Programmbeschwerde beim Deutschlandradio: bezüglich „NATO: Ungewöhnlich viele russische Luftmanöver" vom 30.10.2014

Erfolgreiche  Programmbeschwerde wegen des Inhalts der 8-Uhr-Nachrichten am 30.10.2014 zum Thema „NATO: Ungewöhnlich viele russische Luftmanöver” Beim Intendanten, Herrn Dr. Willi Steul, des „Deutschlandradio“

Sehr geehrter Herr Intendant Dr. Steul,
wegen der „Berichterstattung“ des Journalisten Rolf Clement erheben wir Programm- beschwerde gem. § 15 des "STAATSVERTRAG über die Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts "Deutschlandradio" da die Berichterstattung deutlich gegen die Be- stimmungen der §§ 6 und 7 des vorgenannten Vertrages verstoßen, weil Herr Clement in dieser Sendung

• keinen objektiven Überblick über das berichtete Geschehen gegeben hat und nur einseitig berichtet wird,
  
• der Inhalt des zur Veröffentlichung bestimmten Berichts keiner sorgfältigen Prüfung unterzogen wurde,
  
• Nachrichten und Kommentare nicht getrennt wurden und
  
• Kommentare nicht als persönliche Stellungnahmen gekennzeichnet sind.
  Herr Clement behauptete: „28 russische Kampfflugzeuge haben gestern und vorges- tern den Luftraum europäischer Staaten verletzt. Eine solche umfangreiche Verlet- zung sprengt alles, was die NATO bisher erlebt hat.“
  Die Aussage der Verletzung des „Luftraum europäischer Staaten“ ist irreführend, da in der Sendung vorher behauptet wurde, dass die NATO betonte, der Luftraum des Verteidigungsbündnisses sei nicht verletzt worden.
  Herr Clement behauptete weiter:

„Der spektakulärste Fall war der Flug von acht Kampfflugzeugen der Russen gestern Nachmittag über der Nordsee. Sie wurden von vier Tankflugzeugen begleitet, eindeutiges Indiz dafür, dass es kein Versehen, sondern geplante Absicht war“ und
„Die Reise von zwei Flugzeugen ging bis in den Luftraum westlich von Portugal. Die Flugzeuge drehten dann über eine Route westlich von Großbritannien nach Russland zurück ab. Norwegische und britische Abfangjäger haben sie begleitet und letztlich wieder nach Russland abgedrängt.“

Auch Herr Clement sollte wissen, dass der internationale Luftraum allen Saaten offen steht. Wenn die Flugzeuge der NATO im internationalen Luftraum Russische Flugzeuge abgedrängt haben, haben sie gegen Internationales Recht verstoßen. Das hätte Herr Clement wissen und auch berichten müssen.

14.11.2014

Herr Clement musste bei seiner Aussage „ebenfalls gestern flogen sieben russische Kampfflugzeuge in den Luftraum der baltischen Staaten. Dort hatten gerade portugiesische Abfangjäger der NATO Dienst und haben sie entsprechend begleitet“, wissen, dass es den Luftraum der baltischen Staaten als Sammelbegriff nicht gibt, sondern nur die nationalen Lufträume Litauens, Lettlands bzw. Estlands und dass diese Staaten keinen Protest wegen einer Luftraumverletzung  erhoben haben. Auch diese Tatsache gehört zu einer objektiven Berichterstattung.

Die weiteren Behauptungen

• • •

„über dem Schwarzen Meer wurden vier russische Kampfflugzeuge registriert“,
vorgestern waren sieben russische Kampfflugzeuge über der Baltischen See aufgetaucht“ und „seit Monaten stellt die NATO fest, dass immer wieder russische Kampfflugzeuge den nordeuropäischen Luftraum verletzen.“ sollen bei den Hörern Angst vor den Russen erzeugen.

Bei der „Baltischen See“, handelt es sich um einen Teil der Ostsee, einem Weltmeer mit größtenteils internationalem nicht baltischem Luftraum. Nur nationalen Luftraum kann jemand verletzen. Der nordeuropäische Luftraum ist in nationale Lufträume der nordeuropäischen Staaten unterteilt. Russlands Nordgrenze bis zum Ural ist ebenfalls nordeuropäisch.

Dass die russischen Flugzeuge keinen Kontakt zur Flugkontrolle der westeuropäischen Staaten aufnehmen ist ständige Übung, da die Luftwaffen der meisten Länder eigene militärische Fluglotsen haben, die sicherstellen, dass es am Himmel nicht zu gefährlichen Begegnungen mit zivilen Maschinen kommt. 

Wenn die NATO behauptet, dass die russischen Flugzeuge eine Gefahr für den zivilen Luftverkehr darstellen, so gehören diese Aussagen u. E. zur gefährlichen Kriegshetze gegen die Russische Föderation.

Als gefährliche Hetze gegen die Russiche Föderation betrachten wir die Behauptung, „dass man sich das nicht mehr lange gefallen lassen wird. Es ist eine eindeutige Belastung des Verhältnisses zwischen der NATO und Russland und eine Eskalation der gegenwärtigen Sicherheitslage in Europa.“

Herr Clement betreibt damit die verbale Eskalation der Sicherheitslage. Seiner Betrachtung der Situation ist zu entnehmen, dass er offenbar die Zeit gekommen sieht, dass die NATO russische Flugzeuge im internationalen Luftraum abschießt und eine Flugverbotszone unmittelbar an der russischen Grenze errichtet, bewacht von der US-Air-Force und ihren „Verbündeten“.

Gemäß § 21 der Satzung und Ziff. 1 der Beschwerdeordnung bitten wir Sie, unsere Programmbeschwerde innerhalb einer Frist von 4 Wochen zu bescheiden.

Im Falle der Ablehnung, bitten wir Sie, die Beschwerde unverzüglich an den Hörfunkrat zur Bearbeitung weiterzuleiten.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen Gert Julius, Präsident

Schreiben des Intendanten des Deutschlandradio auf unsere vorstehende Programmbeschwerde vom 2. November 2014

Sehr geehrter Herr Julius,

vielen Dank für Ihr kritisches Schreiben.
Als Intendant von Deutschlandradio gehört es zu meinen wichtigsten Aufgaben, die journalistische Qualität unserer drei Programme - Journalismus auf allerhöchstem Niveau - zu garantieren.
Ich weiß, dass die Kolleginnen und Kollegen sich diesem Ziel ebenfalls verpflichtet fühlen und ihr Möglichstes dafür tun, es auch zu erreichen.

In dem von Ihnen - zu Recht - kritisierten Bericht vom 30. Oktober 2014 in den „In- formationen am Morgen" im Deutschlandfunk ist uns dies nicht gelungen. Selbstver- ständlich habe ich unverzüglich um Aufklärung gebeten.

Seien Sie versichert, dass es den Kollegen Rolf Clement am meisten schmerzt, dass er sich im vorliegenden Fall wahrlich nicht korrekt ausgedrückt hat. Was übrigens unmittelbar nach den Sendungen bereits intern auch aufgegriffen wurde. Die Formulierung, es habe sich um „Luftraumverletzungen" gehandelt, war falsch. Dafür entschuldige auch ich mich.
Herr Clement selbst hat bereits die Initiative ergriffen und anderen Hörerinnen und Hörern, welche ebenfalls geschrieben hatten, sein Bedauern darüber zum Ausdruck gebracht.
Rolf Clement hat selbstverständlich nicht bewusst wider besseres Wissen gehandelt Herr Clement ist ein versierter, profunder und sorgfältig recherchierender Kollege. dem diese Fehlleistung allerdings niemals hätte unterlaufen dürfen.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Dr. Willi Steul
In Kopie an:
Herrn Frank Schildt, Vorsitzender des Hörfunkrates
Frau Doris Krönig, Vorsitzende des Programmausschusses

Anmerkung der BüSGM-Redaktion
Offensichtlich hat unsere Programmbeschwerde den Intendanten zu einer punktuellen Entschuldigung veranlasst. Dass der Journalist Rolf Clement nicht wider besse- res Wissen gehandelt hat, kann man glauben oder nicht. Seine Schmerzen über seine „nicht korrekte Ausdrucksweise“ werden sich in Grenzen halten. Uns interessiert, in welchem Auftrag Herr Clement in der betreffenden Sendung die Hetze gegen die Russische Föderation betrieben hat.
Leider wird in Fernsehund Rundfunksendungen aus allen Rohren gegen Russland gefeuert, so dass wir nur einzelne Ausschreitungen verfolgen können.

Herausgeber: Bündnis für Soziale Gerechtigkeit und Menschenwürde e.V. Domnauer Str. 14, 12105 Berlin, Tel. 030-75652209, Vorstand: Peter Dietrich. Gert Julius (V.i.S.d.P) Lothar Nätebusch, Bernd Cachandt, Email: buesgm@online.de, Website: www.okv-ev.de Mitglied im Ostdeutschen Kuratorium von Verbänden und
im Antifaschistischen Komitee gegen Krieg und SozialraubSpendenkonto BüSGM IBAN DE21100205000001153 400 – BIC BFSWDE33BER (Bank für Sozialwirtschaft)

“Der Fluch der bösen Tat – das Scheitern des Westens im Orient” Peter Scholl-Latour

 

Der bedeutendste Auslandskorrespondent unserer Republik, ein Deutsch-Franzose mit jüdischen Wurzeln, ein Arabist und Islamkenner, einer der als Söldner in Indochina gedient hat, einer, der die Welt wie seine Westentasche zu kennen glaubte, ist am 16. August dieses Jahres verschieden.

Kurz vor seinem Tode hat der 90jährige uns ein hochaktuelles und sein vielleicht wichtigstes Buch hinterlassen. Der passende und noch   von ihm selbst  gewählte Titel ist  einem Schillerzitat aus dem Wallenstein entnommen.

Die vorschnelle Schuldzuschreibung für den Absturz der Malaysian Airways Maschine MH17 an die Adresse Russlands hält er für verhängnisvoll, den Vorgang selbst ganz und gar nicht im Interesse  Putins. Vielmehr verweist Scholl-Latour darauf, dass “durch einen grausamen Zufall ” am gleichen Tage des tragischen Flugzeugunglücks

 ” die Furien des Krieges in unmittelbarer  Nachbarschaft  Europas entfesselt (wurden). Der Regierungschef Benjamin Nethanjahu gab seiner Armee den Befehl, in den GAZA-Streifen einzurücken…

Die Verluste der palästinensischen  Zivilbevölkerung waren entsetzlich und trugen dazu bei, dass die Weltöffentlichkeit, die bislang Israel zuneigte, in Protest und sogar Abscheu gegen den Judenstaat umschlug.”

Und weiter fährt der staatstragende und im Laufe seines langen Berufslebens  mit vielen Ämtern und Ehren gewürdigte Altmeister des Journalismus fort:

“Für die zwei Millionen Menschen, die  im Küsten-Fetzen von GAZA zusammengepfercht leben, schlägt die Stunde der totalen Verzweiflung.

Aber mit Palästina ist es ja nicht getan. In ihrem verbissenen Versuch, das  Assad-Regime von Damaskus zu stürzen, hatten sich die seltsamsten Koalitionen gebildet….

In Syrien hat sich die “Freie Syrische Armee”, mit der die Amerikaner ein westlich orientiertes System installieren wollten, als kampfuntauglich erwiesen. Die gelieferten Waffen kamen den Jihadisten zugute, die über die türkische Grenze eingedrungen waren. Unter diversen Etiketten .Jibhat el-Nusra oder Ahrar es-Scham -engagirierten  sie sich als unversöhnliche Gotteskrieger….

Ein bodenloser Abgrund öffnete sich, als  neben diesen radikalen Islamisten  eine kriegerische Formation auftauchte, die zunächst  einen ‘Islamischen Staat im Irak und in Syrien’ proklamierte, um ihn dann unter der Bezeichnung  ‘Islamischer Staat’ auf die ganze islamische Umma auszuweiten …

In einem sensationellen Blitzfeldzug erwies sich dieser ‘Islamische Staat’ allen anderen kämpfenden Formationen überlegen”

Scholl-Latour greift zu biblischen Bildern, um das vom Westen im Orient  geschaffene “Tohuwabohu” zu charakterisieren. Der  Jesuiten-Zögling lässt gar die Klage  des  antiken Propheten Jesaja erklingen, der einst mahnte:

“Die Sendboten des Friedens weinen bitterlich, die Straßen sind verwaist, alle Menschen sind von den Pfade verschwunden, die Erde trauert und stöhnt; der Orient ist zutiefst verwirrt und durch schwarze Flecken entstellt.”

Mit  dem Zerschellen der Malayischen Verkehrsmaschine sei die Zeit für ironische Bemerkungen verstrichen. Das rauhe Vokabular von Frau Nuland, der US Spitzendiplomatin gegenüber der EU, ihr GI Jargon, werfe ein grelles Licht auf die geringe Wertschätzung, ja Verachtung mit der Washington auf den “Verbündeten” schaue.

Der Autor versteht sich  trotz oder gerade wegen seiner Kritik nach wie vor als Freund Amerikas. Er sieht sich als einen, dessen enge familiäre Bindungen, es nicht geboten erscheinen lassen, passiv zuzuschauen. wie das Land auf den Abgrund zusteuert und seine “europäischen Verbündeten” mit dahinein zieht.

Als einer, der die Schlichen der Weltpolitik von ganz oben mit erlebt hat, sieht der alterweise  Journalist weiter und tiefer als manch einer der nach ihm kommenden Medienarbeiter. Er sieht, wie die  von Bashar al  Assad geführte syrisch-arabische  Republik einer systematischen Desinformations-Kampagne des Westens ausgesetzt wurde, demzufolge jedweder völkerrechtswidrige Angriff  nur vom Regime selber ausgegangen sein konnte, wider alle Logik des cui bono  und des klugen Menschenverstandes, über den zumindest Assad verfüge.

Er hat begriffen, dass beim “Arabischen Frühling” nicht alles mit rechten Dingen zugegangen war, kann das Wort nicht mehr hören! Er  betont, dass die ‘Araballion’  in Syrien in eine Sackgasse geraten war, aus der sie nicht mehr herauszufinden scheint.

Obwohl  Scholl-Latour  von Libyens ermordetem  Staatschef  Gadhafi nur als “Diktator” spricht, dessen unrühmliches Ende  als  mutmaßlicher “Terrorist” er  wohlverdient findet, so sieht er doch auch bezogen auf den Wüstenstaat, die unheilvollen Folgen westlicher Abenteuer-Politik.

Rußland und China  seien bezüglich Libyens über den Tisch gezogen  worden, von einer  umfassenden Militäroperation  und einer politischen Umgestaltung des Landes sei in der UN Entschließung nicht  die Rede gewesen.

Die syrische Tragödie sei anderer Art und die Heuchelei diesem säkularen, dem Westen unter Bashar nahegerückten arabischen  Staat  besonders groß.Lange vor Deraa und Homs sei die unermüdliche Forderung nach “Vernichtung des Regimes von Damaskus” erhoben worden.

Und was den vermeintlich vom Assad-Regime angewiesenen Giftgas-Einsatz von Ghouta angeht, so verweist  Scholl-Latour  auf diverse, vom Westen scheinbar  “vergessene” eigene  Giftgas-  Napalm und Agent Orange-Einsätze,  insbesondere in Vietnam.

Zum Glück habe bei der US-amerikanischen Generalität in Bezug auf Syrien  eine größere Zögerlichkeit geherrscht, die die Bereitschaft der Politiker zu neuem, noch unberechenbarerem Abenteurertum gezügelt habe. Auch in Bezug auf den Iran hofft Scholl-Latour  auf einen Erfolg der Diplomatie, wenngleich, wie er meint, die Würfel noch nicht gefallen seien.

Wichtig für uns nachgeborene Friedensarbeiter ist Scholl-Latours Einsicht in die trügerische Allmacht Amerikas. In China sei den USA ein wirklicher Herausforderer entstanden, dessen Staatschef  Xi Jinping sowie seine attraktive und  gebildete  Gattin mit entsprechender Gelassenheit und mit  dem gebotenen Selbstbewusstsein aufträten.

Abschließend sei Scholl-Latours  Vorhaltung zitiert:

Die Staatsmänner und Politiker der Atlantischen Allianz, die sich über den ‘Expansionismus’  Wladimir Putins und sein Projekt der ‘Eurasischen Union’ entrüsten, erweisen sich als unfähig, die asiatische, die defensive Dimension dieses lockeren Zusammenschlusses zu erkennen.

Das 340 Seiten starke Buch ist trotz aller Kritik in manchen wesentlichen  Details, wegen seiner grundsätzlichen Orientierung als Lektüre empfohlen.

Irene Eckert (AKF)

G20 Summit in Brisbane, Australia - President Putin answers Tass Qestions

 

News | 14.11.2014 | 18:38

Questions From Journalists of Russian News Agency TASS

QUESTION: You are going to attend another G20 summit. To what extent is this format still in demand and relevant, and is it logical that some G20 countries, while striving to cooperate and develop the global economy, have been taking sanctions against one of the G20 members?

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Is this format still in demand or not? I believe it is. Why? The G20 is a good platform to meet each other, discuss both bilateral relations and global problems, and develop at least some sort of common understanding what this or that problem is all about, and how to resolve it. A good place to make a road map for joint work. This is the most important thing because it is totally unrealistic to expect that everything that may be said there will be implemented, especially since the decisions themselves are not mandatory. To a certain degree they are neglected. They are not observed whenever and wherever they are not in line with somebody’s interests. First and foremost, this means the interests of global players.

For instance, at one of the G20 summits a decision was made to enhance the role of developing economies in the activities of the IMF and to redistribute quotas. The US Congress blocked that decision. Full stop. The negotiators, our partners, are saying: well, we would be happy to do that, we did sign it, but the Congress does not let it through. So much for the decisions.

And yet, the very fact that a certain decision has been formulated, that all international actors involved in the G20 found it right and fair and consonant with the current realities, this fact alone shapes the international public opinion and the experts’ minds in a certain way, and this has to be taken into account. The very fact that the US Congress has refused to pass this law indicates that it is the United States that drops out of the general context of resolving the problems facing the international community. One little thing: nobody cares to remember this. Some capitalize on their world mass media monopoly to hush up this information, to make an impression it does not really exist.

You see, everyone is talking about some current problems, including the sanctions and Russia, but in reality, in global terms, it is the United States that neglects the decisions being made. This is a fundamental thing, by the way, but it is being neglected. That does not mean, though, that it is a useless format. I have already explained why. It does yield benefits.

QUESTION: Possibly, it would make sense to make the decisions binding, wouldn’t it?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: That’s impossible. You know that there have been no such precedents in international practice. Except for the UN Security Council decisions regarding international security proper. But that procedure was generated in the very dramatic conditions of bloody World War II. It is just unrealistic to expect that these days some new mechanisms may be established to enforce compliance with decisions, let alone decisions concerning economy. Let me say once again, all this is of moral, political and economic nature. Which in itself is not bad at all.

Now a few words about the sanctions some G20 countries have taken against Russia. Of course, they run counter to the very principle of G20 activities, and not only the activities of the G20 and its principles, they run counter to international law, because sanctions may be introduced only through the United Nations and its Security Council. Moreover, they are against the WTO principles and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the GATT. The United States itself created that organisation at a certain point. Now it is crudely violating its principles. This is harmful and, of course, it does certain damage to us, but it is also harmful to the United States as well, because as a matter of fact the entire system of international economic relations is being undermined. I do hope, and I proceed from the understanding that in the final count the awareness of this will prevail and bygones will be bygones.

QUESTION: Are you planning to raise this question at the summit, or will it remain in the background and you will speak your mind only if the subject is raised…

VLADIMIR PUTIN: If the subject is raised, I will speak about it, of course, but I am not going to raise these questions for discussion myself. The way I see it, it will be useless. All understand what they are doing, I mean, those who impose the sanctions. What’s the use of drawing attention to this matter or asking for something? It’ll make no sense. Such decisions are made at the level of blocs or at the national level; they are made based on how our partners perceive their geopolitical interests. I believe that’s just a mistake, even from the standpoint of their geopolitical interests.

Regrettably, today’s world exists within a very narrow horizon of planning, in particular, in the sphere of politics and security. Everybody lives from election to election. This is a very narrow planning horizon. It leaves no opportunities for taking a broader perspective, for looking into a more distant future. That’s bad. But I hope that we shall discuss this. At the just-ended APEC summit, there were discussions with practically all those who were in attendance on international problems and on bilateral problems, including the problems of sanctions you’ve just mentioned.

QUESTION: In the G20, there is a certain balance of force. On the one hand, there is the G7, and on the other hand, the BRICS countries and some associated states. Proceeding from what you’ve just said about each country pressing for its own interests, how do you see this balance of force – as a dispute that will eventually produce the truth or as a fundamentally new confrontation of two blocs?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Firstly, I believe it will be very bad if blocs begin to pop up again. That’s very counterproductive and even harmful to the global economy. We are on the subject of economy, aren’t we?

QUESTION: Economy that is being more and more affected by politics.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: That’s true, but nevertheless, the G20 is an economic forum in the first place. I suggest that we shift the focus of our conversation in that direction. And here I would like to make a point. I have already mentioned the WTO, which has established certain rules of the game.

There is the mechanism called the IMF. Discussions are underway over perfecting the international financial mechanisms and international trading relations. You know that the Doha round of WTO talks is stalled. Why? Because of the difference in approaches and interests of the developing and developed economies. Because in one case there emerges an imbalance of capital and in the other, imbalances of commodity flows. Developed economies have a fair bit of free capital, and the question is about the effective, reliable and safe placement of this capital in those regions and those economies of the world which can ensure stability, protect property and generate some profit, some revenues for such developed economies. For this reason they export capital, and the developing countries form the commodity flows. Some need to be sure that their capital is well-placed, while others, the recipients of the capital, need to be sure that the rules of the game will not be changed at the sole discretion of capital exporters, including for political reasons.

Everyone must understand that the global economy and finance these days are exceptionally dependent on each other. Take our case: imagine our partners have restricted the access of our financial institutions to global money markets. As we attract capital from global financial markets, our financial institutions finance our companies that import finished products from the very same industrialised economies, thus supporting jobs in those countries, their social sector and economic growth. If we stop doing that, there will be disruptions. These are fundamental things. They are not lying on the surface; they are not obvious at first sight.

Our cooperation with the Federal Republic of Germany gives that country some 300,000 jobs. If there are no contracts, these jobs may be lost. True, they will reorient, but it’s still unclear in what direction. It is not so easy.

Therefore, it is important that we solve all those challenges that come up together. If we take a different path… The United States is currently contemplating the creation of two associations: one Transatlantic, and the other one Transpacific. If these are going to be two closed groups, eventually, it will not remove the imbalances in the global economy but rather exacerbate them. Of course, we want to get rid of such imbalances, we want to work together, but this can be achieved only through joint efforts.

Just 20-30-50 years ago the situation was different. Why am I so certain that only joint efforts can be effective? The GDP of the BRICS countries calculated at the purchasing power parity is greater than that of the G7. As far as I know, the GDP of BRICS is $37.4 trillion, while that of the G7 is $34.5 trillion. And if we go and say: ‘No, thank you, we are going to do this and that here on our own, and you can do it the way you want it,’ this will only add to the imbalances. If we are really set to resolve some issues, we should do that together.

QUESTION: There has been much talk about the emergence of another G7 – the BRICS countries plus Indonesia, Turkey and Mexico. Do you believe this format may have a future?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: As I have already said, decisions must be made together. Everything is interdependent in today’s world, and if some regional associations, like the one we are creating these days – the Eurasian Economic Union also involving Belarus and Kazakhstan – are to be created, they should emerge only as addenda to the existing global instruments that must be operating in compliance with these global rules.

QUESTION: You spoke about imbalances in global economy, and the IMF is talking about them, too. It forecasts the emergence of some new bubbles. Is Russian economy prepared to rebuff a new wave of the crisis?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, it is. We’re considering all the scenarios, including the so-called catastrophic fall of prices for energy resources, which is quite possible, and we admit it. The Ministry of Economics and the Finance Ministry analyse our economy’s development under each scenario. You see, the thing is I spoke about the imbalances of capital, on the one hand, and commodities, on the other hand. When they appear, in some cases owing to political considerations, and when they increase, some countries – especially the emerging economies – find it difficult to cope with this and end up in a complicated situation. A country like ours finds the situation easier to cope with. Why? Because we are producers of oil and gas and we handle our gold and currency reserves and government reserves sparingly. Our reserves are big enough and they allow us to be sure that we will meet our social commitments and keep all the budgetary processes and the entire economy within a certain framework. And what about those who don’t have these reserves? It will be hard for them in a situation like that, but I’d like to say once again that I expect us to have a joint discussion and seek a joint solution on how to change things for the better and eliminate these imbalances.

QUESTION: You just mentioned the reserves. The funds accumulated enabled us to get smoothly enough through 2008 and 2009. Has the time come to unseal those funds to warm up and speed up our economy?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I don’t think so. We were ready to unseal them anyway even before the discouraging events that are linked to ruble fluctuations or the oil price slide. We discussed the possibility of using the funds from the National Welfare Fund. We didn’t say it just yesterday, did we? We said it two years ago. But it always happens this way in situations that the global economy and our economy have found themselves in. So what actually happens? If the funds are spent at all, they are used in several areas. One of them is infrastructure development. That’s where we intended to invest the funds from the Welfare Fund. An extra automobile ring road around Moscow, debottlenecking railway crossings, building and extending new routes for transporting goods and cargoes eastwards along the Trans-Siberian Railway and the Baikal-Amur Mainline, building high-speed railways, as well as developing port and airport infrastructure. Actually, we planned all those things before, and now that the market situation is getting worse, we’ll get down to them. Still this doesn’t mean we can simply eat the reserves out and overlook economic returns just because we’re solving current problems. That’s not the way for us to go.

QUESTION: Quite naturally, the case in hand is structural reforms, for which time and money are always in short supply.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Structural reforms do not require that much money. They call for political will and certain administrative steps both in the economy and in the social sphere.

QUESTION: I’d like to get back to the infrastructure issue later but now round up the National Welfare Fund issue. What do you think about the request from Rosneft [Russia’s major oil corporation] to allocate funds to it from the Welfare Fund?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: If I were a Rosneft CEO, I would ask for money, too. Why not? Who doesn’t ask for it today? Everyone’s asking for money and hoping to get it. The Government Cabinet – I know their position because I discussed it both with the Cabinet and Rosneft – will make a decision based not just on the needs of the company which we truly treasure and which we will definitely help. It will also analyse the company’s activities, analyse how it plans to use this money and what benefits the entire national economy will get from this investment. This will be a real assessment and I don’t rule out that Rosneft may get some funds. Yet the amount of such allocations and the terms require a thorough analysis. No hurry here.

QUESTION: Since no decision has been taken yet, it looks like Rosneft hasn’t convinced anyone.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: You know, in the context of my visit to China, Rosneft is arranging an agreement with a major Chinese corporation on getting a 10% stake in the Vankor oilfield project. Along with the stake, the Chinese will get seats on the board of directors. But we are also making arrangements on selling oil from that deposit, which is actually huge, for the yuans. In this situation, our Chinese partners will be ready to issue loans and to finance many transactions. Secondly, we’re moving away from the diktat of the market that denominates all commercial oil flows in US dollars. We’re encouraging in every way the use of national currencies – both the ruble and the yuan. Thirdly, this will additionally stabilize corporate finances.

Recently, we checked the financial standing of Rosneft and didn’t find any problems there whatsoever. No financial problems at all. I’d like to stress once again that if they need more money they must prove that these funds they get will be spent for specific purposes and there will be returns for the entire economy, on top of returns for the company.

QUESTION: One of the proposals of the Australian G20 presidency is to set up an infrastructure investment centre. Given the priority that Russia is already attaching to infrastructures, does the proposal offer advantages? Or will it stand at variance with what we are doing, if we take into account the sanctions?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Well, you don’t need to coordinate anything with anyone here. The fact simply proves – and one cannot but agree with the Australian proposal – that we’re on the right track. Absolutely in the mainstream, as it were. And the international community – the economic one in this case – shares the same views of government actions in a situation that’s taking shape in the global economy. The fact merely confirms we’re right and this is always pleasant and good to know.

QUESTION: Will this be a source of assistance for Russia or just a platform for sharing our experience?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I think this will be much rather a platform for exchanging experience. And for training specialists, which is a fairly good thing, too. Besides, it is a follow-up on our own proposals in a sense. We formulated them at the G20 summit in St Petersburg.

QUESTION: Here in Russia, a number of infrastructure projects you mentioned are being implemented while others have been halted like a bridge across the Lena River in Yakutsk or a seaport in Taman [a city on the Black Sea coast]. What’s the future for these projects? Is it clear or in a total haze?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: It’s not about haze actually. It’s about feasibility. Should we build a bridge in Yakutsk or no? Of course, we should. And what’s next? Yakutsk is home to more than 300,000 people. It’d be nice to give people a bridge so that they could move freely. Move this way and that way. Then the railway will get right into the city. Nice, isn’t it? Surely it is. I do love Yakutsk. The local people are wonderful and the republic [Sakha (Yakutia)] has an immense mineral wealth. And everything there needs to be developed. But when we discuss these things with my colleagues, they tell me the actual reason is bigger than the 300,000-strong population as such. The bridge is needed to stretch the railway out to a number of mineral deposits. On top of being socially significant, the project will also become economically sound and rational. And if you extend it farther on so that we could deliver more goods to the highly remote northern areas and get to certain deposits… Well, this needs analysis and calculation. An in-depth professional study is essential. But on the whole, that’s the movement in the right direction.

The same thing is with Taman. We must analyse a whole set of infrastructure-related issues. Private investment, too. A private company has been building a modern seaport in that area for several years now and a foreign investor has been invited who invests billions there. We should carefully analyse it. Are we provoking competition there? What’s the volume of goods? Is it enough to give both ports a full load? What about railway infrastructure? Will it cope with covering both ports? And where is the money right now, at this very moment, to develop this infrastructure so that it services both ports? Add to this a bridge to Crimea we also need to build. It’s not a matter of liking or disliking. Everything should be done in a proper and timely fashion and calculated very professionally.

QUESTION: Back to the G20. It didn’t really matter much if it is was G20, APEC or the previously known G8 – it was always about the opportunity for you to meet with your colleagues tete-a-tete. Your recent participation in the Beijing Summit was your first trip abroad following your speech at the Valdai International Discussion Club concerning the global security and the world order. Did you get any reaction from your foreign partners following that speech?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Not really. The Valdai Club is about communicating with experts. It is a sort of free discussion. Maybe even a bit fierce as it should be on platforms like that, since it should set the tone of the discussion and even provoke your partners to open up and voice their point of view so that we could look for possible solutions at the expert level together. But pragmatic issues are more often discussed when we meet with our colleagues at a bilateral level.

QUESTION: Putting it differently, were there any changes in their attitude or any new questions you wanted to ask them? Have you noticed anything of the kind?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: No, nothing happens that quickly. It takes time for someone to actually hear and understand what I had actually said. It must be all well digested at the administrative, governmental and presidential levels, starting with aides and experts. It needs discussions, without any clamour or senseless chirping, which are usually attributed to such forums as the Valdai Club. It is better to talk in the calm of our offices.

All these debate forums are good for sincere and open talks. However, as I have said before, it is good to return to issues without any fuss in the calm of offices and discuss everything over. It takes time.

QUESTION: Do you plan any personal meetings on the sidelines of the G20 summit?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, I have scheduled meetings there. With the German Chancellor. A lot of meetings.

QUESTION: Analysts say that your relations with [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel recently became more strained and less friendly. Have you noticed it?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: No, I have not. You know that we are guided by interests instead of sympathies and antipathies.

QUESTION: Were you also guided by the same interests in the past?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Not just in the past, but always. And she had also been guided by same interests, just like any other leader of a nation, state or government. This is why I see neither considerable changes nor any substantial alterations in the nature of our relations.

eng.kremlin.ru
Tags: G20 Russia Putin

Source:http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/11/14/vladimir-putin-answered-questions-from-journalists-tass.html

German businessman urges Russia, West to make compromises

News | 14.11.2014 | 18:49

It is difficult to build a Europe without Russia and almost impossible to build a Europe in confrontation with Russia, says a German business leader who has repeatedly warned against economic sanctions on Moscow. “Russia to the west of the Ural mountains is part of European culture. I consider it inadmissible if we destroy that Europe, to which Russia also belongs,” Eckhard Cordes of the Committee on Eastern European Economic Relations told German broadcaster Deutsche Welle in an interview published on Friday. Cordes voiced doubts about the effectiveness of the sanctions in place against Russia. “If politicians introduce economic sanctions, the business will comply with the sanctions regime. The question is whether these economic sanctions produce the desired results. We have always been pretty sceptical about it,” he said, adding that the conflicting parties — Russia and the West — should approach each other, make compromises and acknowledge their mistakes in order to find a political solution to the crisis in Ukraine. Speaking about the impact of the sanctions on the German economy, Cordes said German exports to Russia dropped by almost 17% in the first eight months and would probably plunge even further in the remaining part of the year, since the ruble's recent collapse made German goods more expensive and the general climate of sanctions damaged mutual trust. TASS

Resisting the Destruction of Jeju Island

Published on National Catholic Reporter (http://ncronline.org)

---

Living the Eucharist: resisting the destruction of Jeju Island

Art Laffin  |  Nov. 12, 2014

Reflection I had the opportunity to travel to Jeju Island off the coast of South Korea in the East China Sea from Oct. 29 to Nov. 4. I  previously spent four days in Manila, Philippines, where I was invited to speak at the first Asia Pacific Dialogue on Human Rights and Respect for the Dignity of Life with the theme: "No Justice Without Life." I left an amazing community in Manila standing for life and justice and saying "No" to state-sponsored killing. In coming to Jeju Island, I met another extraordinary gathering of people who are saying "Yes" to creation and "No" to the construction of new naval base that is a crime and a sin.
For several years, I have been closely following this inspiring nonviolent campaign led by local islanders along with priests and sisters to stop the construction of this U.S.-backed Korean naval base on Jeju Island (named the "Island of Peace" by the Korean government).
UNESCO considers Jeju Island and nearby Beom Island, Moon Island, Seop Island, and Hallasan National Park biosphere reserves. The construction of this base, which is a joint Korean, U.S. and Japanese venture with Samsung as the main contractor, is destroying the beautiful ecosystem of the island as well as the majestic soft coral reefs and surrounding ocean life.
The ancient Gureombi rock formation no longer exists, having been blasted away two years ago. In the March 2014 issue of the Gangjeong Village Story monthly newsletter [1], the lead article lamented the second anniversary of the destruction of this sacred formation: "For thousands of years, Gureombi has been a playground, a garden, and a mother's arms, embracing and embraced by the people of Gangjeong. Thus it was perhaps the most painful and sorrowful moment of this 8 year struggle to experience the partial destruction of Gureombi Rock. Still, though we cannot see Gureombi anymore, it lives on in our memories."
Ultimately, the U.S. wants to use the base as an outpost to contain China. Peacemakers from the United States, including Bruce Gagnon, Regis Tremblay, David Hartsough, Ann Wright, Jesuit Fr. Bill Bichsel, Nick Mele, Kathy Kelly, Brian Terrell and Michele Naar-Obed, have come here to offer support over the last several years, and the local campaign has been deeply appreciative for this friendship and solidarity.
Upon arriving in Jeju City, I received a very warm welcome by Fr. Pat Cunningham and the Columban religious community, who offered me hospitality for the night. The next morning, Father Pat and I took as bus to Gangjong Village, about an hour from Jeju City. We arrived just in time for the daily 11 a.m. Mass that occurs directly outside the entrance to the base construction site.
Father Pat and I joined with other friends, including longtime renowned peacemaker Fr. Mun Jeong Hyeon, who has spent nearly three years in prison for his resistance, in sitting on plastic chairs stretched out across the base entrance. As grace would have it, I also became reacquainted with two of the local organizers whom I had previously met in D.C.: Sung-Hee Choi and Jung Joo.
There were at least eight people from the community sitting in chairs, blocking the center of the entrance. As streams of cement and supply trucks entered and exited the base, police carried those blocking to the side of the entrance. Then the police permitted those forming the blockade to return to the entrance, where they continued the witness. This back-and-forth went on for at least one and a half hours.
Celebrating Mass and receiving the Eucharist in this context was a very powerful experience. In the face of this monstrous base, which is now halfway complete, the power of eucharistic love, borne out in nonviolent witness, is the means by which true conversion and transformation can occur. Those gathered at the base entrance, along with at least 30 people who also attended the Mass a short distance away, truly believe in miracles and that with God all things are possible.

Following the Mass, the gathered community prayed the rosary. This was followed by a press conference by the Gangjong Village Association, calling for an end to the expansion of military housing units being built in the village as a result of the new naval base. I then was invited on a tour of the port area of the island, where one can see a panoramic view of the massive base construction.
Cranes are visible everywhere on the site, while in the port, there is constant dredging to accommodate future warships. The Korean government has described the new base as a joint military port complex meant to encourage tourism in the beautiful landscape. Despite this and other attempts to deceive the public about the real purpose for the base, local villagers and their supporters refuse to be duped.
In the late afternoon, I met Yang Yoon-Mo, a well-known former film critic who has endured long-term imprisonment and hunger strikes for trying to stop the construction of the naval base. He is one of the more than 650 people who have been arrested for saying "No" to the naval base construction. There have also been 550 indictments for resisters, and about 45 people have served jail sentences for their courageous resistance. Yang and several others have set up a new vigil site at another part of the base perimeter where supply trucks are being redirected from the main entrance. Many villagers are upset that these trucks are now diverted through their neighborhood.
On Nov. 1, All Saints Day, I joined two other friends, Jesuit Fr. Kim Song Hwan and Gayun, in blocking the cement and supplies trucks. Moments after receiving the Eucharist, four police from the base hoisted me in my chair, banner in hand, and carried me over to the side of the road as they had done with Father Kim and Gayun. It was indeed a moving experience in more than one way! Once the traffic cleared, the three of us resumed our positions blocking the main entrance. This would happen two more times, once during the rosary and once when the human chain was formed across the road.
The Eucharist and the rosary have taken on a whole new meaning for me here as they occur in the context of an act of nonviolent resistance. In the face of this new port of death being constructed, I feel a power here that is far greater, that can truly overcome the idolatrous forces of military violence: the self-emptying, transforming love embodied in a living Eucharist.

The resiliency of this community is quite remarkable, and they remain deeply committed to a spirited resistance despite overwhelming odds. After the rosary ended, a human chain of about 30 people stretched across the entire entrance to the construction site. As I was still being surrounded by police who had carried me to the side of the entrance, I was handed the mic to lead several songs. I started off with "When the Saints Go Marching In," which was followed by "Down By the Riverside" and "Seek Peace and Pursue It," singing with police literally hovering over me as I sat in my chair. Following the human chain, there was an enthusiastic snake dance, then some exuberant dancing. The police, for the most part, let all this go on but continued to move anyone impeding supply vehicles from going into the site.
On my last day in Gangjeong Village, I joined the blockade at main entrance to the construction site and was carried off four times. After the rosary, I was carried off as I sang "We Shall Not Be Moved." I later asked Father Kim about the history of having the Mass at the base construction site. He told me that in 2009, Bishop Peter Kang U-il of Jeju Island, chairman of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of Korea, first celebrated Mass on the land designated to be the base. In 2011, Father Mun initiated having the Mass outside the main entrance of the construction site for the base. Father Kim also shared with me that he is assigned to be part of this nonviolent witness to stop the base construction and has been joined by other Jesuits, including his provincial, in blocking the base entrance.
My friend Bruce Gagnon, longtime peacemaker and coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, was the first one to introduce me, as well as countless others, to the nonviolent struggle in Jeju Island to stop construction of a new U.S.-backed naval base. His inspiring peace work has not only included stopping construction of this new base, but campaigning to stop the militarization of space and for the closing of the nearly 1,000 U.S. military bases worldwide. When addressing the struggle on Jeju Island, Bruce makes an important point that bears repeating: This nonviolent campaign to stop the construction of the new naval base on Jeju Island is an important symbol for the international peace movement. It brings together all the issues -- militarization, disarmament, the environment and human rights. I couldn't agree more with him.
Hopefully, before it's too late, more people will join and support the courageous people of Gangjeong Village in the struggle to stop the building of this base meant for death and destruction. I encourage people to see Regis Tremblay's excellent documentary, "The Ghosts of Jeju [2]," which is the most important resource available about the nonviolent struggle on Jeju Island. For updates about the campaign and ways you can support it, go to savejejunow.org [3].
- Art Laffin is a member of the Dorothy Day Catholic Worker in Washington, D.C.

---

Source URL (retrieved on 11/13/2014 - 14:33): http://ncronline.org/news/peace-justice/living-eucharist-resisting-destruction-jeju-island

Links:
[1] http://savejejunow.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Gangjeong-Village-Story_MAR-2014.pdf
[2] http://www.theghostsofjeju.net/
[3] http://www.savejejunow.org/

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/  (blog)