Publicly presented as a crusading anti-corruption effort heralding a new dawn in Brazil, in which democracy and the rule of law reigned supreme, in reality, it was a fraud directed by the CIA, FBI, and U.S. Department of Justice. The objective was to destroy the country’s most profitable companies and prevent the left from retaking power.

The Presidencies of Lula and Rousseff divorced Brasilia from Washington’s grasp and made the country a major player regionally and increasingly internationally. Brazil was widely perceived to be a global power of the future, pursuing a very different model of growth and development than that enforced by the U.S. empire. Its biggest companies used portions of their immense profits to fund social programs and development projects for the benefit of all.

The need to put a decisive stop to all this was pronounced from Washington’s perspective. Lava Jato provided a highly effective means of achieving that malign end behind a public chimera of radical reform and positive change. Revealingly, when Lula was jailed on bogus corruption charges in July 2017, the Operation’s lead prosecutor dubbed his incarceration “a gift from the CIA” in private Telegram chats, subsequently leaked to The Intercept.

Lula’s imprisonment prevented him from running in the 2018 Presidential election. When he was released in November 2019, vast swaths of Brazil’s previously booming economy had been ravaged. All construction in the country was paralyzed, while millions of jobs and tax revenues had been lost, causing the country’s GDP to contract by at least 3.6%.

The Operation’s economic and political destruction wasn’t restricted to Brazil. In March 2021, Lula observed: “The criminalization of [our] engineering companies also had a regional impact that contributed to conservative political changes in other Latin American and Caribbean countries.” Lava Jato was a seismic CIA depth charge concerned with dragging the region back to its Cold War position – impoverished, authoritarian, and easily exploitable by the U.S. government. It was inevitable that indigenous communities would concomitantly suffer.
 
Hope At Last

Brazil’s National Truth Commission completed work in 2014. Its findings confirmed that the ruling military junta was guilty of industrial-scale human rights violations, including arbitrary imprisonment, forced disappearances, rape, torture, and murder. Such was the scale of abuse doled out to indigenous communities that the commission recommended the creation of a standalone National Indigenous Truth Commission to investigate further how they suffered under CIA-backed dictatorship and reparations in the form of regularization of their lands.

Neither has materialized in the years since, although they may now do with Lula’s return to the Presidency. Immediately upon being sworn in for the third time this January, he started reversing his predecessor’s policies in many areas, particularly concerning the environment.

In April, he signed a decree recognizing six new indigenous reserves while banning mining and restricting commercial farming in those lands, which includes a vast swath of Amazon rainforest.

see in full 
https://www.mintpressnews.com/bolsonaro-butchery-cia-fingerprints-brazil-indigenous-genocide/285536/

CIA/DIA/DoD School of the Americas

How a Notorious Georgia Army School Became America's Training Ground for Global Torture
In spite of undergoing several name changes and employing shrewd repackaging strategies under the pretext of human rights advocacy, the notorious School of the Americas remains actively committed to training foreign fighters, steadfastly advancing the cause of the American empire.
MintPress News·Alan Macleod·Aug 10

High Yoon in South Korea

S.Korea's President Yoon approves motion to request parliamentary consent to arrest opposition leader as partisan conflicts worsen
By GT staff reporters
Published: Sep 19, 2023 10:17 PM
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202309/1298480.shtml

Lee Jae-myung (center), leader of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea, is transferred to a nearby hospital in Seoul by paramedics on the 19th day of his hunger strike on September 18, 2023, while prosecutors sought an arrest warrant for him over corruption allegations.

Lee began the protest on August 31, citing reasons including the South Korean government's economic mismanagement and the failure to oppose Japan's dumping of the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol on Tuesday approved a motion requesting parliamentary consent to arrest opposition leader Lee Jae-myung, who has been on a hunger strike for 20 days.

The extreme and rare protest has further revealed that the partisan conflict in the country is deepening and polarizing, said experts.

Illegal China Semiconductor Sanctions/Control Increases on US Companies

(Bloomberg) — The Biden administration issued final restrictions Friday on expansion in China by semiconductor companies that receive federal funds to build plants in the U.S.

It’s the last regulatory hurdle before the Commerce Department hands out more than $100 billion of federal aid intended to boost domestic chipmaking while containing China’s technological advancement.

The Chips Program Office, which is preparing to give out $39 billion in grants and $75 billion in loans and loan guarantees, will bar enterprises receiving the funds from substantially increasing their output or expanding their physical manufacturing space in China. They will be limited to a 5% increase for advanced chips and 10% for older technologies of 28 nanometers or more.

“Chips for America is fundamentally a national security initiative [ BULLSHIT ], and these guardrails will help ensure companies receiving U.S. government funds do not undermine our national security as we continue to coordinate with our allies and partners to strengthen global supply chains and enhance our collective security,” Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said in a statement.

in full
https://www.caixinglobal.com/2023-09-23/us-issues-china-restrictions-on-companies-getting-chip-funds-102111585.html

[SeanAU]

Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Brazil, Columbia, Ecuador, China Russia, or Venezuela what difference does it make .... lol

Announcing ‘Corporate Coup: Venezuela and the End of US Empire’
Anya Parampil · September 11, 2023

After four years of frontline reporting and research, The Grayzone’s Anya Parampil unveils her forthcoming book, Corporate Coup: Venezuela and the End of US Empire.

Based on four years of original investigative work and interviews with diplomats from across the globe, Corporate Coup uses the case of Venezuela to examine the West’s blueprint for modern regime change war:
the hybrid diplomatic assaults,
economic terrorism,
covert destabilization tactics,
and information warfare
that the US and its allies unleash against all governments that continue to resist the Washington Consensus.

While exposing the human cost of the West’s criminal quest to maintain its hegemonic hold over the world, Parampil reveals the limits of Washington’s imperial policy in the 21st Century, illustrating how developing powers from Moscow to New Delhi to Tehran — and yes, Caracas — are working to establish a multipolar world that honors the territorial sovereignty, political independence, and self determination of all nations.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/09/11/corporate-coup-venezuela-anya-parampil/

An excerpt from “Corporate Coup”:
Introduction: The Project for a New American Century

Upon walking through the front doors of Venezuela’s Foreign Ministry, or Cancillería, in Caracas, one is greeted by a peculiar art installation which, at first glance, appears to be a large, fractured, black-trimmed window with a tail stretching behind it. As you gaze past the structure to see what is labeled the Sala de Salvador Allende, or “Salvador Allende Room,” located in the Cancillería lobby, the towering sculpture’s full image becomes clear. It is an artistic rendering of former Chilean President Salvador Allende’s glasses, left shattered on the floor of his office on September 11, 1973, after US-backed military forces stormed the Presidential Palace in Santiago and overthrew his government. Allende died from gunshot wounds, later ruled to be the result of suicide, amidst the putsch.

I first encountered the sculpture in February 2019, during what became the first of three extended reporting trips I made to Venezuela over the next two years. Days before my arrival, a little-known opposition lawmaker named Juan Guaidó had stood in the center of Caracas’ John Paul II Square and declared himself president of Venezuela, announcing a direct challenge to the authority of President Nicolás Maduro—and sparking an international political crisis that lingers to this day.

Up until that point, the entirety of Guaidó’s burgeoning career had been defined by his ascent within foreign-funded civic organizations in Venezuela. As we will learn, after studying at George Washington University in Washington DC, he joined the ranks of Voluntad Popular, a US-backed opposition party borne from foreign-sponsored student protests that rocked Venezuela throughout 2007. By 2016, Guaidó was representing his native Estado La Guaira in the country’s national legislature at the tender age of 32.

When he announced his self-declared presidency less than three years later, however, Caracas-based pollster Hinterlaces found that a whopping 81 percent of Venezuelans had no idea who Guaidó was. Even so, the novice politician managed to woo officials Washington. According to The Wall Street Journal, his confidence was inspired by a conversation with none other than US Vice President Mike Pence, who placed a call to Caracas on the eve of Guaidó’s makeshift swearing-in ceremony to “set in motion a plan that had been developed in secret over the preceding several weeks, accompanied by talks between US officials, allies, lawmakers and key Venezuelan opposition figures.” The scheme marked an unprecedented twist in US foreign policy: Washington had declared its regime change mission in Caracas “accomplished” before a physical transition in government had actually taken place—and it never would. Today, Guaidó’s name is primarily evoked as a punchline; synonymous with the most infamous US-backed coup that wasn’t.

To myself and my colleagues, the Venezuela dilemma presented a fascinating reporting opportunity—a chance to cover one of the Trump Administration’s most consequential foreign policy blunders while getting a firsthand look at Chavismo, a political movement that permanently altered the course of history on our shared American continent...........

in full
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/09/11/corporate-coup-venezuela-anya-parampil/

[SeanAU]

I think two main things stand out regarding these matters posted here and on other threads.

First is the incredible arrogance of the US elites to imagine they have the right to do any of these things to other peoples around the world not only to their governments.

And secondly how utterly meek and subservient the people of the US and the west are to keep on swallowing all of this.

There are no excuses for either. I so love when I hear news reports today the majority of illegals rushing the USA border from Mexico are Venezuelans -- in their thousands each and every day. Pure bliss! 

Oh Lordy, Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.........   

“Today, we proudly proclaim for all to hear: the Monroe Doctrine is alive and well,” White House National Security Advisor, John Bolton, triumphantly declared before a group of Cuban Bay of Pigs veterans in April 2019, roughly three months after the US recognition of Guaidó.

10 Days later, Ambassador Samuel Moncada, Venezuela’s representative before the United Nations in New York, expressed to me his conviction that Bolton’s Monroeist views were based in a 200-year-old ideology that “in the 21st century is clearly racist, illegal, and against” the UN Charter and founding principles, enshrined to guarantee the territorial sovereignty, political independence, and self-determination of all nations.

Unfortunately for the US and Venezuelan population alike, Bolton’s words represented not only the view of Trump’s Administration, but an unelected bureaucracy that has dominated Washington across decades of superficial changes in leadership. Indeed, one could draw a direct line between Washington’s contemporary Venezuela policy and the CIA-backed putsch that ousted Chile’s Allende, Latin America’s first democratically elected socialist president, in 1973—an act of terror that colored a continent-wide campaign of US-sponsored counterinsurgency and lethal political repression.

The statue of Allende’s splintered spectacles on the floor of Venezuela’s Foreign Ministry today are a reminder of the threat that all independent governments in the region continue to face as Monroe’s ghost wanders the halls of Washington, haunting its permanent guard with deranged visions of colonial conquest conjured in the cradled infancy of US empire.

This reality weighs heavily on the shoulders of Venezuela’s current government officials, many of whom bear the legacy of underground movements that once resisted their own country’s US-backed junta. In the decades preceding its 1998 revolution, Venezuela was ravaged by the same dark forces that reigned across Chile and the rest of the South American continent throughout the 20th century: military dictatorship, a dirty war against leftist guerillas, and pro-market shock therapy prescribed to benefit a tiny domestic ruling class that placed the boundless wealth beneath its soil—including the largest oil and gold deposits in the world—under the command of foreign interests.

It’s no surprise then that when a charismatic Venezuelan paratrooper stormed the country’s political scene and declared war on its domestic oligarchy, the public was ripe for more than your average nationalist revival. Following decades of colonial and neoliberal subjugation, Venezuela’s sole path to sovereignty was political revolution.

[zenith]

his ship is sinking domestically but the drama teacher has a new role to play for 5-eyes, which will be a welcome reprieve from the usual mauling he's taking in parliament and the media these days.

btw, surrey, bc is full of sikh farmers and gangsters. the rcmp has that place under constant surveillance. the sikh terrorists that blew up Air India Flight 182 were from just up the road in the cowichan valley (van. isle), a (non) place called paldi. it was a small sikh community that's essentially abandoned now.

Trudeau's Skripal moment, ruins relations with India

[SeanAU]

FRANCE NIGER - a sudden change

France will pull its military and diplomats from Niger after a successful coup by anti-French forces, President Emmanuel Macron said on Sunday. The move will see around 1,500 soldiers leave by the end of the year.

“France has decided to withdraw its ambassador. In the next hours our ambassador and several diplomats will return to France,” Macron told France 2 television on Sunday. “And we will put an end to our military cooperation with the Niger authorities,” he continued, adding that French troops would return home in “the months to come.”

https://www.rt.com/africa/583491-france-wthdraw-troops-niger/

PS again the above cannot be true because it's from that lying RT media the Russian Govts propaganda operation!   


Here is the real truth from France24

 President Emmanuel Macron announced Sunday that France will end its military presence in Niger and pull its ambassador out of the country after its democratically elected president was deposed in a coup.

Issued on: 24/09/2023
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230924-president-emmanuel-macron-says-france-will-end-military-presence-in-niger

Nah, can't be - it's says the same things - OMG 

[SeanAU]

Too much happening everywhere ... whatever happened in Niger etc?

----------------------------------

Someone spun up these questions ... I don't know the answers but I think I could guess pretty well. :-)

Do you know how many billions from the USA have gone to Armenia over the last 10 years?
Do you know how much money have poured into Armenia's MSM from USAID?
Do you know why the spy Samantha Power has visited Armenia so many times?
Do you know why the Pentagon and CIA have been training the Armenia arm forces?

-----------------
copied across from another thread to here
PS Neocon Samantha Powell (USAID) is in Armenia giving instructions to the solidly anti-Russian PM Nikol Pashinyan.... who is not popular at all  Ukraine-Maidan v2.0 is now in well advanced stages. Massive Humanitarian crisis underway .... (local state politicians from here were reporting from the scene on a investigative trip there) .... recent US military exercises were more about effective "crowd control" management not typical military ops. There's a very strong anti-PM element among the public because the Azerbaijan enclave was given up and ~120K are heading to Armenia and the PM did nothing.

US doing all it can to draw Armenia away from Russian influence in the south caucuses and into EU/NATO  -- Indications are things are going to get worse / explode out of control ....  we'll see.

Where ever the US goes big trouble follows soon after.   My guess is this forum is going to need more War threads -- way too much happening in Geopolitics / Cold War2 et al

[SeanAU]

This could easily fit in one of the Media threads .. but given the current debacles going on I'll put it here - it is 2 years old - still, it is the BBC interviewing Ilham Aliyev president of Azerbaijan.
Look how well he pushes back against the snide anglo-saxon distortions, false and unproven allegations etc of the BBC 'journalist' ....

Azerbaijani President angrily criticizes BBC: Please take care of yourself and do your homework before accusing others
Distributed by Full View @tongvisual Hong Kong Media - translated with Chinese Subtitles

[zenith]

this thing is really heating up among the sikhs in canada, i can't recall things being this intense before.

US, Canada Seek to ‘Destabilize’ India Through Khalistan Separatist Movement
https://sputnikglobe.com/20230928/us-canada-seek-to-destabilize-india-through-khalistan-separatist-movement-1113771194.html#:~:text=US%2C%20Canada%20Seek%20to%20'Destabilize'%20India%20Through%20Khalistan%20Separatist%20Movement,-15%20hours%20ago&text=to%20the%20author-,The%20Biden%20administration%20is%20fueling%20the%20ongoing%20Indian%2DCanada%20diplomatic,told%20Sputnik's%20New%20Rules%20podcast.

"According to the US mainstream press, the American intelligence services provided their Canadian counterparts with information that helped Canada "conclude" that India "had been involved". For their part Canadian secret services are said to intercept "smoking gun" communications between Indian diplomats in Canada indicating "involvement in the plot", per officials quoted by the US media. A top US diplomat in Canada confirmed there was "shared intelligence among Five Eyes partners" concerning the matter.

However, the timing of the accusations raises further questions. Nijjar was murdered in June and now, after India voted for the expansion of BRICS, de-dollarization and new financial mechanisms alongside Russia, China, Brazil, and South Africa, the Canadian government voiced groundless claims of New Delhi participating in the killing of the Sikh separatist."

i don't pay attention to india's domestic politics, i know modi is favouring hindus and the sikhs in canada are up in arms.

another sikh 'gangster' was assassinated in canada this week.

Winnipeg homicide victim was wanted by authorities in India
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-homicide-victim-wanted-india-1.6975772

Jagmeet Singh, the man who pulls Trudeau's strings on the Khalistan issue
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/jagmeet-singh-the-man-who-pulls-trudeaus-strings-on-the-khalistan-issue/articleshow/103830959.cms?from=mdr
Synopsis
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government is dependent on the support of Jagmeet Singh's New Democratic Party (NDP) to survive. Singh, a vocal supporter of Khalistani politics, has associations with violent Khalistani leaders. Trudeau previously patronised Khalistani elements in Canada, but his competitive wooing of Khalistanis intensified after Singh emerged as a rival claimant for Khalistani votes.

[SeanAU]

by FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING
January 31, 2022
Why Comparing Chinese Africa Investment to Western Colonialism Is No Joke
https://fair.org/home/why-comparing-chinese-africa-investment-to-western-colonialism-is-no-joke/

China has a large and growing economic presence in many African countries. The China/Africa deals cry out for analysis: Are they different from the deals on offer from Western countries like the US, Britain or France?

Post-independence Africa’s economic relationship with the West has been mediated through the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Funding for projects comes with a range of conditionalities; when Western loans come due, the IMF demands painful cuts to health and education programs as the price of refinancing. In the past, the IMF has taken outright control of African governments. At other times, the US has sponsored coups, assassinated leaders and fomented civil wars on the continent.

China, meanwhile, does not attach political strings to its loans. China is known as a “patient” investor, making deals that take decades to pay off. When the Chinese loans come due, China reschedules or restructures debt payments. Ex-Minister for Public Works for Liberia, Gyude Moore, cited 87 cases of restructuring or rescheduling of such loans between 2000–19.

Which of these two approaches sounds like neocolonialism, and which like economic development?

 

“Say what you will about European colonizers,” Noah concludes, “but at least they were upfront about it.” Actually, they weren’t “upfront about it” at all. The history of European colonization is replete with covert operations and assassinations, mistranslated treaty clauses, broken promises and outright lies.

Western colonizers enslaved and killed millions of Africans over centuries (Williams, Capitalism and Slavery; Davidson, The African Slave Trade). They colonized the entire continent (Rodney, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa). They invented apartheid and imposed it on Africans (Magubane, The Making of a Racist State). They corralled Africans into death traps to be machine-gunned in one-sided battles, from Ulundi in 1879 to Omdurman in 1898 (Pakenham, The Scramble for Africa), and posed proudly for photographs with the corpses. They ran counterinsurgencies against independence movements in the 1950s that included torture, mass hanging and concentration camps (Elkins, Imperial Reckoning).

In the Democratic Republic of Congo alone, they killed 10 million people between 1885-1906, cutting off people’s hands to coerce their families to work (Hochschild, King Leopold’s Ghost). They assassinated the most promising post-Independence leaders (notably Patrice Lumumba). They engineered the secession of Katanga, the wealthiest province of the country. They backed first a dictatorship (Mobutu) then an invasion and occupation (by Rwanda and Uganda). Millions of people died in post-independence wars sponsored by the US. (See Podur, America’s Wars on Democracy in Rwanda and the DR Congo; Epstein, Another Fine Mess; or Curtis, Unpeople, for details.)

Drawing a comparison between the horrors visited by Western countries on Africa and China’s infrastructure deals there can only serve to advance ignorance and racism.

[SeanAU]

ARMENIA, Karabakh, etc
Maria Zakharova's Weekly Briefing:
https://karlof1.substack.com/p/maria-zakharovas-weekly-briefing-d7d

Question: The issue of shutting down Russian TV channels is being discussed in Armenia, MP from the ruling Civil Contract faction L. Badalyan said on Saturday. Anti-Russian sentiments in other countries have repeatedly begun with such unfriendly steps, in many cases these were real repressions against our journalists and media - we can recall Latvia, Estonia, France, Great Britain, Moldova. How to maintain relations with the Armenian people? It's one thing with politicians, it's another thing with the people.

Maria Zakharova: We have no problems with the fraternal Armenian people. We have helped, are helping and will continue to help. I have just told you how: through the Russian peacekeepers, who not in words, not sitting in warm offices, but there, on the ground, shedding blood, help the Armenian people, humanitarianly, socially, financially, economically. We didn't lose any friends there.

Another thing is that we see a huge number of provocations. We know what the 2000 American diplomats are doing. Can you imagine? 2000 people are the composition of the American embassy in Yerevan. We understand perfectly well what they are doing: mainly spreading fakes and disinformation. It is surprising that the authorities in Yerevan do not notice this. Such a number of people would be justified if they spread humanitarian aid instead of fakes every day. They got up in "human chains", distributed food, help, clothes or something else. No. Over the years, many hundreds of U.S. diplomats have appeared there, engaged in disinformation work in the information space.

Against the background of the fact that two thousand American diplomats are in Armenia, for some reason this does not raise any questions or hints among officials in Yerevan that it is somehow necessary to regulate information flows. But then some deputies from the ruling faction come out and declare the need to block the Russian media. This is all in addition to the fact that Russian journalists are no longer allowed into Armenia. They are announced by people from certain stop lists, etc.

Let me remind you that we all know that the current authorities in Armenia came to power with the main slogan "freedom of speech". Everything else was secondary. And freedom of speech, as a fundamental principle of democracy, does not work in one direction, when only they can speak. And it is also necessary to broadcast this, because these are alternative sources of information. Depriving people for whom this is a really important source of information (only people should determine this), as long as these media operate legally, cutting off these sources is a blow to democracy. Nothing else. And there is no other way to call it. This is a blow to the foundations that make up the political platform of the current authorities in Yerevan. As far as this corresponds to the official position of Yerevan, I think that this question should be asked to the authorities in Armenia. But such statements indicate a departure from democratic principles.

I think that those who want to officially or not block Russian TV channels (I repeat, let official Yerevan comment), but if such thoughts "wander" somewhere, then you need to be aware that with their statements they literally "put an end" to the democratic principles that they declared as a priority.

Question: Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev refused to meet with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan in Granada. Why do you think the meeting failed? Can this somehow affect Russia's interests? Are there any plans to hold talks on the Russian platform?

Maria Zakharova: It is the sovereign right of each country to determine its position and policy. In this case, as far as I understand, we are talking about a meeting in which we did not participate. I do not consider it necessary to comment on the decisions of the parties. Baku regularly explains and comments on all its steps. I think such questions should either be addressed to the Azerbaijani side, or wait for their comments.

As for the process as a whole, our mediation role was put into practice in agreements (1,2,3,4) – large-scale, elaborate, based on everything: on a combination of history, reality, and the future in every sense of the word.

Another thing is that Western partners got involved here, who began to look for their own benefit. It is always in violation of the harmony achieved by others. This is the main problem. Everything was, everything was possible, taking into account the interests of all. No one can ever be one hundred percent satisfied. But there's diplomacy for that. This is the basic principle of correct, competent communication – to minimise costs and bring together the positions of the parties in terms of the maximum number of points, to create an appropriate atmosphere for mutual consideration of interests. All this was done with the mediation of our country. Everything in which the West performs mediation functions, please contact the co-sponsors of these meetings, processes, negotiations, and so on.

Question: Do you still think it is necessary for Russian peacekeeping forces to remain on the territory of Karabakh until 2025 after this issue is resolved?

Maria Zakharova: It seems to me that your question has an obvious answer. We have talked about this many times. The timing and other issues of the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in the region will be determined jointly with colleagues. If you are talking about the territory of Karabakh, then together with the Azerbaijani side, taking into account the situation on the ground.

[zenith]

it will be interesting to see how nato survives a loss in ukraine as there are plenty of internal tensions.

US Jet Shoots Down Turkish Drone Over Syria After Attack On Occupied Oil Field
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-jet-shoots-down-turkish-drone-over-syria-after-attack-occupied-oil-field

"The anti-Assad, UK-based monitoring group Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has also said that the US coalition shot down a Turkish drone in what marks a serious "NATO vs. NATO" escalation over Syrian skies, ironically enough."

[El Cid]

OMG, here come the Russians, dreaming about the fall of NATO when they can barely hold their ground against Ukraine. Pathetic...

[zenith]

you may want to catch up on the news from poland (how sincere it is will be revealed post election), hungary, slovakia and turkey, who's always a wild card.

the british have run out of gas too, while the usofa withers.

[SeanAU]

Misc Geopolitics, the old & new world orders and the mysterious Rules Based International Order

@RnaudBertrand
1h
This is absolutely the direction the emerging world order needs to take.

Like @ArtaMoeini argues we need "[a new] framework drawn from cultural realism that heeds the reality of multiplicity and plurality of cultural forms in the world, rejecting universalist & timeless assumptions about values that would ultimately demand global conformity.

[In] a polycentric world, we need international ethics to be value-neutral, pragmatic, and tolerant of those with whom we fundamentally disagree. Otherwise, we risk crystalizing our own manichaean thinking in the West, deepening resentment in our civilizational counterparts, and normalizing conflict & escalation spirals."

500 years from now, if we've not destroyed ourselves by then, when we look back at the era of Western domination over the world, we'll remember it as a uniquely barbarous and violent time for this very reason: because of its intolerance, its need to proselytize and remake the world in its image, its hierarchic view of a world where they are the superior civilization on a holy mission to convert the world. (to it's own narcissistic view of the world)

Lasting peace can only occur in a world that values mutual respect and understanding, as well as reject all universalisms of values.
https://nitter.net/RnaudBertrand/status/1710486268105355748#m

@ArtaMoeini
9h
💢 Some general thoughts on my latest piece: "A REQUIEM FOR THE RULES-BASED ORDER"

The 21st century will be shaped by the Great Transition—the shift to a polycentric, regionalist, and interest-based order that's anchored more on middle powers and civilizational states than on the globe-trotting & ideological superpowers that characterized the 20th century.

For @carnegiecouncil, I compare the end of unipolarity & the erosion of the US-led Rules-based Order to Nietzsche's "death of God", and think through an alternative that rejects global hegemony and exceptionalism by any single world power or civilizational bloc.

Instead, I propose a new normative framework drawn from cultural realism that heeds the reality of multiplicity and plurality of cultural forms in the world, rejecting universalist & timeless assumptions about values that would ultimately demand global conformity.

I argue that in a polycentric world, we need international ethics to be value-neutral, pragmatic, and tolerant of those with whom we fundamentally disagree. Otherwise, we risk crystalizing our own manichaean thinking in the West, deepening resentment in our civilizational counterparts, and normalizing conflict & escalation spirals.
https://nitter.net/ArtaMoeini/status/1710342993251610821#m

Oct 5, 2023 • Article
A Requiem for the Rules-Based Order: The Case for Value-Neutral Ethics in International Relations
U.S. Global Engagement Initiative
By Arta Moeini
"The decline of the post-1945 liberal international order and its constructed “rules” does not entail disorder & permanent chaos but an alternative order that places multiplicity above universality."

The Unraveling of the Established Order
Regardless of how it eventually concludes, the Russo-Ukrainian War represents a seismic event signaling profound changes in the global landscape. The unipolar era is at its end, major countries are more concerned with their cultural sovereignty and strategic autonomy than they have been in decades, and it seems inevitable that the once-dominant Western hegemony must gradually yield to a more diverse and multipolar system. [...]

If the current transition is understood correctly, it could promise the birth of a new normative system based on a functional, value-neutral, situational, and diplomatic ethic that has its primary concern in managing reciprocal relations between world powers.

Instead of attempting to impose our values on others (no matter how good or true we think they are), we in the West should prioritize engagement with other major powers based on common interests and shared objectives. While relative power compared to neighbors will be the key determining factor in granting status to states, the U.S.-led West will nevertheless remain one of the poles in this new order. Yet to remain influential, it must adapt, foster the ethos of non-interference in realms outside of its own, and learn to treat other major states—both rivals and partners—as equals.

https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/media/article/requiem-rules-based-order

Before the Nation-State: Civilizations, World Orders, and the Origins of Global International Relations
The Chinese Journal of International Politics  (paywalled)
https://academic.oup.com/cjip/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/cjip/poad011/7289981

From Thucydides to 1648: The “Missing” Years in IR and the Missing Voices in World History
International Studies Perspectives,
Abstract
International relations (IR) defines itself as a discipline by adhering to a Westphalian narrative centered on 1648. The following paper argues that IR should broaden its engagement with history to consider the international prior to 1648 and to examine global and transnational historical accounts that challenge the states in anarchy framework. This paper examines how pre-modern history is often used within IR as a foil for which western modernity and its superiority is defined. It concludes by arguing for the need to re-read the processes of modernity and imperialism that are commonly seen as the prelude to the familiar Eurocentric stories told in IR.
https://academic.oup.com/isp/article-abstract/22/4/495/5908796

@RnaudBertrand
23h
I know I keep linking to it but the best study I've read on the ‘rules-based order’ is this one by Professor John Dugard, a member of the UN International Law Commission:

Specifically on what the rules of the order are, he writes: "The rules comprising the ‘rules-based international order’ have still to be spelled out. [...] Furthermore, we do not know what the nature of these rules is. It has been suggested that ‘they do not have a positive quality. Rather their worth depends on the extent to which they serve the interests and values of States which sustain them’.

If there are rules, the method for their creation remains a mystery. We do not know ‘who ultimately lays down these rules and determines their content’, we do not know whether states must consent to these rules, and if so, which states. Certainly, the International Law Commission and the UN Sixth Committee are not involved in this process. Charitably, it seems that the rules are tacit agreements between a handful of Western states to which there has been no clear consent. But consent is the basis of international law.

According to Stefan Talmon, the rules-based order has been used to call upon certain states to comply with existing international legal rules which these states actually have not consented to, and thus are not bound. The term ‘rules-based order’ blurs the distinction between binding and non-binding rules, giving the impression that all states and international actors are subject to this order, irrespective of whether or not they have consented to these rules."
https://nitter.net/RnaudBertrand/status/1710138141695430670#m

What are the Rules of the Rules-based Order?

The Rules are made by the US but not written down anywhere. It boils down to "I'm the alpha, follow me without questioning. If you dare to be independent of me, I'll shower with you with hellfire".

The Rules-based Order is used to replace International Law, typically enforced by NATO/Western Countries under the Suzerainty of the US Empire jointly wishing to impose their demands using Rules that would be a contravention of International Law.

Rules Based International Order is in reality a Feudal System - Rules for thee and not for me… the US of A.

The choice before us: International law or a ‘rules-based international order’?
Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2023
John Dugard 

 On 2 June 2022 President Biden published an op-ed in the New York Times titled ‘How the US is willing to help Ukraine’ in which he declared that Russia’s action in Ukraine ‘could mark the end of the rules-based international order and open the door to aggression elsewhere, with catastrophic consequences the world over’.Footnote 1 There is no mention of international law. Later, in a press conference at the conclusion of the June 2022 NATO Summit Meeting in Madrid, he warned both Russia and China that the democracies of the world would ‘defend the rules-based order’ (RBO).Footnote 2 Again, there is no mention of international law. On 12 October 2022 the US President published a National Security Strategy which makes repeated reference to the RBO as the ‘foundation of global peace and prosperity,’Footnote 3 with only passing reference to international law. Footnote 4

The term ‘rules-based order’ is so frequently used by American political leaders, such as President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, that, according to Professor Stephen Walt of the Kennedy School of Harvard University, it ‘seems to have become a job requirement for a top position in the US foreign policy apparatus’.Footnote 5 The clear inference to be drawn from this is that the failure to invoke international law and instead to appeal on most occasions to a ‘rules-based international order’ on the part of the United States is considered and deliberate. Footnote 6

Other Western leaders have likewise invoked the ‘rules-based international order’ to criticize non-Western states, particularly Russia and China, for their international misconduct,Footnote 7 but such references have been inconsistent or used interchangeably with international law. A good illustration of this is provided by the Declaration issued by the Heads of State at the conclusion of the 2022 Madrid Summit of NATO which stated that ‘[w]e adhere to international law and to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. We are committed to upholding the rules-based international order’.

The Prime Minister of the Netherlands has gone even further by blending the two terms into a single phrase in referring to ‘the rules-based international legal order’. This suggests that other Western leaders, particularly of the EU, have an ambivalent attitude towards the rules-based international order. While they are prepared to go along with the United States’ preferred language in joint statements with the United States, they nevertheless insist that international relations are governed by international law. This was made clear in a statement issued by the EU in the United Nations when Russia invaded Ukraine. The United Kingdom, on the other hand, frequently invokes the rules-based international order.

What is this creature, the ‘rules-based international order’, that American political leaders have increasingly invoked since the end of the Cold War instead of international law? Is it a harmless synonym for international law, as suggested by European leaders? Or is it something else, a system meant to replace international law which has governed the behaviour of states for over 500 years? {...}
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/choice-before-us-international-law-or-a-rulesbased-international-order/7BEDE2312FDF9D6225E16988FD18BAF0

"I'm right & you're wrong, I'm big & you're small & there's nothing you can do about it." - Roald Dahl's "Mathilda" sums it up ....

We are living through change that hasn't happened in 500 yrs. For the first time since the 1400s (the age of discovery), the collective West does not enjoy overwhelming military, industrial & fin/econ superiority over the collective "global south." Expect the unexpected. 

War Criminal Tony Blair's 1999 Chicago speech in which he explained the "Westphalia" system was going to be replaced with the doctrine of "The International Community" is one of the starkest and most overt announcements of this shift from international law to "rules based" despotism.

Propaganda:101 - what Doctrine of Isolation is he talking about? It never existed until this speech.

"Doctrine of the International Community" - and KOSOVO in a wider Context - Globalization etc
Tony Blair (Labour) Location: Chicago
http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=279

[SeanAU]

China, Africa, Australia, Xinjiang repression fantasies, Afghanistan and Hot Chips

@RnaudBertrand
Oct 6
Very interesting read on how China can contribute to Africa's industrialization, by Professor Zhou Jinyan of Shanghai International Studies University: @ thetricontinental.org

To summarize, the author starts with the sobering assessment that Africa’s share of global manufacturing went from 3% in 1970 to less than 2% today, 5 decades later. This makes the African continent today more dependent on the rest of the world, especially the West, as a market for its primary commodities than at the time of independence.

Professor Zhou sees this failure to industrialize as largely the result of the "failure of Western development prescriptions". For instance, she writes that "Western aid has promoted economic dependence in Africa, while the political, economic, and ideological hegemony of the West has reduced Africa’s policy space and autonomy. From neoliberal structural adjustment programmes to reform strategies aimed at improving the business and investment environment, Western prescriptions have not assisted African economic development".

She has a very interesting quote by Chinese economist Wen Yi who summed up the problem with the Western development prescription as "taking the roof as the foundation, taking the result as the cause […] taking the results of Western industrialisation as the prerequisite for economic development". In short the West encourages countries to become like them, thinking that it would help them develop but their status is an outcome of development, not a cause!

Instead Professor Zhou highlights 3 ways in which China can contribute to Africa’s industrial development.

First, she argues that China’s help, via the BRI and other mechanisms, to build infrastructure across the African continent over the last 3 decades or so will greatly aid the continent’s aspirations at industrialisation. The building of modern ports, highways, and power stations should reduce the costs of production and thereby promote industrialisation.

Second, Africa can learn from China's development model, for instance the "dialectical unity of reform, development, stability, and innovation; the management of relations between the government, market, and society; the importance of leadership that is capable and has a strong political will; [or] the need to define clear strategies." This would undoubtedly be more productive than the private sector-led, market-centric approach that is the staple of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Zhou interestingly notes that many African countries had early experiments with state-led development models in the 1960s and 1970s: during that time per capita income in sub-Saharan Africa grew at a rate of 1.6 percent per year when between 1980 and 2004 (when those development models were abandoned in favor of Western neoliberal prescriptions), per capita income decreased by 0.3 percent per year.

The final way in which China can aid Africa’s industrialisation is by enhancing Africa’s autonomy in the global geopolitical arena by providing the continent with an alternative way to interact with the rest of the world along mutually reinforcing and respectful lines.
https://nitter.net/RnaudBertrand/status/1710095993243684929#m 

@RnaudBertrand
23h
I think Chinese imports played a role in the deindustrialization of the West but very little role in Africa's, for 2 reasons:
a) Africa was never industrialized in the first place so by definition in cannot have deindustrialized.
b) Were Africa to industrialize, there are plenty of factors that would make local products extremely competitive with Chinese imports. Labor costs are much lower in Africa than in China, you don't have the cost of transportation for locally-made goods, Africans know the local market much better, the raw materials for most goods come originally from Africa so no need to import them, etc.

So the key question, as highlighted in the article, isn't "how can Africa not deindustrialize further?" or "how can Africa reindustrialize?" but "What model should Africa follow in order to industrialize?"

Wenhua Zongheng / Issue no. 3
Africa’s Path to Industrialisation: How Can China Contribute to the Continent’s Economic Development? By Zhou Jinyan

Zhou Jinyan (周瑾艳) is an assistant professor at Shanghai Academy of Global Governance & Area Studies (SAGGAS), Shanghai International Studies University (SISU). Her recent research has focused primarily on African paths of development and comparing Chinese and Western development cooperation with Africa. She has conducted field trips in Angola, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Rwanda.

Since attaining their independence, African countries have tirelessly pursued industrialisation, seeking to overcome their dependent status in the global economic order. In 1989, the Organisation of African Unity (the precursor to the African Union) and, subsequently, the United Nations General Assembly declared 20 November to be Africa Industrialisation Day to encourage international awareness and cooperation on African industrialisation. Regrettably, these aspirations have not yet been realised.

In the twenty-first century, there have been important developments in the continent’s economic development. The relationships between Africa and emerging economies, including China, have developed rapidly, altering the continent’s strategic position within globalisation. A period of high growth rates between 2000 and 2014 led to the emergence of an ‘Africa Rising’ narrative in Western media, as Africa’s image transformed from a ‘continent of despair’ to a ‘continent full of hope’.1

See, for example, the following cover stories published by The Economist roughly a decade apart, The Economist, ‘The Hopeless Continent’, The Economist, 13 May 2000, https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2000-05-13; and
The Economist, ‘Africa Rising’, The Economist, 3 December 2011, https://www.economist.com/leaders/2011/12/03/africa-rising.

However, behind the portrayals of the ‘rise of Africa’, the underlying figures remain disheartening.

In short, Africa has experienced growth without industrialisation, with its high economic growth rates stemming from rising demand and prices for natural resources, making it unsustainable.

Through an analysis of Africa’s experiences on the path to industrialisation, this paper attempts to answer three questions.
- Why have decades of Western aid failed to promote African industrialisation?
- What explorations have African countries made in their paths to industrialisation?
- And finally, as a fellow participant and student on the path to industrialisation, what can China contribute to Africa’s industrialisation?  [...]

Ultimately, the real engine for African industrialisation lies in the hands of African countries themselves. Capital, technology, and experience from China, or other countries, can only support these efforts. For instance, similar projects or forms of cooperation can have very different outcomes in different countries.
https://thetricontinental.org/wenhua-zongheng-2023-3-african-industrialisation-how-can-china-contribute/

Exclusive Australia concludes China decoupling ‘impossible’ after carrying out series of classified studies

    Separate administrations conducted investigations into the feasibility of ‘diversifying’ import-export relationship, all resolved such a decoupling would be unmanageable
    Current relations came after years of networking by exporters and cannot be replicated elsewhere, analysts say
China-Australia relations
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3236860/australia-concluded-china-decoupling-impossible-after-series-classified-studies

Southeast Asia won’t be ‘split between two camps’ over US-China rivalry
Singapore’s Lee Hsien Loong says

    The regional geopolitical outlook is ‘not all gloomy’ given the efforts by states to maintain good ties, says PM Lee at the Asia Future Summit in Singapore
    With globalisation ‘in retreat’, countries must maximise cooperation opportunities for the region to reach its full potential despite geopolitical challenges, Lee adds
Singapore

Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Thursday said he was optimistic that Southeast Asian nations would not be “split between two camps” despite the intense rivalry between the United States and China, adding that the regional geopolitical outlook was “not all gloomy” given efforts by states to maintain good ties with both superpowers.

“While different countries will align more closely with one side or the other, nearly all still want to be friends with both,” Lee said in a dialogue session at the geopolitics-focused Asia Future Summit in Singapore.

Lee said Asian countries could take a cue from other states, citing recent efforts by Japan and South Korea to thaw bilateral relations, as well as moves by China and Australia to ease trade tensions that stretch back to 2020.

While US ally Australia “may not see eye-to-eye on strategic issues” with China, Lee said the two countries shared a deep economic relationship, noting that Beijing had since lifted tariffs on Australian barley exports and barriers to Australian hay exports.

“So even countries that are not like-minded allies need to learn to cooperate and coexist with one another,” Lee said. 

Besides great power competition, Lee said the region was also dealing with “our fair share of difficult issues” such as the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, and in the Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea claimed by China but administered by Japan, which calls it the Senkakus.

“Asian countries need to insulate their overall relations from these specific difficulties, build mutual trust, and to continue to cooperate pragmatically for mutual benefit,” Lee said.
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3236953/southeast-asia-wont-be-split-between-two-camps-over-us-china-rivalry-singapores-lee-hsien-loong-says

Xinjiang China, and the small minority of separatist Uyghurs ala "East Turkestan Islamic Movement” ala the Terrorist group operating inside Afghanistan

@RnaudBertrand
12h
Interesting: the Talibans said they'd "take security threats against China like a challenge to our own" and China expressed hope that they will “completely eliminate the terrorist forces of the [Uyghur] East Turkestan Islamic Movement” (ETIM) based in Afghanistan.

Which again goes to show just how idiotic the narrative of "China wants to destroy Islam" is...

For the Nth time the whole Xinjiang issue was a terrorism/separatist issue, not an attempt by China to suddenly clamp down on Islam, after 1,400 years of peaceful coexistence with the religion in the country (10 of China's 55 official ethnic minorities are predominantly Muslim)...

Like all countries, China doesn't tolerate violent separatist groups, like the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), and it clamped down (admittedly quite drastically) on them. Interestingly, but it's probably a mere coincidence (😏), ETIM found a relatively safe harbor in Afghanistan when the Americans were in the country and the vast majority of attacks they committed against China were during the 2007-2017 period.

Ironically the more the Talibans gained over the Americans, all the way to winning the war, the less of a problem ETIM was and now the Talibans go as far as saying that they "take security threats against China like a challenge to our own”, which is quite an extraordinary statement.
https://nitter.net/RnaudBertrand/status/1710313898350727440#m

Reminder that the ETIM was removed from the official list of terrorist groups by the Trump Trump, and kept off by the Biden admin. Per the UN, they're now mixing with and transferring weapons to ISIS-K, the ISIS offshoot now targeting Chinese development in Afghanistan.

 

Terror threat to China ‘is challenge to our own’, Afghanistan’s Taliban leadership pledges to Beijing in apparent first

    Amir Khan Muttaqi also gives ‘effective guarantee’ of Chinese nationals’ safety in the country
    He made the remarks in talks with counterpart Wang Yi on the sidelines of a regional forum in Tibet

Afghanistan’s Taliban leadership has assured Beijing that it has worked to combat terrorism and regards threats to China as seriously as a threat against its own country.
China-Afghanistan relations
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3234744/china-continues-taliban-balancing-act-after-new-ambassador-arrives-afghanistan?campaign=3234744&module=perpetual_scroll_1_RM&pgtype=article

Don't forget a Western source - the University of Maryland's Terrorism Database - records approx. 130 terror attacks in Xinjiang. Only bad faith actors like ASPI pretend terrorism was not a real problem in Xinjiang.

This has nothing to do with religion. This is a terrorist organization. It's political. The Muslim Brotherhood is also banned in many countries in the Middle East: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and so on

Sinophobes - like Russiaphobes, Homophobes, any Phobes - are not interested in facts. When Adrian Zenz invented the 'Ugyhur genocide' fantasy, he had a billion people ready to eat it up.

@RnaudBertrand
Oct 5
Like I've often said the (FAKE) "Xinjiang genocide" accusations will end up being another nail in the coffin of US and Western credibility, maybe even the final one.

Like (the World) noticed the absence of WMDs in Iraq, eventually the world will notice that the Uyghurs and their culture are still very much there. These first few articles might be the start of this.

By lying to such an extreme extent the US might have sown the seeds of a worldwide Red-pill moment in China's favor. Extremely shortsighted for them to gamble their credibility like that. After this, even their truths will be questioned.

And unlike the WMDs episode, what should happen is a reckoning where we relentlessly confront all those who participated in lie. Those people (Think-Tanks, Retired Officials & Military/Intel Operatives) Journalists and Politicians alike, should face the music so such a shameful attempt at manufacturing consent doesn't happen again.

An attempt that happened to be extremely successful!

There's zero evidence that US-licensed sales to Huawei played any meaningful role in the production of the Mate Pro 60, but cold warriors desperately want to believe that Huawei simply *couldn't* have produced a high-end phone unless treasonous US officials allowed it to happen.



@RnaudBertrand
57m
Love the conclusion of this CSIS report on US attempts to kill Chinese semiconductors progress: the US incurred all the costs but failed to actually achieve much 🤭

You'll never guess what their recommendation is after this... Conclude this is a fool's errand and change course, right? No, of course not! It's to double down: put more money into it and be more aggressive. What was Einstein's definition of insanity again? 🤔

Also, like in all such reports written by MIC-funded think-tanks, at no point do they even come close to reflecting on the morality of it all. Seeking to stop or even reverse the development of a nation populated by 1.4billion human beings in order to salvage US hegemony is just seen as perfectly normal and legitimate 🤢

Throughout the report one of the big questions is even whether Chinese companies violated US law, and how unacceptable that would be. This is Chinese companies based in China, doing business with other Chinese companies in China, and they apparently need to respect US law... Which is the infamous extra-territorialisation of US law, a hallmark of imperialism. And obviously a form of colonialism that goes against all the principles of international law. But that's the "rules-based order" for you..

Long in-depth article on Huawei and the 5G chip

In Chip Race, China Gives Huawei the Steering Wheel: Huawei’s New Smartphone and the Future of Semiconductor Export Controls

Introduction
On August 29, Huawei launched its new Mate60 Pro smartphone. Normally, smartphone launches do not attract attention in U.S. national security circles. However, this one did, and rightfully so.

The mobile application processor chip at the heart of the new Huawei phone has an integrated 5G modem.

SMIC manufactured the new chips at the advanced 7-nanometer (nm) technology node (N+2 in SMIC process naming conventions), raising questions in U.S. national security circles about whether the effectiveness of U.S. technology export controls on Huawei—and perhaps China more broadly—is coming to an end.

That was certainly the message that China wanted to send. [...]

Along with the Chinese government and its corporate partners, Huawei is now engaged in a project to build a Chinese computing ecosystem that is entirely independent of the United States. The list of projects that Huawei and its partners have underway at varying levels of maturity is extraordinary. [...]

In much the same way that one of the first major initial uses of the Chinese yuan currency for international trade transactions was avoiding U.S. sanctions, the initial customer base for Huawei’s alternative AI computing ecosystem is sanctioned and entity-listed actors in China. That may soon grow to include other countries such as Russia and Iran.

The Need for Timely U.S. Intelligence Collection and Technology Analysis on China’s Semiconductors

Perhaps the most surprising fact about the Huawei breakthrough is that so many U.S. government leaders were evidently surprised. Asked about the chip on September 6, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan stated that “I’m going to withhold comment on the particular chip in question until we get more information about precisely its character and composition.” Similarly, a group of Republican members of Congress wrote a letter to Department of Commerce leadership in which they expressed being “extremely troubled and perplexed” by what the Huawei phone suggests about the efficacy of U.S. export controls. [...]
https://www.csis.org/analysis/chip-race-china-gives-huawei-steering-wheel-huaweis-new-smartphone-and-future

[BeeKnees]

you may want to catch up on the news from poland (how sincere it is will be revealed post election), hungary, slovakia and turkey, who's always a wild card.

the british have run out of gas too, while the usofa withers.

Hungary hasnt changed, Orban is a wily character who will play hardball to restore EU funding.  Poland ar in electioneering rhetoric for another couple of weeks and slovakias largest party got 22% of the vote.   
Turkey are throughly enjoying Russias weakness, it's why Turkish backed Azerbajan felt emboldened to take Nagorno Karabakh

UK hasnt remotely run out of gas. 
Not only has it just approved a new gas field (Jackdaw), but also it's storage is at record high levels and the demand for Gas at record low and will only fall further as the energy mix changes. 
Most of last year UK was an export hub to support the rest of europe when russia cut supplies.

As for USA withering, it's just wishful thinking, as much as thinking Russia is capable of capturing Ukraine, that ship sailed long ago. 

[zenith]

we're going old school conflict. i'm not sure what set hamas off...

Israel 'ready for war' after Hamas infiltration and 5,000 rockets in 20 minutes

[SeanAU]

we're going old school conflict. i'm not sure what set hamas off...

Well the News never gets reported in the western MSM and even the alt media are blockaded from reality ....

October 5 2023:
    More than 800 Israeli settlers stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem on Thursday morning under the protection of Israeli forces.

    Rabbis, heads of settlement associations, and far-right university lecturers were among 832 people who forced their way into the religious site compound, a source in the Islamic Endowments Department in Jerusalem told The New Arab's Arabic sister site Al-Araby Al-Jadeed.

    Israeli forces imposed severe restrictions on Muslim worshippers entering Al-Aqsa and those under 60 were prevented from accessing the site.

    It comes during the Jewish religious holiday of Sukkot, which started on 29 September and ends on Friday. The holiday has seen thousands of Israeli extremists storm the Al-Aqsa compound, with almost 1,500 entering the site on Monday.

    Israeli extremists also continued on Thursday to hold provocative marches both inside Jerusalem's Old City and outside its walls, attacking Palestinians and their property.

    They also beat and spat at journalists in a market area near Al-Aqsa, where shops were forced to close for the sixth day in a row.

    The Old City is home to Al-Aqsa as well as the Western Wall and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

    The Al-Aqsa compound is the third holiest site in Islam and the most important Muslim place in Palestine.

October 7 2023:

Escalation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

    This morning, the Islamic Jihad group announced the start of the Al-Aqsa Flood operation (aka Storm), igniting another local war against Israel. They formally cited regular oppression and attempts on Al-Aqsa as reasons, where local Arab worshippers have been repressed repeatedly (in addition, there have been raids against the Islamic Jihad in Jenin over the past few weeks).

----------------

so that's why they have named the Operation The Al-Aqsa Flood, it's the key trigger on top of arrests, murders, assaults, land and property theft, no rule of law, no sovereignty, no dignity and being endlessly spat on by Orthodox Jewish Zionist NAZI IDEOLOGUES at every opportunity.

So no dignity no rights no freedom mass imprisonment on top of 90+ years of terrorism and repeated insults to their sacred sites on top of everything else = no security for Israelis. Ever.

Israel can never and will never win this fight - because they are the evil criminal terrorists who created a fraudulent nation built upon murder theft and terror.

Wait until the Palestinians become well armed with uav and kamikaze drones by the thousands and start hitting government buildings, the wall, army security towers, passing IDF trucks and tanks, their howitzers, and air-force bases and security checkpoints at will.

imo the only way left for Israelis to stop the attacks from Palestinians is to kill them all. Or leave!

STATEMENT FROM HAMAS:
We are opening a battle that will expand, escalate, and deepen, and its goal is the freedom of our people and their sanctities, and our right to be free and secure in a free and independent homeland.

If the whole world were silent, we would not remain silent about the desecration of our sanctities, the attempts to desecrate Al-Aqsa, and the attacks on Al-Aqsa.

We will do everything necessary to preserve the dignity, existence and freedom of our people.

There will be no talk even about the details of the dead and captured Israelis, and our prisoners in prisons whose freedom is at hand.

[zenith]

Clare Daly is my therapist, she puts the world in it's proper order.

The EU Is Submitting All Its Interest To The USA | The Monthly Daly - July 2023

[SeanAU]

.... why be so shocked about the obvious response to the escalating provocations?

Well because it's about how misinformed we in 'the mega wealthy west' are about everything.


JUNE 2023  Actuating an Israeli ‘Solution’ – via an al-Aqsa Emergency
[...]
However, the truly incendiary parts of the entire Budget framing were less covered outside "Israel":

To mark "Jerusalem Day", National Security Minister Ben Gvir toured the ‘Temple Mount’, Haram al-Sheriff, and the site of al-Aqsa Mosque, declaring it a demonstration of Israeli ‘ownership’. “We are in charge here. I am happy to go up to the Temple Mount, the most important place for the Jewish people”.

And, to supplement Ben Gvir’s provocative language effectively claiming ownership of al-Aqsa, the entire Israeli cabinet held its weekly meeting in the Western Wall Tunnel -- sitting together immediately below al-Aqsa Mosque.

[ well, these things do kind of get reported but everyone is brain dead so cant work out what such acts actually mean in reality .... nothing is an accident - they have a plan - and look it is working perfectly - but between Trump, Hunter and Ukraine who has any brain cells left to spare? ]

At that meeting held below the Mosque, the government approved the creation of a new body to ease the path toward legalizing about 70 illegal outpost settlements in the West Bank. Negev, Galilee and National Resilience Minister Yitzhak Wasserlauf, said he will “work to regulate the young settlements and establish the infrastructure” necessary to hook up these unauthorized communities to water and electricity”. The decision marked the first time that this government has created a department specifically designed to back settlement activity that Israeli law deems illegal.

[ damn brilliant yeah? ]

Additionally, Finance Minister Smotrich this month ordered government ministries to prepare to absorb another 500,000 settlers in the West Bank - with Smotrich promising that “budgeting for these steps will not be a problem.”

The point here is that the Budget effectively endows Settlers with much more political power that they already have.

As Zvi Barel writes:
“If today they can dictate the division of the budget, set security goals and use the military as a private defence force, once their power has doubled they will determine the content for the educational system, dictate the national narrative, empty out towns unable to cope with their lack of funding - as more worthwhile alternatives are offered instead - on the hills of the West Bank, and turn Israel inside the Green Line into their printer of money”.

Gideon Levy trenchantly lays out the longer-term implication of these events: Netanyahu, in “removing the entire Palestinian issue from the public agenda in Israel… [where] no one is interested in it anymore, other than paying it lip service - is a tremendous achievement” (at least in the eyes of the Right).

This act thus distills Israeli options down to two -- and no more: A unitary (one democratic state for the two peoples) between the River Jordan and the Sea; or, secondly a second Nakba (cleansing of Palestinians from the ‘Land of Israel’).


Here is the ‘rub’, as Gideon Levy puts it: The present situation which he calls ‘apartheid’ is but a stop-gap. “Its’ end will come”. And if the government goes on entrenching Occupation … “Not that there’s much more to entrench: the occupation is deep, consolidated, strong and irreversible. But if you can consolidate it further … this will enable an official declaration of the death of the two-state solution, decades after it died de facto”.

In killing this as a ‘Palestinian solution’, Netanyahu has left us with only two possible solutions, Levy avers:
“How will it play out: One is preferred by the extreme Right, and horrifically, perhaps by almost all Israelis – a second Nakba. If things come to a head, and Israel is faced with a choice of one democratic state for two peoples, or a mass expulsion of Palestinians in order to maintain the existence of a Jewish state - the choice will be clear for almost every Israeli Jew [i.e. they would choose Nakba]. The moment a two-state solution was taken off the table, they were left with no other choice” (emphasis added).

So how can Ben-Gvir, Yariv Levy, and  Smotrich crystalise this plan? Through al-Aqsa. The holding of the Cabinet on "Jerusalem Day", immediately below al-Aqsa in the western wall tunnel, is an obvious telltale. Both Netayahu and Ben-Gvir declared that al-Aqsa “is ours”.

The best way to consolidate the occupation into the ‘binary option’ is the consolidation of al-Aqsa as ‘theirs’. The crisis (and possible war that ensues) is the Emergency that could put the ‘binary solution choice’ starkly on the table before every Israeli.
https://english.almayadeen.net/articles/analysis/actuating-an-israeli-solution-via-an-al-aqsa-emergency

DOH! It worked!
---------------------------------------------

-- Zionist settler terrorists going absolute rabid promising to slaughter innocent Palestinians. Just as they have even doing for the last 7 decades. .... video incl
"The 2nd Nakba is coming soon! You will end up in Refugee camps!"
https://nitter.net/Partisangirl/status/1710832890685317607#m 

I mean seriously, Palestinians including Hamas aren't stupid -- that's OUR Job!

Much like the knowing lies surrounding the Minsk agreements, the two-state solution has always been a plan to buy time to ensure a One State Solution with only Zionist Nazis as Citizens of Israel.

When a man has lost all that you could lose, the all then rules go out the window. This is where the Palestinians are today and have been for years.

[SeanAU]

Mid-Year Jenin etc

https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/acaps-briefing-note-palestine-escalation-violence-jenin-12-july-2023

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/7/11/lets-talk-about-jenin

Israeli air strikes and ground operations in Jenin may constitute war crime: UN experts
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/07/israeli-air-strikes-and-ground-operations-jenin-may-constitute-war-crime-un

https://www.acaps.org/en/countries/archives/detail/palestine-escalation-of-violence-in-jenin

At least 447 Palestinian structures, including 61 that were funded through international aid, were demolished or seized by Israeli forces during the first six months of 2023. The number included homes, water and sanitation facilities, agricultural structures, and a school. Last year, 391 structures were demolished during the same period.

“Israeli demolitions have displaced 685 Palestinians this year. Three communities have also been forcibly transferred due to ongoing settler violence and demolitions,” said Ort.

Israeli authorities have also promoted more than 13,000 new settlement housing units so far this year - another record number.

Settler violence is often overlooked by Israeli forces and even encouraged by officials and ministers in the Israeli government. The attacks are rarely investigated by Israeli authorities. Sometimes they are perpetrated under the protection or with the assistance of Israeli forces.
https://www.nrc.no/news/2023/july/palestine-jenin-operation-marks-violent-half-year-for-israels-government/

It gets reported but no one in the western public cares or knows what's going on or why.

There's other "more serious" concerns --- like gee, political arguments on the ASIF -- big issues!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

OCT 4TH
October War, 1973: Much has changed; a lot hasn’t

The 1973 war in which Egyptian and Syrian forces were co-ordinated for the aim of launching a surprise attack on "Israel" -- and in which the latter was tricked by an Egyptian senior source during the ultimate run-up to war -- ended in what is deemed by some as an Israeli victory.

But at great cost to the United States.

Though the war did not entirely scuttle détente, it nevertheless brought the US closer to a nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union than at any point since the Cuban missile crisis. The war was launched essentially to force "Israel" to return the territories it had captured in the earlier 1967 Arab-Israeli war, including Sinai and the Golan, in accordance with UN Resolution 242. "Israel" rejected those terms -- and the conflict’s residue, in one form or another, lasts until today.

Egypt ultimately made peace with "Israel", but Syria and Lebanon have not, and Syria remains as the 50-year-old war’s front line -- and is so today.

As we stand back today, we observe certain shifts and other seeming constancies that are present: Iran -- albeit in a very different mode -- has stepped into the shoes once worn by Egypt, Russia is back on the scene, and Syria has been subject to a 12-year cruel war, with its economy razed to a desert, in order to break its refusal to concede the Syrian Golan Heights that are still occupied by "Israel".

The most notable strategic shifts are two-fold: the weakening of the US, both in and of itself and as a regional power, and the advent of China as a mediator, economic powerhouse and guarantor standing behind regional agreements. China’s reconciliation of Saudi Arabia with Iran changed the strategic landscape, and many things have followed in corollary: Peace talks in Yemen have made progress and President al-Assad was celebrated in the Arab League after a long absence.

China’s Syrian initiative clearly raises the possibility of it possessing a strategic equivalence to that of the Iran-Saudi Accord. President al-Assad and his family were accorded a "royal" welcome in China. It is a first step -- reviving economic life again, and the "Blaze Reception" -- that peremptorily ended Syrian isolation. But much, much more, is hinted at: Reconstruction, the Road and Belt initiative, and the eventual restoration of full sovereignty over existing Syrian territory in alliance with Moscow and Tehran.

The long-standing Israeli military strategist, Ehud Yaari, despairs that “apart from the Syrian people themselves, Israel comes out of the 12 years of civil war in Syria as the biggest loser. The survival of the Assad regime, closely allied with Iran, amounts to nothing short of an Israeli strategic failure.”

[...]

So, here we arrive at the second qualitative change (following that of the advent of China) since the October War of 1973 -- it is no more "conventional war". The latter has shifted toward Qassem Soleimani’s vision of war by attrition: No need to build conventional air dominance; rather General Soleimani advocated deploying swarm drones and smart cruise missiles in an encirclement of "Israel".

[...]

What would not be changed however, is the situation of al-Aqsa and the Palestinians. Should the so-called "Temple Mount Movement" radicals in the Netanyahu government light the fuse leading to the Israeli takeover of al-Aqsa, then all of Washington’s "normalization" will count for "zilch". Whilst Christianity may have become supine, Islam has not (entirely) become so.

https://english.almayadeen.net/articles/opinion/october-war-1973:-much-has-changed-a-lot-hasnt

Well then they lit the fuse!


16 Sep 2023
The reality is that Netanyahu is ‘hostage’ to his coalition -- and not vice versa. And the reality is also that in recent months, entire Palestinian communities between Ramallah and Jericho have been chased out (i.e. cleansed) by settler violence, paving the way for a total Israeli takeover of thousands of acres of land.

Gideon Levy has warned that ‘an unbelievable population transfer’ is underway in the West Bank.

https://english.almayadeen.net/articles/opinion/will-a-tripartite-us-saudi-israeli-deal-make-any-difference


news reports videos
https://english.almayadeen.net/coverage/operation-al-aqsa-flood

[SeanAU]

None of this matters or makes nay difference on the ground or what people already think - still it;s interesting from a historical pov looking at the past vs the present.

Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights.
UN. General Assembly (37th sess. : 1982-1983) Symbol A/RES/37/43
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/40572?ln=en

a few extracts --

Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of
the Palestinian people to self-determination, sovereignty,
independence and return to Palestine and the repeated acts
of aggression by Israel against the peoples of the region
constitute a serious threat to international peace and security,

Deeply shocked and alarmed at the deplorable conse-
quences of the Israeli invasion of Beirut on 3 August 1982,
and recalling all the resolutions of the Security Council, in
particular resolutions 520 (1982) of 17 September 1982 and
521 (1982) of 19 September 1982,

Reaffirming the importance of the universal realization of
the right of peoples to self-determination, national sover-
eignty and territorial integrity and of the speedy granting of
independence to colonial countries and peoples as impera-
tives for the full enjoyment of all human rights,

Reaffirming that "bantustanization" is incompatible with
genuine independence, national unity and sovereignty and
has the effect of perpetuating the power of the white minority
and the racist system of apartheid in South Africa, [nee ISRAEL]

Reaffirming also that the system of apartheid imposed on
the South African [nee PALESTINIAN] people constitutes an inadmissible vio-
lation of the rights of that people and a constant threat to
international security,

1. Calls upon all States to implement fully and faithfully
the resolutions of the United Nations regarding the exercise
of the right to self-determination and independence by peo-
ples under colonial and foreign domination;

2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples
for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and
liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign
occupation by all available means, including armed struggle;

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian peo-
ple, the Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign
and colonial domination to self-determination, national in-
dependence, territorial integrity, national unity and sover-
eignty without outside interference.

12. Strongly condemns the continued violations of the
human rights of the peoples still under colonial and foreign
domination and alien subjugation, the continuation of the
illegal occupation of Namibia, and South Africa's [nee ISRAEL's] attempts
to dismember its Territory, the perpetuation of the racist
minority regime in southern Africa and the denial to the
Palestinian people of their inalienable national rights;

13. Also strongly condemns the policies of those West-
ern and other countries whose political, economic, military,
nuclear, strategic. cultural and sports relations with the racist
minority regime in South Africa [nee ISRAEL] encourage that regime to
persist in its suppression of the aspirations of peoples to
self-determination and independence;

18. Strongly condemns those Governments that do not
recognize the right to self-determination and independence
of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination
and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the
Palestinian people;

The Magna Carta of 1215, clause 40 reads:
"To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice."

For when justice is denied peace will vanish. And justice delayed is justice denied and when justice is denied that's when violence enters.

When a man has lost everything he could lose all the rules go out the window.

[SeanAU]

Aaah yes the olden day memes of "savages and animals" abused by thieving murdering racist white supremacists from time immemorial with the Zionists the current holders of the World Title for Genocidal Evil:

Of course the recent events have not changed these determinations one bit. When it comes to Palestine these factual truths have been so for over 90 years already. It's merely 'topical today, that;'s all. Where the murderous perpetrators are being made out to be "the poor innocent victims" in the western media and political systems of the US Empire of Lies where Truth and Morality Goes to Die!

ON LAWS NOT ENFORCED and the enormous crimes that are denied and hidden:
Australia, America, Canada or Palestine it's the the same Killing for the Land and for the unbridled wealth and the power that provides to the murderers. Famed award winning Journalist David Marr's new book documents his family's history as professional killers of Aborigines in NSW and Queensland in the mid-1800s.
A few years ago while researching his family tree, David found a photo of his great-great-grandfather, Reg Uhr. In the picture Reg was in uniform as an officer of the Native Police. David discovered Reg had led many murderous expeditions into NSW and Queensland under instructions to clear the land of SAVAGES and ANIMALS by any means necessary.
Killing for Country is published by Black Inc
https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/conversations/david-marr-native-police-frontier-wars-colonial-australia/102882172

Early in the morning of 18 December 1838, seven men were publicly hanged at the Sydney Gaol. They were the first British subjects to be executed for massacring Aboriginal people.

The Myall Creek massacre was neither the first nor last massacre of Aboriginal people in Australia but the NSW Supreme Court trials that followed set a judicial precedent. However, attitudes towards such massacres took longer to change.

Gamilaraay elder, Uncle Lyall Munro, 2013:
    [The Myall Creek massacre Supreme court trials were] the first place white man’s justice done some good. Right across Australia, there were massacres. What makes Myall Creek real is that people were hanged, see. That was the difference.
https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/myall-creek-massacre

WOUNDED KNEE MASSACRE
On December 29, 1890, on Wounded Knee Creek in southwestern South Dakota, a tangle of events resulted in the deaths of more than 250, and possibly as many as 300, Native Americans. These people were guilty of no crime and were not engaged in combat. A substantial number were women and children. Most of the victims were members of the Miniconjou band of the Lakota Sioux who had been intercepted by military forces after they fled their reservation in South Dakota for refuge in the Badlands.

The story begins in October 1890, when Daniel F. Royer arrived at Pine Ridge Agency, home of the Oglala Lakotas, to assume responsibility as agent. His selection as agent could not have been worse: he knew nothing about Native Americans and was irrationally fearful of them, and from the time of his arrival the dispatches he sent back to Washington were peppered with warnings of an outbreak similar to the one in Minnesota in 1862 in which hundreds of settlers were killed by Santee Sioux. Royer's appointment was also ill timed. In 1890 drought replaced the bountiful rainfall of the 1880s, resulting in crop failures and economic depression. On their reservations, Native Americans were forced into dependence on the federal government for food and clothing. When Royer took over as agent, there was widespread anxiety among the Oglalas regarding the adequacy of government provisions.
http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.war.056

I. Evidence on U.S. government’s genocide against Indians

1. Government-led action
On July 4, 1776, the United States of America was founded with the Declaration of Independence, which openly stated that “He (the British King) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages”, and slandered Native Americans as “the merciless Indian Savages”.

The U.S. government and leaders treated Native Americans with a belief in white superiority and supremacy, set out to annihilate the Indians and attempted to eradicate the race through “cultural genocide”.

During the American War of Independence (1775-1783), the Second War of Independence (1812-1815) and the Civil War (1861-1865), the U.S. leaders, eager to transform its plantation economy as an adjunct to European colonialism and to expand their territories, coveted the vast Indian lands and launched thousands of attacks on Indian tribes, slaughtering Indian chiefs, soldiers and even civilians, and taking Indian lands for themselves.
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/202203/t20220302_10647120.html

SAVAGE MURDERERS
These commemorations serve to uphold the pioneer legend that honours the brave settler and the characteristic representation of the “Natives” as being savage and vengeful, and their attacks unmotivated and unpredictable.

Typically, the events are decontextualised; there is no account of what led up to an incident, what actions by the settlers prompted the attacks made by Aboriginal peoples on them.

There is also usually no account of the retaliatory attacks that followed, where settlers sought retribution through the indiscriminate brutal massacre of Aboriginal peoples that went unpunished and largely undocumented.
https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-killed-by-natives-the-stories-and-violent-reprisals-behind-some-of-australias-settler-memorials-198981

The Shameful Final Grievance of the Declaration of Independence

The revolution wasn’t only an effort to establish independence from the British—it was also a push to preserve slavery and suppress Native American resistance.

A second hard truth exposed by the 27th grievance—and its racist depiction of Native Americans as “merciless Indian savages”—has generated much less public discussion. In indicting the king for unleashing Indians on the “inhabitants of our frontiers,” the Declaration was not referring to a specific event but rather to the recent escalation of violence, which was caused by colonists invading Native lands west of the Appalachian Mountains. In response, a confederation of Senecas, Shawnees, Delawares, Ottawas, Cherokees, and other Native nations exercised a right of self-defense and attacked new colonial settlements.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/americas-twofold-original-sin/606163/

These criminal racist Zionist scumbags have no excuse - history has already condemned their evil desires, acts, lies and crimes.

May the entire Zionist Entity be burned to the ground and erased from physical existence ... but not from human memory as a dire warning for posterity.

[ivica]

Balkan Duel all around, since roman times <

[SeanAU]

Me above, 'dem's fighting words.'

However if you have time have another look the 8th Oct posts

OK .... a little change of tack - the topic fits in here as well in other places. 


Labels, we all have our favourite labels - many like "Concentrated wealth" others the "financial elites" or maybe Neoliberals, the Banksters, and even "Corporate Cabals".

Here's another: the "owners and controllers of global financialized capital" or the OCGFC?

Uncoordinated groups & individuals yet with shared class and institutional self-interests
"like any Empire the Empire of capital is
sprawling and only vaguely centralized you
have people and institutions all pursuing
maximum profit and power so they tend to
agree on the methods for achieving that
the appearance of orchestration is the
natural byproduct of shared interests no
conspiracy required this is important to
understand because we need to know that
there is no Central all-powerful organizing
committee that runs the world such a thing
is actually impossible and that's important
for us to understand too"

"....... bear in mind here that the Rich and
Powerful do not and cannot really understand
normal people and neither can intelligence
agencies, they are so estranged from normal
people that they reliably fail to predict how
people will behave or react in any given
situation, even if they also often do get
that right."
9 mins

 

I drop that in there because he mentions this OCGFC in this next short video
 
"I wanted to if I can just sort of try
to connect some strands on the
economic and geopolitical scene that I
think are connected to or related to
the Israel Palestine conflict and the
impending demise of Zionism."

The Third world-isation of the West and of the United States specifically.
That being the natural trajectory of neoliberalism (globalization) and austerity.
 16 mins
 


His name is Shahid Bolsen, and he's an American Muslim convert, with a 'colourful/dubious' background, but his commentary I think speaks for itself. He's quite well spoken. Coming on people's feeds now due to the current Gaza situation on which he spoken a lot about for a long time.

Anyway, I thought he has some interesting views, pro-Gaza anti-Zionism anti-colonialism pro-freedom / choice etc., so up to you to make your own call

[kassy]

Labels, we all have our favourite labels - many like "Concentrated wealth" others the "financial elites" or maybe Neoliberals, the Banksters, and even "Corporate Cabals".

Here's another: the "owners and controllers of global financialized capital" or the OCGFC?

They are actually two slightly different concepts.

Concentrated wealth is a very general concept.

The next four are labels for people who hold the wealth now. OCGFC is another way to name people albeit somewhat more abstract.

It also implies that the current owners are important. They are if you look at current politics but if you look at the general concept you can see that it works by it´s own logic. As soon as we settled down you could do this. Over time you get bigger kingdoms and empires to protect wealth but then a lot of those collapse early 20th century because they were in the way of progress. No one at the time knew what they were getting into but the logic is simple. First of you finance both parties and later you pick a side because technically the official claims stays anyway.

Also we live and learn and dollar colonialism came home in the Eighties. That is strategically stupid but the people getting richer do not care.

Concentrated wealth is an abstract concept that keeps working and the people change.

[SeanAU]

They are actually two slightly different concepts.

I never said they were the same.

That was not the point of sharing the video and it's content.

Had you watched either and understood ............ well, there's no point discussing it. 

[johnm33]

Over time you get bigger kingdoms and empires to protect wealth

No these are the means by which protection rackets extend their reach and assume 'respectability' thus legitamising themselves.

Concentrated wealth is an abstract concept that keeps working and the people change.

In the UK most of the land still belongs to the descendents of 'Normans' or their warrior vassal 'saxons' though the banking families have made serious inroads since William of Oranges time, and most of the national debt is owed to those banking families. I suspect in the US most of their debt is owed to long established respectable  banking families too, I've been wondering when they'll foreclose? The worlds banking families are both allies and mortal enemies whose intersts necessarily interpenetrate each other and I guess it's tough to become a 'made man' in their brotherhood.

[El Cid]

In the UK most of the land still belongs to the descendents of 'Normans' or their warrior vassal 'saxons' though the banking families have made serious inroads since William of Oranges time, and most of the national debt is owed to those banking families. I suspect in the US most of their debt is owed to long established respectable  banking families too

That 's one fine conspiracy theory. Unfortunately not really true. Eg in the US:

https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2023/05/the-federal-government-has-borrowed-trillions-but-who-owns-all-that-debt

See the charts!

about 1/3 of US debt is owned by foreigners (Japan, China, etc). About a quarter is owned by the Federal reserve but as a Central Bank's assets are at the end of the day belong to the government, in reality that debt has already been cancelled, doesn't exist: fugazi.  Then there is quite a lot owned by pension funds and mutual funds, basically the savings of the US public, of Average Joe and Jane. No Rotschilds so far but let's see what's left. Some more is owned by local governments and cca 6% of total debt is "owned" by banks. Not much, but finally, the Rotschilds!!! Alas, no. A bank basically puts its depositors' money into securities and loans: these are in reality the assets of the depositors. So no, even this is not Rotschild money. Where is it now??? Ok, you have 13% in "other domestic". This is mostly bonds held either directly buy the public or corporations (Apple, Meta, Berkshire Hathaway, you name it).

So...nice theory. Not true

[kassy]

They are actually two slightly different concepts.

I never said they were the same.

That was not the point of sharing the video and it's content.

Had you watched either and understood ............ well, there's no point discussing it.

The concentrated wealth problem is a much more abstract concept. It starts as soon as it is possible so when people settle and then it changes through the ages and by region. The rest just discusses the modern version of it.

The real problem is getting rid of it. So you need to completely rethink society which is hard when the OCGFC is going for so much control. Live via the phone! Spying is so much easier these days. And everybody needs their phone so in the future you turn it off at non compliance and then wait how long the riot lasts.

The other alternative of course is complete collapse which might be more likely. Convenience and death at the end of the same fork.

[SeanAU]

Wow, that is a very 'out there' response. Besides having nothing to do with me or my posts, it was quite unrelated to the content and the several geopolitical and society points being made in the two video comments.
But everyone has their personal 'wheel barrows' they must push no matter how disconnected from what's going on around them. I know I have mine. Quite nice wheel barrows actually.

I considered posting the transcripts but the videos are so short it seems unnecessary. No big deal.

[SeanAU]

Establishment Blames YOU For The World Wide Immigration Crisis!

Scottish political commentator Neil Oliver issued another of his signature blistering verbal assaults on the elite global interests seeking to divide everyday people and have us attacking one another rather than the rich and powerful who should be the target of our ire. This time Oliver was responding to efforts to falsely paint Irish citizens who reacted with anger to violent crimes committed by immigrants in their community as “far-right.”

Then Jimmy doubles down and gives one of his own "blistering verbal assaults" of what's really going down and how it's achieved. eg

".............. everybody wanted to talk
about Trump's Muslim ban at the airports
nobody wants to talk about Barack Obama
creating those Muslim immigrants by
bombing the shit out of them for eight
straight years cuz that's what caused
that refugee problem in the first place."

" ......... and right now Joe Biden has an
open border policy trying to get as many
illegal immigrants into this country as
possible to create chaos, to keep people
are on edge, who are already on edge on
edge and to suppress wages and create
more chaos. That's exactly what's happening,
that's exactly what Neil Oliver's talking about."

[SeanAU]

Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley has urged the UK to pay $4.9 trillion in reparations for the transatlantic slave trade, in a speech in London on Wednesday.

She added that talks over how this debt should be repaid will “be difficult and will take time.”

“We’re not expecting that the reparatory damages will be paid in a year, or two, or five because the extraction of wealth and the damages took place over centuries. But we are demanding that we be seen and that we are heard,” the prime minister said.

Citing figures from a report by the Brattle Group, which analyzed the cost of the transatlantic slave trade, she said the UK owes $24 trillion in reparations to 14 countries affected by transatlantic slavery, Spain owes $17.1 trillion, France – $9.2 trillion, and the Netherlands – $4.86 trillion.

“These numbers, if taken out of context, can appear to be staggering. But in relation to the total wealth accumulated over a period of time, the numbers are actually minuscule,” Mottley said.

A day earlier, Mottley met with UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron to discuss bilateral relations between the countries, but would not reveal details about Cameron’s position on Britain’s slavery-related debt to the media, saying only that she hopes “the foreign secretary will take his lead from his majesty” on the issue.

King Charles has acknowledged Britain’s role in the slave trade, publicly expressing his regret over the injustice and suffering that slavery inflicted, while making no reference to financial reparations. In a speech in Ghana in 2018, Charles condemned slavery, calling it an “appalling atrocity” and “profound injustice” that can never be forgotten.

In Rwanda last June, Charles said it is important to “acknowledge our past,” including slavery, which he called a “painful period.”

The British Empire traded an estimated 3.1 million Africans, of whom 2.7 million were sent to Britain’s colonies in the Caribbean, North and South America, and other places over a period of 150 years. The slave trade was abolished by Britain’s Parliament in 1807.

Since becoming the leader of the island nation in 2018, Mottley has been an influential voice on the legacy of colonialism and has demanded reparations for the damage done by the empire.

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak publicly declined to apologize or offer reparations for the slave trade in April, saying that “trying to unpick our history is not the right way forward and is not something we will focus our energies on.”

https://www.swentr.site/news/588777-barbados-demands-49-trillion-from/ 

or
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/06/barbados-pm-says-country-owed-49tn-as-she-makes-fresh-call-for-reparations

or
https://www.wionews.com/world/barbados-pm-demands-49tn-in-reparations-from-slave-owning-nations-667205

or
https://www.firstpost.com/opinion/vantage-why-its-time-for-colonisers-like-uk-to-pay-up-trillions-of-dollars-they-looted-13480862.html

[SeanAU]

Taiwan has a siesmic shift at the elections with a new Party playing at the table.

New Center-left party the TPP pulls 26.46% of Presidential vote at their first outing as a new party (in 2019). That is a massive change in the political landscape of Taiwan. The DPP ruling party Presidential vote collapses by 17% down on 2020 elections to only 40%.

They will potentially lose next election if Taiwan still exists as it is now. The DPP won the Presidential first past the post voting system. 60% Voted against their candidate. A new generation of voters are rising who seem to be rejecting the more recent two-party duopoly and some against the aging aggressive independence rhetoric within Taiwan inspired by the USA against China.
 
KMT Presidential only fell by 5% on 2020 result but this is not a healthy sign for them either. The DPP may hold on in Parliament as the govt but needs coalition support as they only gained ~50% of the vote there. Though there is potential for the KMT and TPP to form an alternative parliamentary majority as well in coming days or weeks.

It's a very fragile situation politically in Taiwan at the moment. Worth watching.

Basic info Refs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Taiwanese_presidential_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_People%27s_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ko_Wen-je

Allow me to summarise:

Taiwan's Complex Political Landscape: Historical Perspectives, Economic Realities, and Shifting Alliances

Taiwan's political dynamics have been intricately entwined with its economic ties to China for decades. The island nation, historically known for its economic prowess, has faced significant challenges in navigating its relationship with the mainland, particularly concerning the ongoing debate over independence versus reunification.

At the heart of Taiwan's economic influence in China lies a paradox that has become increasingly evident with the rise of the Taiwan People's Party (TPP) and the challenges faced by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). For years, Taiwan has been a major foreign investor in China, exemplified by companies like Foxconn, under the ownership of influential Taiwanese figures such as Terry Gou. The economic interdependence has shaped the political discourse, adding layers of complexity to the pursuit of political autonomy by the DPP.

The DPP's predicament is rooted in its inability to find a viable international trading partner or coalition to replace China's substantial role in Taiwan's economy. This challenge is exacerbated by the party's insistence on pursuing a path toward independence. The historical context of Taiwan's political landscape is marked by a shift from a multi-party system to a two-party state in 2000, instigated by Chen Shuibian's electoral reforms. This change limited the diversity of political voices, leaving Taiwan with a binary political choices.

The recent election has brought the TPP into the spotlight, securing 26% of the vote and eight seats in the legislature. A noteworthy aspect of the TPP is its composition of young members from various political backgrounds, attempting to bridge the gaps between the DPP and Kuomintang (KMT). The TPP advocates for socialized housing reforms, progressive property taxes, and a pragmatic approach to relations with China. The failed attempt to form a coalition with the KMT highlights the internal divisions within traditional political factions.

Examining the historical context, Taiwan had a more diverse political landscape until 2000, allowing for the expression of a range of political ideologies. The resurgence of a multi-party system, as hinted by the TPP, could potentially alter the political trajectory of the island. This shift is crucial in understanding the evolving sentiments of the Taiwanese people and their desire for more nuanced political representation.

Economic challenges also play a pivotal role in shaping political perspectives in Taiwan. It's critical to understand the deteriorating economic situation for the average worker, a consequence of rapid increases in economic inequalities largely driven by the propertied class's rentierism. This economic desperation has led some to consider relocating to China for opportunities, adding a layer of complexity to the political landscape.

While the general attitudes in Taiwan are challenging to gauge due to the reluctance of average Taiwanese to openly express their political opinions, the economic downturn may prompt individuals to reassess their views on China. Many speculate that events like Russia's actions in Ukraine could influence Taiwanese youth to reconsider their perceptions of China and the United States entirely.

Moreover, Taiwan observers must explore the historical context of the Kuomintang (KMT) and its clear stance in favor of reunification. The KMT represents an ethnic divide with China including the old-moneyed elites of Taiwan and views reunification as a key aspect of its platform. On the other hand, the DPP opposes reunification, citing ethnic chauvinism and a propensity to accept Cold War tropes. We suggest the youth's exposure to Western propaganda in the past 25 years, without countervailing forces introduced by the DPP, has influenced their perspectives.

We conclude by highlighting the complexity of Taiwan's political landscape, marked by historical nuances, economic challenges, and shifting alliances. The emergence of the TPP adds a new dimension, potentially signaling a return to a more diverse political landscape. As Taiwan grapples with its relationship with China, the evolving political dynamics will continue to shape the island nation's future.

SA

[SeanAU]

The view from a Taiwanese citizen:

In essence, the Taiwan problem is basically a Chinese internal affair (meaning among Chinese themselves) as a result from the civil war between CPC and KMT since 1945.

If one wants to have a CLEAR understanding about Taiwan, one has to get a grasp of its historical context in addition to Taiwan politics nowadays.

The historical context includes:
1. I believe there is NO dispute about who owned the sovereignty of Taiwan before Sino-Japanese War in 1894-95. It is unquestionably Qing (Dynasty).
2. How and when Taiwan got separated from China- as a result from Sino-Japanese War in 1894-95.
3. The 50-years of Japan occupation/colonization (1895-1945).
4. How and when Taiwan returned to China- as a result of Japanese unconditional surrender to the Allies during World War II, based on Cairo Declaration (1943) and Potsdam Declaration (1945).

The history of Taiwan presidency since ROC took back Taiwan from Japan:
1. Chiang KS (KMT, 1945-1975)
2. Yen Chai-kan (KMT, 1975-1978) (Chiang’s VP and the successor of the presidency at Chiang death. My impression is that Yen might be a care-taker and it's said the real power is in Chiang KS's son Chiang Ching-kuo.)
3. Chiang Ching-kuo (KMT, 1978-1988)
4. Lee Teng-hui (KMT, 1988-2000, Chiang CK’s VP and the successor of the presidency at his death in 1988)
5. Chen Shui-bian (DPP, 2000-2008)
6. Ma Ying-jeou (KMT, 2008-2016)
7. Tsai Ing-wen (DPP, 2016-2024)
8. Lai Ching-te (DPP, 2024-?)

KMT is truly for reunification only during the two-Chiang period. Since Lee’s reign, he gradually transformed KMT to a party that claims to keep the status-quo (, which is NOT reunification). Tasi Ing-wen was actually the chair of the government agency Mainland Affair Council under Lee’s presidency. She was a main contributor to Lee’s claim of Two-States Theory (Special State-To-State Relationship) in 1999. After Lee and as the effect of changes in Taiwan curriculum in the grade schools, few KMT politicians who seek public offices dare to publicly favor reunification in elections. If someone still asserts that KMT favors reunification with China today, a few possibilities:
(a) That person still lives in the two-Chiang period mentally about KMT
(b) That person is either lying or misleading

One can easily verify this by checking KMT presidential candidate Hou’s stands toward China in this election. I bet he said nothing much about favoring reunification in fear of losing votes that way. In the last a few days before the vote, Hou’s campaign kept some distance from the former president Ma because Ma publicly supports the 1992-concensus with China. Today, even 1992-consesus is a taboo in Taiwan politics- DPP would claim there is no such thing and KMT would skip mentioning it.

As for Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), its leader Ke Wen-che publicly claimed that he’s a deep-green during his 2024 presidential campaign (source in Chinese). Note that DPP’s representative color is green. KMT’s is blue and TPP is white. IMHO, Ke is simply an opportunist.

As I noted before, Taiwan would be in big trade deficit for years if it doesn’t have HUGE trade surplus with China. The numbers can be easily looked up and that may be why it does not get disputed. Those who said that Taiwan helped China to develop and China needs Taiwan more than the other way around. IMO, that's partially true before but no longer now. At that time, China needed capital and know-how and Taiwan could offer that in the labor-intensive industries like textile after Taiwan experienced a take-off in economic development since 1980s. Around that time, China offered very cheap labor and a lot of incentives instead of "regulations" in environment or others. At the same period, Taiwan started to pay attention to environmental matters. So a lot of Taiwan businesses moved to China. It is basically mutual-beneficial- China got the capital and know-how and Taiwan (businesses) got the PROFITS.

One has to look for the facts about what actually happened and what the known ramifications of those events in Taiwan. Then comb through those to come to an objective conclusion. However, this is not possible for most people to take such efforts for every topic/subject. In the blog sphere, people basically rely on the good intention of other people to share information/expertise, anecdotes, and/or opinions. But this is really tricky and there is ample room for misleading and cognitive warfare.

[SeanAU]

A summary of another Taiwanese perspective

Taiwan's Political Landscape: The Quest for Independence, Historical Complexities, and Reunification Dilemmas

The political spectrum in Taiwan, represented by the Kuomintang (KMT), Taiwan People's Party (TPP), and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), reflects varying degrees of support for Taiwanese independence. Each party articulates its intent differently, influencing the ongoing debate over whether to maintain the status quo or actively pursue reunification with China.

The historical context of Taiwan's political intricacies can be traced back to Mao Zedong's deliberate decision to leave Kinmen, a region closer to Fujian than Taiwan, under KMT control as a reminder of the unresolved Chinese Civil War. The island was regularly shelled by the mainland until 1979 when the United States recognized Taiwan as part of China. This historical background emphasizes the deep-rooted connections across the strait and the symbolic significance of Kinmen.

The introduction of Western-style liberalization in Taiwan, particularly during the DPP's rise to power, initiated educational reforms that aimed to cultivate a sense of separation from the mainland. Even when the KMT, led by Ma Ying-jeou, returned to power, it did not reverse the pro-independence policies set by the DPP. This contributed to a complex narrative where the Taiwanese youth grew up with conflicting ideas about their connection to Chinese civilization.

The DPP, when in power, stopped short of formally declaring independence but employed salami-slicing tactics to create the perception of an independent Taiwan. This included altering the design of the ROC passport to emphasize "Taiwan" over "Republic of China" and manipulating the language status of Chinese and English. The essay highlights instances where the DPP used fear tactics, such as translating a mainland satellite launch to "missile" in English to sway votes.

The TPP, positioned between the DPP and KMT, acts as a spoiler party and advocates for policies that straddle the line between independence and reunification. The author dismisses its significance as it falls within the spectrum of pro-independence parties.

Chinese analysts anticipate shifts in reunification strategies with a DPP victory, emphasizing the need to gain control without fostering resentment. The potential rollback of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) is highlighted as a strategy to rectify Taiwanese misconceptions about economic superiority over the mainland. The essay proposes that the return of Taiwan to its natural state, isolated and impoverished, could be a strategic move to pave the way for reunification.

The essay explores the uncertain dilemma of using force for reunification, comparing one country, one system with the peaceful one country, two systems approach. The potential economic ramifications, including US-led condemnation and sanctions, are acknowledged. The author discusses the benefits of a hands-off strategy, drawing parallels with the situation in Hong Kong, where the absence of PLA involvement allowed the local police to gain sympathy as the chaos caused by rioters unfolded.

In conclusion, "Taiwan's Political Landscape" delves into the multifaceted dynamics of the island's political entities, their historical roots, and the complex narratives surrounding the quest for independence and potential reunification with China.

:

Of course, most Americans cannot wait for the shock and awe missile attacks to begin and US troops marching on Beijing in a victory parade.

[Alexander55]

There is not a single party that wants to unite with China. The KMT wants good economic relations. But not political relations. Even they don't want to be under control of the communists.

[The Walrus]

A summary of another Taiwanese perspective

Taiwan's Political Landscape: The Quest for Independence, Historical Complexities, and Reunification Dilemmas

The political spectrum in Taiwan, represented by the Kuomintang (KMT), Taiwan People's Party (TPP), and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), reflects varying degrees of support for Taiwanese independence. Each party articulates its intent differently, influencing the ongoing debate over whether to maintain the status quo or actively pursue reunification with China.

The historical context of Taiwan's political intricacies can be traced back to Mao Zedong's deliberate decision to leave Kinmen, a region closer to Fujian than Taiwan, under KMT control as a reminder of the unresolved Chinese Civil War. The island was regularly shelled by the mainland until 1979 when the United States recognized Taiwan as part of China. This historical background emphasizes the deep-rooted connections across the strait and the symbolic significance of Kinmen.

The introduction of Western-style liberalization in Taiwan, particularly during the DPP's rise to power, initiated educational reforms that aimed to cultivate a sense of separation from the mainland. Even when the KMT, led by Ma Ying-jeou, returned to power, it did not reverse the pro-independence policies set by the DPP. This contributed to a complex narrative where the Taiwanese youth grew up with conflicting ideas about their connection to Chinese civilization.

The DPP, when in power, stopped short of formally declaring independence but employed salami-slicing tactics to create the perception of an independent Taiwan. This included altering the design of the ROC passport to emphasize "Taiwan" over "Republic of China" and manipulating the language status of Chinese and English. The essay highlights instances where the DPP used fear tactics, such as translating a mainland satellite launch to "missile" in English to sway votes.

The TPP, positioned between the DPP and KMT, acts as a spoiler party and advocates for policies that straddle the line between independence and reunification. The author dismisses its significance as it falls within the spectrum of pro-independence parties.

Chinese analysts anticipate shifts in reunification strategies with a DPP victory, emphasizing the need to gain control without fostering resentment. The potential rollback of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) is highlighted as a strategy to rectify Taiwanese misconceptions about economic superiority over the mainland. The essay proposes that the return of Taiwan to its natural state, isolated and impoverished, could be a strategic move to pave the way for reunification.

The essay explores the uncertain dilemma of using force for reunification, comparing one country, one system with the peaceful one country, two systems approach. The potential economic ramifications, including US-led condemnation and sanctions, are acknowledged. The author discusses the benefits of a hands-off strategy, drawing parallels with the situation in Hong Kong, where the absence of PLA involvement allowed the local police to gain sympathy as the chaos caused by rioters unfolded.

In conclusion, "Taiwan's Political Landscape" delves into the multifaceted dynamics of the island's political entities, their historical roots, and the complex narratives surrounding the quest for independence and potential reunification with China.

:

Of course, most Americans cannot wait for the shock and awe missile attacks to begin and US troops marching on Beijing in a victory parade.

Americans where?  Certainly not in the U.S.

[SeanAU]

[SeanAU]

This only a few days after Putin opens his most anticipated interview ever, and most watched interview ever, where he gives a 35 minutes history lecture to the world...... that western US politicians label as pseudo-history. (US Politicians that believe in the fake LDS Mormon mythologies and fantasy fictions based on lies transposed into a fake bible by it's psychotic mythomanic founder) Go figure.

RT 12 Feb, 2024
Western diplomacy ‘primitive’ – Moscow
Russians have had to dumb down their speeches at the UN so other countries can understand them, deputy representative Dmitry Polyansky has said

Russian diplomats perceive their Western counterparts' approach to international affairs to be “quite primitive,” Moscow’s deputy permanent representative to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, has said. Moscow's representatives are not certain what caused this, but have simplified their messaging in response, he added.

Polyansky made remarks about the quality of the Western diplomatic corps in an interview with RIA Novosti published on Monday, based on his personal experience at the UN. He expressed concern about Anglophone speakers at the forum selectively ignoring the context of particular situations for their own benefit.

”They pick an arbitrary point in time and claim nothing happened before it. They try to blame a nation for its actions regardless of prior events or the general context,” he explained.
West ‘spares no effort’ to undermine Moscow’s dialogue with New Delhi – Russian envoy

The diplomat cited the Ukraine conflict as an example. The US and its allies have been describing Moscow’s military action against Kiev as “unprovoked” and supposedly motivated by “imperial ambitions,” and have pressured other nations to frame it in the same way. As they learn more about the conflict, however, those parties realize how much the general context and Western actions since Ukraine gained its independence matter, he added.

”This trick does not always work, but it is a trend. I don’t know if it’s some deeper trend or just something typical for some people coming from [Western] schools of diplomacy,” Polyansky said. “Having a dialogue with them is challenging because they show certain superficiality, tunnel vision, and unwillingness to seek the core causes of conflicts. No solutions can be found without [such analysis].”

The office of the Russian envoy to the UN has been simplifying its addresses due to uncertainty over how their words are understood, he said. Russian diplomats used to quote foreign and Russian classics in speeches, but are no longer using this rhetorical device as much, Polyansky said.

”Times dictate things. Our partners may now be less well-read individuals, so occasionally we want to speak in plainer terms to make sure our signal comes through,” he explained.

--------------------------

[ comment - I think Larry Johnson is generally useless, and thoroughly unreliable. I never look up his stuff even if recommended. Ritter I quite like personally, and I can often get some high end quality insights from him. But he's no academically trained journalist or historian either. So he has his limits imo, so beware, but overall his hearts in the right place I believe. He's no fraud which I suspect Larry is, an ex-cia dude. Then there is Miershiemer, and also Tucker Carlson. All four are died in the wool sworn biased US patriots - no matter what. As Americans they all have distinct limitations by that very fact of being American. imo only people like Chomsky do not. That being said, enjoy Doctorow. ]

Follow up to Carlson’s interview with Vladimir Putin
gilbertdoctorow   Uncategorized   February 10, 2024   10 Minutes   
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/02/10/9441/

I watched with interest evaluations of the Putin interview last night aired on Russian state television’s Vesti program, read assorted articles on this subject published in yesterday’s Johnson’s Russia List and the comments which readers posted on my website or sent to me directly via email.

I think the issues are worthy of further discussion and that is the objective of today’s essay.

It should come as no surprise that yesterday’s Vesti only sang the praises of the interview and of Putin’s performance in particular. In that context they put on air the very complimentary remarks of two Americans from the intelligence community who in recent months have become the darlings of Russian television:  Scott Ritter and Larry Johnson. I will only say that both showed poor judgment in giving unqualified thumbs-up.  Why?  I hope that will become clear from what I have to say today to amplify and dig down deeper into the critique that I sketched yesterday.

By its nature, a website like mine attracts a goodly number of Russia-cheerleaders who don’t want to hear any sour notes. Many of these folks know little or nothing about Russia and rely on guesswork that ignores highly relevant facts available to Russia speakers.

The question of who was the target audience for the Tucker Carlson-Putin interview is critical. Was it the United States? the Collective West? the Russian domestic public? China, India and the Global South?   

As I said yesterday, the Kremlin elites hoped that the interview would get around U.S. censorship and bring the Russian perspective directly to the ears and eyes of the broad American public, which also, of course, includes American elites. It is highly likely that Tucker Carlson was on the same wave length, since Americans are the folks he hopes to entice to become paying subscribers to his Network and also because he likely believes he can influence the course of history by waking up his compatriots. Each time Carlson brings in 40 million viewers he puts to shame the likes of CNN whose viewer numbers are ten times less, if I may be generous to them.

With this objective in mind, I continue to believe that Putin’s decision to deliver a 30 minute opening history lecture by way of answer to Carlson’s question of why Russia invaded was a bad decision. It was bad for several reasons. One is that it was boring for the general public.  Yes, the interview attracted 140 million ‘hits’ on Carlson’s website, but we are not told how long those viewers stayed tuned. Secondly, Putin is not a professional historian and anything he said would be pulled to pieces by academics in the States, not just by the usual journalistic commentators.  Thirdly, the history going back to the 9th century had nothing to do with the decision to invade Ukraine, which was prompted and justified internally in the Kremlin by reasons of Realpolitik, not by what is called Romantic Nationalism.

As I have said in the past, Realpolitik does not go down well with the general public in Russia as in many other countries whereas Romantic Nationalism does. Mothers don’t willingly send their sons to die for Realpolitik. Hence, the story of how Russians and Ukrainians are just brothers and similar platitudes in many of Putin’s speeches to his domestic audience. But if you have any marketing sense, and I tell you frankly that the people advising Putin seem at times to have zero marketing sense, then you prepare your speech around who is the intended audience, in this case the USA.

Putin’s explanation of why he chose to invade should have started with the year 2008, when the U.S. insisted that NATO offer membership to Ukraine. After all, the trigger for the war in February 2022 was the refusal of the United States to negotiate on Russia’s demand that Ukraine remain neutral and that NATO pull back to its 1996 borders. Note that after one hour of the interview Purin himself says this, but I believe it is too late and many who came to Tucker’s platform will not have stayed with it long enough to hear this.

In the same vein, Putin never answered Tucker Carlson’s reasonable question as to why, knowing as he did that modern Ukraine is an ‘artificial state’ concocted by Lenin and his associates in 1922 to satisfy their own needs to consolidate power throughout what had been the Russian Empire, knowing as he did that the Russian speakers in the Donbas were being persecuted before 2014 and were being bombed and shelled after 2014, why did he wait so long to move against the regime in Kiev.  Fair question, I might add, as I poke back at some readers who insisted that Carlson is just an ignorant clown.

The answer is available and well known among Russia’s foreign policy professionals:  Putin could not dare act until Russia’s armed forces were sufficiently modernized and strengthened, until the Russian economy was made similarly robust to survive any threats coming from the West should Russia forcefully push for regime change in Kiev. That moment arrived in 2018 when Putin announced to the world the serial production of strategic arms including hypersonic missiles that put Russia years ahead of the USA and presented a window of opportunity to act. Meanwhile conventional weapons of superior quality were being delivered to the armed forces and the economy was being readied for the most severe sanctions, beginning with the ‘import substitution’ programs launched in 2014. I do not see why setting out these real motivations on air to the American public was not done.

A couple of readers noted that Tucker introduced his Sinophobe thinking into the interview with Putin, asking pointedly whether Russians are happy to be rushing into the arms of China, whether they understand that Xi is using BRICS to dominate its partners just as Washington has been doing with its allies. Putin responded in line with what he has been saying at many forums, namely that Russia and China have an exceptionally strong cooperation in many spheres that is mutually beneficial. However, he added something that I have rarely heard him say: “Russia and China have thousands of kilometers of common borders. You don’t choose your neighbors, just as you don’t choose your relatives.”  Here is precisely the Realpolitik mentality that I have alluded to above.  The game is not about kissy-kissy. It is about the necessities of life and playing with the hand you are dealt.

If I may expand on the China issue, I believe Russia had no particular interest in how many Chinese or Indians tuned in to watch the interview. The Chinese as a people may or may not have particularly warm feelings for Russians.  I can assure you that the man in the street Russian has mixed feelings about China, of which the most evident are fear and envy. The Chinese loggers who rape the forests of Eastern Siberia are denounced in Russian media, as are the many Chinese farmer settlers in the Far East who find Russian wives and move in permanently, changing the fragile demography.  But none of this can or should influence policy in Moscow, which is focused on the big picture of Russian interests.

China is without question one of the most supportive countries in the world in Russia’s hour of need.  And Xi’s actions are similarly based on realism. As the hero of The Queen of Spades Hermann sings in his last aria, Сегодня ты, завтра я! – Today it is you, tomorrow it will be me!


------------------

 Things are not getting better. Karmala says she's ready to be President. But is the world ready for that? 

[SeanAU]

The whole issue of Trump’s refusal to come to the aid of NATO members who do not contribute fully to the Alliance is a great deal more substantive and thought through than what you hear and read in mainstream media. Like  him or not, Trump is no fool and dismantlement of NATO entails a wholly different concept of U.S. defense than what our foreign policy establishment promotes, for its own benefit and to the detriment of the nation.

European NATO Members Know 'Russia Threat' Rhetoric is a Lie - Expert

In his speech at a rally in South Carolina, Donald Trump appeared to double down on his previous insistence that all NATO members should follow the bloc’s guidelines and spend at least two percent of their respective gross domestic products on defense.

According to Rasmussen, Trump is merely “sending a message” about him being concerned that certain NATO members are not paying their dues in full.

“That said, NATO is essentially just an extension of the United States military and foreign policy. So in a way, being part of NATO keeps [the US] in Europe and influential within all of the European Union as well as the UK,” he noted. “So from a global strategic perspective, being able to influence policy in Europe is an important thing for us to stay there.”

NATO membership essentially provides the United States with a way to involve itself in Europe, “not just from the defense perspective, but also from their policies perspective, which I think is much more critical to us,” as Rasmussen put it.

“Sometimes we've dragged countries into conflicts that probably was not in their interest to be dragged into. Had NATO not been in existence, would Yugoslavia have been dismantled? Would the Balkans be balkanized? Would we have leveled Iraq and Libya? Would the Middle East have really gone to the extent that it has?” he mused. “That's a question, you need to look at the human costs of NATO's existence.”

Rasmussen also suggested that by not paying their share of the dues in full, NATO’s European members signal that they do not really believe there is a military threat they need to be protected from by the bloc, which basically was the raison d’etre for NATO’s existence during the Cold War.
“The politicians will have the rhetoric as far as Russia boogeyman. But they know that Russia is not going to attack them. And security is fine unless they attack Russia,” Rasmussen remarked.

“President Putin pointed out recently in his interview with Tucker Carlson, no, it would be insane to attack a NATO country unless they attack them. That's another story. So most countries realize that their security really is not threatened, no matter what they're telling their public, no matter what the politicians are saying.”

"One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, 'Well, sir, if we don't pay, and we're attacked by Russia, will you protect us?' I said, 'You didn't pay, you're delinquent?'" Trump said as he recalled an exchange that allegedly took place at some NATO meeting. "No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want."

Trump’s statement, however, does not mean that the United States would not honor its obligations under NATO’s charter, argued Earl Rasmussen, retired lieutenant colonel of the US Army and an international consultant.

“In my view, it's time to move past NATO,” he postulated, arguing that the bloc’s expansion led to “increased tensions with Russia resulting in a conflict in Ukraine,” not to mention NATO’s role in the “leveling of Libya” and the destruction of Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan.

“We're now pushing to extend it into Asia as well, opening up a NATO office in Japan. This is just going to increase tensions with China. It really has become more destructive to the world and global stability. So we need to really have some deep self-examination,” Rasmussen added.
On the other hand, international relations and Russian affairs analyst Gilbert Doctorow said he thinks Trump was serious about leaving NATO members to fend for themselves if they don't pay their dues.

“He was preparing the way for the United States to step back from its Article 5 obligations and eventually for leaving NATO,” he said.

As Doctorow explained, NATO’s European members for a long time saw no need to ramp up their defensive capabilities due to understanding that “their own collective military capabilities were incomplete and inadequate without the full and active participation of the USA in their defense.”
He also remarked that being a part of NATO means that his country, Belgium, “has a big bulls-eye painted on it” due to the fact that the NATO headquarters in Brussels would quickly become a target if a “European war with Russia” were to break out.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20240212/european-nato-members-know-russia-threat-rhetoric-is-a-lie---expert-1116744370.html

[morganism]

Democracy Index: conflict and polarisation drive a new low for global democracy

EIU’s Democracy Index, launched today, sheds light on trends in democracy globally in 2023, as war and conflict spread across the globe, reinforcing existing negative trends in many countries. The annual index, which provides a snapshot of the state of global democracy, registered a decline in its total score from 5.29 in 2022 to 5.23. The increasing incidence of violent conflict has badly dented the global democracy score.

According to EIU’s measure of democracy, almost half of the world’s population live in a democracy of some sort (45.4%), but only 7.8% reside in a “full democracy” (scores above 8.00). Substantially more than one-third of the world’s population live under authoritarian rule (39.4%). The good news is that the number of democracies increased by two in 2023, with Paraguay and Papua New Guinea being upgraded from “hybrid regimes” to “flawed democracies”. Greece became a “full democracy”, but Chile was reclassified as a “flawed democracy”. Pakistan was downgraded to an “authoritarian regime”, while Angola was upgraded to a “hybrid regime”.

The decline in the overall index score was driven by reversals in every region of the world except for western Europe, whose average index score improved by the smallest margin possible (0.01 points). The biggest regressions occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East and North Africa. Countries in the Sahel and West Africa were also among the worst performers in the 2023 index, as coups and conflicts spread across the region. Adverse developments in Canada drove a decline in North America’s score to 8.27, below that of western Europe (8.37), marking the first time that North America has not placed as the world’s highest-scoring region since the Democracy Index launched in 2006.

https://www.eiu.com/n/democracy-index-conflict-and-polarisation-drive-a-new-low-for-global-democracy/

[Rodius]

Not sure where to put this so... here it is.

Eygpt has ditched using USD

https://watcher.guru/news/brics-egypt-officially-ditches-us-dollar-for-trade

[El Cid]

Sounds ominous. However, the only question is what currency their trading parners will accept? Do you think they will take Egyptian pounds for their oil and grains and machinery? I strongly doubt that. So in actual reality they will still pay with USD , EUR (and maybe, a big maybe CNY) for their imports. Nothing to see here. Words without acts

[Rodius]

Sounds ominous. However, the only question is what currency their trading parners will accept? Do you think they will take Egyptian pounds for their oil and grains and machinery? I strongly doubt that. So in actual reality they will still pay with USD , EUR (and maybe, a big maybe CNY) for their imports. Nothing to see here. Words without acts

It isn't just words.

I agree with you on the change of currency to EUR etc, but it is the removal of USD from the overall system that is of interest.

It is a small act that gets the ball rolling down the hill... hense I view it as a point of interest worth watching as other countries follow suit.