Friday, February 28, 2014

China Issues Report on U.S. Human Rights

News | 01.03.2014 | 05:58
A Chinese idiom says that all will follow one who is personally upright, even though he does not give orders; but if he is not personally upright, they will not follow, even though he gives orders.
Attributed to Confucius (551 BC-479 BC), one of the greatest Chinese philosophers in history, the idiom is an important tenet for the Chinese.
In another example of this idiom, China on Friday published a report on the U.S. human rights situation, finding that the hypercritical Uncle Sam has turned out to be a poor performer in human rights issues.
The report said that the human rights situation in the United States is worsening. It faces rampant gun violence and a grave employment situation. With the tapping program code-named PRISM, the U.S. government has infringed on the privacy rights of people both at home and abroad.
The report came one day after the U.S. State Department issued its country reports on human rights practices for 2013. Acting as the world's judge of human rights, the U.S. made arbitrary attacks and irresponsible remarks on the human rights situation in almost 200 countries and regions.
Of course, the report included human rights situations in China, a longtime victim of the U.S.'s groundless accusations. The U.S. report made accusations about China's political and judicial systems, ethnic issues, and other issues.
Pursuing human rights is a process and no country can have an absolute perfect record. China is on a path of rapid development, and due to a low starting point, the country emphasizes the right to development more than developed countries.
The U.S. report deliberately ignored the great progress China has made in human rights. China has abandoned the reeducation through labor system, eased the one-child policy, and significantly improved the people's livelihood, especially vulnerable groups.
The Chinese government's commitment to improving its human rights situation is based on its own will rather than the push from other countries, especially countries such as the United States, which are always criticizing others while their own records are poor.
If the United States wants to be the self-claimed human rights judge of the world, though China and most countries do not agree, it first needs to sweep its own doorsteps. Otherwise, its words will not be heard, let alone trusted, by other countries.

Israel verschärft Druck auf Palästinenser

Palestinian Art
Israel versteht es wieder einmal, die auf andere dramatische Ereignisse in der Region konzentrierte internationale Aufmerksamkeit auszunützen, weitere Schritte zur Verwirklichung der zionistischen Ziele in Angriff zu nehmen. Und über diese Ziele bestehen ja seit über einem Jahrhundert wohl keine Zweifel: es geht um die Schaffung von „Eretz Israel“, sprich um die Vertreibung des palästinensischen Volkes aus seiner Heimat. Auch wenn es manche Idealisten im Westen nicht wahr haben wollen, im zionistischen Konzept ist kein Platz für eine Zweistaatenlösung!

In der Beilage unseres heutigen Newsletters dokumentieren wir zwei Ereignisse der letzten Tage: Der Beschluss der Knesseth, den in Israel lebenden christlichen Palästinensern einen eigenen Minderheitenstatus einzuräumen, sowie eine Debatte über jüdische Ansprüche auf den Haram al-Sharaf (Tempelberg) in Ost-Jerusalem.

Während die Schaffung eines eigenen rechtlichen Status für die dem Christentum angehörigen „israelischen Araber“ ganz offensichtlich als Maßnahme zur weiteren Schwächung der rund 1,5 Mio. in Israel lebenden Palästinenser konzipiert ist – frei nach dem alten Prinzip der Kolonialisten „Teile und herrsche“ –, brachte die Knessethdebatte über den Haram al-Sharif ganz unverhohlen die Ansprüche der zionistischen Israelis nicht nur auf die heiligen Stätten der Muslime sondern auf ganz Jerusalem zum Ausdruck, welches in ihren Augen ja bereits seit Jahrzehnten die „vereinigte Hauptstadt“ Israels ist. Dass dies in krassem Gegensatz zum Völkerrecht und zu allen relevanten internationalen Beschlüssen steht, spielt hier keine Rolle.

Man könnte meinen, dass es sich hier um die Ansichten von radikalen Außenseitern in Israel handelt, leider ist dies nicht der Fall. Diese „Radikalen“ stellen die große Mehrheit dar, sind an der Macht und haben die Möglichkeiten, ihre expansionistischen und rassistischen Ziele auch zu verwirklichen. Daran ändern auch sogenannte „Friedensgespräche“ mit den Palästinensern nichts. Leider praktiziert der Westen die Methode der Verdrängung, wenn es um den israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt geht. Man kennt zwar die wirklichen Absichten von Netanjahu, Lieberman und Konsorten, verdrängt diese aber und macht gute Miene zum bösen Spiel. Damit macht man sich aber zum Komplizen einer Politik der systematischen Aushöhlung jeglicher völkerrechtlichen Ordnung.

Fritz Edlinger

P.S.: Die ebenfalls beiliegende Meldung über einen Amnesty-International-Bericht über die israelischen Gewaltanwendungen in der Westbank (auch in den sogenannten autonomen palästinensischen Gebieten!) rundet diese Bild ab. Der gesamte Bericht ist auf unserer unter Aktuelle Meldungen zu finden.
GÖAB-Newsletter Nr. 20/2014
Posted am  28.2.2014 
Gesellschaft für Österreichisch-Arabische Beziehungen
A-1100 Wien, Laaer-Berg-Str. 43
Tel.: +43 1 526 78 10, Fax: +43 1 526 77 95

"Today Crimea is facing the powerful rise of people’s self-consciousness."

Coup and Anti-Coup. Gene Sharp Amended

Irina LEBEDEVA | 01.03.2014 | 00:35

In the Coup in Kiev piece published on February 24, Justin Raymondo makes no bones about it saying that the events in Ukraine were nothing else but an outright coup d’état «pure and simple, the violent overthrow of a duly elected official», as he puts it. The author describes it as an overthrow of pro-Nazi and anti-Russian nature, just another regime change in the line of «color revolutions» taking place in the post-Soviet space. According to Justin Raymondo, the coup bringing putschists to power is being hailed not only by «that champion of «democracy», the United States government, but also by our clearly biased media, which is using this as «a bludgeon to beat the hated Vladimir Putin»
The author believes Americans would get a better understanding of theUkrainian events if they realize that, «the role of the United States government in this affair is utterly pernicious. While funding and encouraging the Ukrainian people to rise up against a gang of kleptocrats, Washington plots behind the scenes to install their own favored thieves in power»… According to Raymondo, the way the events unfold makes one believe that at this stage it’s just a beginning. With bitter irony he comments the recent statement by Susan Rice, the United States National Security Advisor, as she stressed that deploying Russian troops to Crimea «would be a grave mistake». The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs tactfully recommended Susan Rice to address her advices to the US President, while the American journalist leaves diplomacy aside saying bluntly that Susan Rice plays with fire reviving the old Cold War fears and raising «Russians are coming!» style hullabaloo to spook people. The author explains thatRussians don’t need to go anywhere; Sebastopol is the site of the Russian fleet stationed at Sevastopol, as well as the heart of the Russian-speaking population living there since ancient times. As Kiev burned, Crimeans rallied in their tens of thousands calling for unity with Russia. Quite unexpectedly the American author arrives at the conclusion that Susan Rice is completely wrong because «the present borders of Ukraine no more represent a real nation than do the borders of African states set by nineteenth century European colonialists».
Not that unexpectedly though. Whatever it is, American politicians never known for harboring any pro-Russia sympathies before have started to cite Russia Today reports. Ron Paul is a politician often characterized as the «intellectual godfather» of the Tea Party movement. He sought the presidency of the United States a number of times. The website of the Institute for Peace and Prosperity, the think tank he founded and chairs, has posted the interview that professor Mark Almond of Oxford University granted Russia Today. The caption reads 'Whole of Ukraine held hostage by a small group of radicals'. According to Almond, the violence in Ukraine, incited by the West, is something more than just another orange revolution boiling down to revision of election results. This time it’s about «a clean sweep». Mr. Almond believes the situation in Ukraine is similar to the process taking place in Syria. He says, «One of the problems of this crisis is that there isn't a constitutional way out because, in fact, about half of the country, the Western third of the country at least, is already controlled by these very radical groups who suppress any opposition».
On February 24 and February 27 the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) made statements regarding the events in Ukraine. It is clearly stated that the agreement on settlement of the crisis in Ukraine of the 21 February, signed by President of Ukraine Yanukovych and opposition leaders Vitaly Klitschko, Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Oleh Tyahnybok, is not observed despite the fact that its signature was certified by Foreign Ministers of Germany, Poland and France, as well as the United States, the European Union and other international bodies that welcomed this document. The February 24 MFA statement notes, «We are deeply concerned about the actions in the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada in terms of their legitimacy. Actually referring to the «revolutionary appropriateness» only, they are stamping «decisions» and «laws», including those aimed at deprivation of humanitarian rights of Russians and other national minorities living in Ukraine. There are calls to prohibition the Russian language almost fully, lustration, liquidation of parties and organizations, closing of undesirable mass media, removal of restrictions for propaganda of Neo-Nazi ideology».
Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said the Ukraine’s new government is not legitimate. According to him, «Some of our foreign, western partners think otherwise, considering them to be legitimate authorities. I do not know which constitution, which laws, they were reading, but it seems to me it is an aberration of perception when something that is essentially the result of a mutiny is called legitimate».
I open From Dictatorship to Democracy, a Conceptual Framework for Liberation by Gene Sharp, the book-length essay translated into dozens of languages. It is devoted to the theory of color revolutions. Gene Sharp has gained fame. His instructions on non-violent insurgency have been followed in many coups staged across the globe to meet the interests of the «only superpower». But this time Gene Sharp does not help me to better understand what is happening in Ukraine now. Unexpectedly his, much less popular publication, called The Anti-Coup, happens to be just the thing. It was written together with Bruce Jenkins and contains a host of instructions on measures civil society can take to resist illegal power when a coup has already taken place. Isn’t it the kind of resistance we’re witnessing in Sebastopol, Crimea and the south-eastern part of Ukraine?
According to Gene Sharp, «A coup d'état is a rapid seizure of physical and political control of the state apparatus by illegal action of a conspiratorial group backed by the threat or use of violence. The members of the previous government are deposed against their will. Initially the coup group rapidly occupies the centers of command, decision-making, and administration, replacing the previous chief executive and top officials with persons (military or civilian) of their choices». That is exactly what is happening in Ukraine. The steps taken by incumbent Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, which are supported by Pravy Sector, a new version of «White Al Qaeda», perfectly fit the scenario described by Gene Sharp.
The coup manual is not so big, its length is only 40 pages, but it gives a clue as to how to proceed and effectively resist a coup: never give up and unmask the usurpers as illegitimate imposters. As Sharp puts it, «Immediately after the coup is started, the putschists require legitimacy, that is, acceptance of their moral and political right, or authority, to rule». That’s why, «The first basic principle of anti-coup defense is therefore to deny legitimacy to the putschists». The author notes, that, «The putschists also require that the civilian leaders and population be supportive, confused, or just passive. The putschists additionally require the cooperation of specialists and advisors, bureaucrats and civil servants, administrators and judges in order to consolidate their control over the society». Therefore, «The second basic principle of anti-coup defense is to resist the putschists with noncooperation and defiance». Sharp believes that, «If both legitimacy and cooperation are denied, the putsch may die of political starvation». Thus the society will revive the chances for return to democracy.
Closing the Gene Sharp’s book I start to think about how life makes amendments to what the classic has written in his works. These days the parliament of Ukraine’s Autonomous Republic of Crimea has found a way out of the crisis spread across the nation. A referendum on «improving the status of autonomy and expanding its powers» slated for May 25, 2014 is the step in this direction. It’s something completely different from an anti-coup. Today Crimea is facing the powerful rise of people’s self-consciousness. Those who take part in the process cherish a hope that the trend would make possible the return to democracy.
Tags: Crimea Russia Ukraine US Sharp

Moscow mayor says Russian capital city to help Crimea’s Sevastopol

Moscow mayor says Russian capital city to help Crimea’s Sevastopol

News | 01.03.2014 | 00:52
Moscow will carry on its cooperation with Sevastopol, the Crimean base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, in all the existing areas, the Russian capital city’s mayor Sergei Sobyanin said on the air of the City FM radio station.
“We’ve been rending assistance for many years and we aren’t going to stop it,” Sobyanin said specifying that assistance is provided for the veterans, residents of Sevastopol, and the communal services.
“In particular, we’ve been delivering municipal transport - trolleybuses - to Sevastopol for the past 24 months,” he said. “And the mayor’s office (in Sevastopol) is very grateful.”
“We’re connected with that city by lots of cultural ties and an agreement in this sphere has been signed,” he said. “Certainly, we won’t go back on it.

Cartoon Russia/Ukraine "What The Hell Are You Doing Getting So Close To Your Own Border"

My dear artist friend in Florida W. B. Park wrote me today after reading my rant about the US destabilizing Ukraine.  I've been working with Will since the early 1980's when I was organizing in Florida.  He made countless drawings and cartoons for leaflets, newsletters, posters, and even once designed us a billboard that we put up.  When I published my book, Come Together Right Now: Organizing Stories from a Fading Empire, I used all of Will's artwork that I could dig up. (Says Bruce Gagnon from USA)



Add captionU.S. Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland offered food (and $$$) to pro-European Union agitators as she and
U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, right, walked through Independence Square in Kiev, Ukraine last December
I watched the mainstream national news last night at 6:30 pm.  I did alot of raging at the TV.  One of the networks led off with the story about Russia holding war games inside their own country, near the Ukrainian border.  The White House and Secretary of State John Kerry issued stern warnings to Russia about not trying to "interfere" with the current balkanization of the Ukraine.  In Crimea, riots between pro-EU and pro-Russian citizens broke out.  The Russian Navy has their Black Sea bases in Crimea.

I was ready to throw my slippers at the TV when Obama and Kerry threatened Russia over any "interference".  Who the hell are they to talk about interfering?  The now famous "Fuck the EU" quote from Victoria Nuland (wife of Bush-Cheney era neocon Robert Kagan) was direct evidence of the deep involvement and interference of the US in Ukraine.  This whole story just reeks of hypocrisy and arrogance on the part of the US.

Talking about war games - the US-NATO in recent months were holding war games in Latvia and Lithuania - practicing flying NATO warplanes right up against Russia.  Were they trying to draw a response?  And the US has been heavily arming Georgia and doing joint war games there, again right along the Russian border. At this very moment the US and South Korea are running war games aimed at North Korea which is bordered by Russia and China. 

But the American people would never know about US war games because the network TV news never reports those facts.  They only report the news that is intended to lead the public in a certain direction - and that direction is demonizing Russia (and China) in order to justify US imperial moves.

During one of the commercials that dominate network TV an actor, about my age, was selling some product.  I had muted the sound but watched this nice looking middle class man appear so genuine and I couldn't help but feel confident that he was gaining the trust of those across the nation who had not cut the sound off.  I then thought of a lifetime of watching the tube, buying the soap and the bullshit sold on corporate TV.  The false patriotism during the Olympics... the agenda infused news reporting done by reporters who toe the corporate party line.... the false innocence and phony outrage expressed by US politicians about Russia trying to defend their immediate front-door interests as if the US would not be going ballistic if the Russian Bear had its "diplomats" handing out bread during riots in Canada intended to force that nation to break away from the capitalist camp and move into bed with Moscow.  Just imagine that one.

This stuff just drives me crazy.  And the American people keep walking off the cliff in lockstep as the US prods, pokes, surrounds, and stomps on Russia which sooner or later will indeed respond - and when they do we will hear this from Washington - "Holy shit, look what Putin is doing... we told you he was crazy and wants war with us!"

The US pulls this kind of crap daily all over the world... but you'd never know it back here at home because it is not reported on the TV - and that is all that counts.
Bruce K. Gagnon
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502

Ukraine: Noose around Neck of US Diplomacy

Nikolai BOBKIN | 28.02.2014 | 10:29

The White House has decided that Ukraine is in for a transition period, though it’s not clear where exactly the country is heading to. President Obama promises to cooperate with all parties without having an idea who he means exactly. It’s not known as yet who has happened to be a winner or a loser as a result of US intervention, but the contemporary plight of Ukraine allows calling it a non-existent state. America cannot stay away from the events in Ukraine but it is not ready to act on its own. The US knows how to destabilize other countries but in the given case it would like to rectify the situation with the help of Moscow…
Washington did not think about Ukraine when it was calm there, at least it never manifested its interest in developing bilateral ties. The US is the tenth largest investor into the Ukraine’s economy with the stock of only one billion dollars. It ignores the interest of the partner. The US is pushing for non-traditional gas production in the low-profit western deposits where the population is not inclined to support the “shale friendship” with the United States. No other energy sector investment projects exist and there is nothing to make the trade turnover grow. It’s tiny; the US exports to Ukraine do not exceed 200 million dollars while the Ukrainian exports to the United States are only $60-70 million. Unlike that, the Ukraine’s ties with Russia are much closer, actually its beyond comparison. The trade turnover between Russia and Ukraine exceeds 40 billion dollars; Russia is the largest market for Ukraine (approximately 10 billion dollars). 
When Yanukovych came to power in 2010, the US concentrated its efforts on developing cooperation in the field of non-proliferation; the parties agreed that Ukraine would get rid of highly enriched uranium. The United States promised aid in decontamination of the territory affected by the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, but it never materialized. It’s a long time since Americans became frugal substituting money with promises to those who are ready to believe empty words. US and UK foreign policy chiefs John Kerry and William Hague never discussed urgent economic aid to Ukraine at anything like a special meeting; instead they exchanged the views on the issue on the sidelines of Sexual Abuse and Armed Conflict conference held in Washington (?). The British Foreign Secretary said the new political leaders in Kiev still had to prove their ability to implement reforms and fight corruption. Mr. Hague believes it will improve the chances to get financial aid from world community. So it’s arms twisting again, this time it applies to those who pin their hopes on Western aid. No doubt, there will be no money flows to Ukraine from the United States. 
From the United States view, Yanukovych was not the worst president of Ukraine. He was dismissed as a result of a coup, something that runs contrary to the US principles of democracy and rule of law. Americans ask themselves what would Obama do if his armed opponents threw Molotov cocktails at the Capitol, assaulted the White House and broke windows in the Oval Office? Would US President reconcile with the ruling by Congress to change the Constitution and fire him without complying with due procedures against the background of ongoing unrest and chaos in the country? 
Law obedient Americans just don’t understand how could Obama tell Yanukovych to get security forces from the streets at the time blood had already been shed in Kiev? Many in America believe the Obama’s reaction was tantamount to incitement. Actually the United States leadership issued a license to kill and is responsible for dozens of human lives lost in Kiev. It’s a shame for America. The fact that Obama tried to hide behind the backs of those who work for him and eluded to meet Yanukovych directly is no excuse for his actions. The US Ukraine policy was in the hands of Vice President Joe Biden those days, it was him who spoke nine times with Yanukovych on the phone …Now State Secretary John Kerry speaks about Ukraine in a very abstruse and murky way trying to rectify the evident blunder of US diplomacy. Talking about the events, Kerry says it’s not “a zero sum game”. Indeed, in a zero sum game the winner’s gain is always the loser’s loss. Russian Foreign Chief Sergey Lavrov noted that Kerry had problems with counting when talking about Ukraine at the Munich conference the State Secretary said that Kiev was to make a choice between the whole world and one country. Now the State Secretary has started to talk about “working together with Russia”. The White House has displayed its support of the territorial integrity of Ukraine, it has even started to emphasize the importance of Russia’s participation in the crisis management. UK Foreign Secretary William Hague admitted that it was important for Ukraine to cooperate with both: Russia and the European Union. But the question is - will Russia want to cooperate with the new regime in Kiev? 
Moscow resolutely condemns the growth of neo-Nazi and neo-fascist sentiments in the western part of Ukraine, the calls to ban Russian language, to make Russian speakers “non-citizens”, to curb freedom of expression and to dismiss the political parties which are out of favor with the new regime. Washington should also understand that Maidan leaders, who have pledged allegiance to European values, are in stark violation of fundamental constitutional norms of the European Union related to the treatment of other nationalities, including minorities that speak their own languages.
Against this background the Zbigniew Brzezinski predictions about the majority of Ukrainians turning into the enemies of Russia sound more like malicious joy of a decrepit Russophobe. Zbigniew Brzezinski explicitly endorsed the Finlandization of Ukraine. This would mean mutual respect, broad economic ties with Russia and the European Union, non-alignment with any military alliances, which Moscow believes to be hostile to it. At that, the cooperation between Russia and Europe should make progress. In a nutshell, Finlandization is offered as a pattern of relations between Ukraine, the European Union and Russia. Now, what’s new about it? 
It was not Russia, but the European Union who suggested that Ukraine should make a choice between Europe and Russia. It was an ultimatum launched by the European Union that Yanukovych had to face. The Russian President asked why Ukraine was to make any choice at all. According to him, Moscow was ready to lend a helping hand and prevent Ukraine from collapse while joining efforts with the West. It could be a three-party aid package. Washington and Brussels refused the offer. They are the ones Brzezinski should have addressed with his Finlandization initiative. Moscow never forgot that Ukrainians were a brotherly nation – Russia and Ukraine are two parts of one civilization. That’s why the West fails to include Ukraine into the list of unconditional allies.
Tags: European Union Ukraine US Brzezinski Kerry Obama Yanukovich

"Whole of Ukraine held hostage by a small group of radicals'" Prof. Mark Almond, Oxford

News | 28.02.2014 | 13:09
A country of almost 15 million people is being held hostage by a very small radical group, namely 2 or 3 thousand very aggressive rioters, with some of them toting firearms and Molotov cocktails, Professor Mark Almond of Oxford University told RT.

RT: Extreme violence, 10 dead, and chaos in a major city. Russia and Ukraine accuse the EU and US of interference, but are they really to blame for this?

Mark Almond: Well, only time will tell when the archives open, but there is a great deal of prima facie evidence that Americans and Europeans wanted some kind of chaotic denouement to this crisis. Remember, if we go back to 2004, they pushed through a compromise solution to the crisis and there was a rerun of the elections. Now what is wanted is a clean sweep or a revolution... It means abolishing the constitution, it means outlawing the losing side, and what I think the West really wants to see is the pushing away from any position of power, any chance of coming back to power, of the president’s government and its supporters.

RT: Who would replace the president? We see extremists and nationalists taking power over the protesters on the streets…

MA: This is a great problem, I’m afraid. Just as we saw the same process taking place for instance in Syria, where we started out by supporting people who said they wanted constitutional change, they wanted general pre-elections, and then we ended up with radical jihadists planting car bombs and so on. So I’m afraid, on a smaller scale, we will probably see it in a European city. We have seen that the process of chaos is taking over.

And we have to say, after all, Mr. Klitchko and Yatsenyuk went to Berlin, they came back and then they made very radical statements. Quite often, particularly in the European media, we hear the moderate views. They said that today was the decisive day. And I think we have to ask ourselves are we really seeing a forked tongue approach? This is a very dangerous approach because it has a long history. When the Germans occupied Ukraine in 1919, the German commandment said “Let’s put these little boys in short trousers, and ministerial seats, and we'll create a government of an independent Ukraine.” And it’s a horrible pre-echo of Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyat, the US State department people, talking about who should be prime minister, who should hold high office. I think this is the danger that we are seeing today. We see the geopolitical game played out over the bodies of ordinary Ukrainians.

RT: What is going to come out of this all? If what they really want is chaos and destruction that we are seeing now, but if it’s a bankrupt country already?

MA: I think what they hope and I’m not entirely wrong, President Yanukovich and the Ukrainian police forces will back off. After all they were repeatedly confronted by violence on a smaller scale. They backed off, they compromised, they released hundreds of people involved in very bad acts a few weeks ago, they released them only this week. That actually has helped to provide the hard core of people to take part, because the tragedy in this situation is really how few people are playing a part in this. We are talking about 2 or 3 thousand very aggressive rioters, just some of them provided with firearms, some with Molotov cocktails, but the country of almost 15 million people is held hostage by a very radical small group.

RT: Many people have seen this as the representation of the Ukrainian people, decent and angry about the corrupt government, and they like the idea of joining the EU because it’s a better life for them.

MA: Two things. First of all, coming to your second point, they have been sold by a very diligent propaganda campaign by the NATO countries, the EU countries that were they to join the EU, they'd have a better life. They have never told how many people have emigrated from Poland to Britain, because in fact joining the EU plunged the already poor country into economic crisis. So the tragedy of people in Ukraine is that they are very misinformed.

One of the problems of this crisis is that there isn't a constitutional way out because, in fact, about half of the country, the Western third of the country at least, is already controlled by these very radical groups who suppress any opposition. If you go to Lviv, if you go to Ivano-Frankovsk, people don’t agree with the paramilitary groups… it's rather like meeting dissidents in Ceaușescu's Romania 25 years ago. And so if you were to hold an election you would find a situation where a large part of the country has a completely bogus situation, for example inflated by large numbers of non-existent people - that happened already in 2004. So the claim, the argument “let’s have elections,” if you have an election with the paramilitaries in control at the polling stations, I’m afraid you are not going to get a genuine result.

RT: Will that still be a case if we wait till the 2015 scheduled elections?

MA: The problem now is, and this is why it’s difficult to see a compromise solution, that the Svoboda and the Right Section radical groups in Ukraine have in a sense played their card. They have shown they are prepared to use extreme violence and then they face the problem if they don’t succeed, if the West is not able to cajole the Ukrainian political elite into making concessions, these people do face a very grim future, they’ll go to prison. The problem now is that we have passed the situation where there is an obvious political solution. And as you said a lot of ordinary Ukrainians are very discontented with their economic law, they are probably also very discontented with the ways the government is handling this crisis. Whether they will be listened to, whether they will have a chance to have their votes counted fairly, I think is now very much an open question.

Reprinted from RT-

Syria forces continue mop-up operations

Syria forces continue mop-up operations, kill 50 militants

News | 28.02.2014 | 06:03
Syrian government forces have continued mop-up operations across the country, seizing parts of Aleppo airport and killing at least fifty militants.
Syrian troops also took control of the Brakat hill, reaching to the east of al-Sakan al-Shababi area in the northern city of Aleppo on Thursday.
The operations came a day after an army operation in which Syrian soldiers killed at least 175 foreign-backed al-Qaeda-linked militants near the capital, Damascus.
The ambush attack near Otaybeh village in the eastern Ghouta region claimed the lives of mostly Saudi, Qatari and Chechen militants, local media said.
Meanwhile, almost 300 people arrived in the Syrian capital after being evacuated from Madaya town, east of the Damascus countryside.
Earlier on Thursday, Syria’s official al-Watan newspaper said the country’s army is “preparing to launch a new phase” of its mop-up operation in the town of Yabrud near the border with Lebanon to clear militants from the area.
It said the government forces have taken control of two strategic hills near Yabrud, in the Qalamoun mountains.
"Every day there is progress" by the Syrian troops, the daily also said, adding that militants used the hills as supply route.
Syria has been the scene of deadly violence since 2011. Over 130,000 people have reportedly been killed and millions displaced due to the unrest.
The Western powers and their regional allies -- especially Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey -- have been supporting the militants operating inside Syria, according to reports.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

"The victory which has been marked by a change of regime in Kiev is highly questionable... " Dmitry MININ | 28.02.2014


The Ukrainian Pendulum: Has Russia Lost and the West Won?

The more the acrid black smoke disperses from the burning tyres on Kiev’s Maidan Square, the more quietly and deeply are analysts beginning to think about who has actually emerged as the winner in the latest round of the endless Ukrainian ‘chess tournament’, and how much is still to come? Initial euphoria in the West regarding the fact that while absorbed in competing at Sochi, Moscow was overlooking a tricky combination next door is gradually evaporating. And the question arises: what next? And here it becomes clear that the victory which has been marked by a change of regime in Kiev is highly questionable... 
Dmitry MININ | 28.02.2014

Ukraine Shows Russia On Washington’s ‘To Do’ List For Regime Change and Lenin's Clarification of what Imperialism means

Ukraine Shows Russia On Washington’s ‘To Do’ List For Regime Change

Days before Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted from office he was told it was «game over» by America’s Vice President Joe Biden. According to the British Guardian newspaper, quoting anonymous US officials, Biden admonished the Ukrainian leader in an hour-long phone call that his efforts for finding a negotiated solution to the country’s political crisis was «a day late and a dollar short». That’s hardly the friendly advice of a neutral bystander... The climate of lawlessness and mob rule that has now taken over Kiev has spread to other parts of the country... The prompt arrival this week of US deputy secretary of state Williams Burns in the Ukrainian capital «to discuss with political and business figures» the future direction of the country is further evidence that this coup d’état was a Washington-sponsored event… 

The systematic fact is that capitalism cannot be sustained without imperialist conquest. This is especially true in times of capitalist crisis, and the current juncture is probably posing the greatest historical crisis to the viability of US-led capitalism. Imperialism, with its proclivity for foreign interference, subversion and warmongering, is therefore currently at its highest point of need and manifestation for relieving the US-led stagnant economic order. That is what makes the present global situation disturbingly dangerous. 
This structural connection between capitalism and imperialism was made cogently over a century ago by the Russian Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin in his study Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism. Lenin’s insights into the systematic economic and political causes of the First World War have stood the test of time, albeit censored from mainstream Western consciousness. Those insights on how capitalist crisis furnishes imperialist predation can be applied with equal cogency in explaining the origins of the Second World War and many other subsequent international conflicts, including the current rash of US-backed regime-change operations on different continents. 
Lenin’s analysis accounts for why Washington has stepped up its addiction for regime change around the globe over the past decade since when the US-led capitalist order has become locked into a seemingly inextricable depression. As in previous times, war and imperialism are the only way for the system to alleviate its own destructive tendency for impasse. Little wonder, ironically, that one of the first acts of the Western-sponsored protesters in Kiev at the end of last year was to smash up statues commemorating VI Lenin. 
What is taking place in Ukraine is consonant with the bigger historic dynamic that the US and its Western proxies have stepped up their drive for imperialism – everywhere. 
Ultimately, the targets for Western capitalist designs are the two major perceived geopolitical rivals of Russia and China. Both these countries represent a block on unfettered Western expansionism in Eurasia and the Pacific. 
In that regard, ominously, Ukraine may be seen as merely a beachhead for Western regime-change plans in Russia itself. With the rise of Russian President Vladimir Putin as a global leader standing in the way of all-out Western naked aggression that «obstruction» has elevated Russia as a priority objective for Washington. This is fully consistent with renewed threats of militarism from the US towards Russia (and China) in the form of ballistic missile deployments along borders, nuclear weapons expansion (euphemistically called «upgrade») and the veiled doctrine of «first strike» capability. 
Ukraine illustrates a chilling denouement of a political tendency that has been evolving in American imperialism over the past decade. To Wesley Clark’s infamous list of covert American regime change operations, the unspoken ultimate prize is becoming increasingly evident – Moscow.
In truth, however, it is not simply a case of the post-1945 American Cold War against Russia being resumed. The US-led global capitalist war on Russia goes back to the October Revolution of 1917. The onslaught on Soviet Russia by Nazi Germany was a Western covert plan to subjugate a vast territory that had become out of Western capitalism’s control. (The subject of a subsequent column.)
The neo-Nazi paramilitaries unleashed by the West to destabilize the Ukraine, and Russia, presently, resonate with an old, systematic agenda of Western imperialist regime change towards the East and elsewhere. There is nothing anomalous about the historical association of the Western capitalist ruling class and present-day fascist thuggery. 

Finian CUNNINGHAM | 27.02.2014

Destabilisierungskampagne gegen ecuadorianische Regierung hält an

Kommuniqué der Botschaft von Ecuador in Deutschland


Destabilisierungskampagne gegen ecuadorianische Regierung hält an

Am 19. Februar dieses Jahres erschien ein fehlerhafter Artikel in der britischen Tageszeitung The Guardian, in welchem behauptet wurde, dass die Regierung Ecuadors 2009 Verhandlungen mit chinesischen Ölkonzernen zur Erdölförderung im Nationalpark Yasuní aufgenommen habe. Dieses bedeutende Tageblatt hatte nicht ausreichend recherchiert bzw. die Tatsachen ungenügend überprüft, denn die Quelle der dem Artikel zugrundeliegenden Behauptung erwies sich als manipuliert. Am 20. Februar druckte die ecuadorianische Zeitung El Telégrafo eine Richtigstellung der Regierung von Ecuador ab. Aus ihr geht hervor, dass ein mittlerweile in die USA geflüchteter ecuadorianischer Staatsangehöriger namens Fernando Villavicencio, ehemaliger Gewerkschafter der Erdölindustrie, einen verfälschten Text über die ecuadorianisch-chinesichen Verhandlungen verbreitet hatte. In diesem Dokument stand ein Satz, der in der abschließenden, das heißt gültigen Version des Verhandlungstexts jedoch gestrichen war: Demnach sagte Ecuador einem chinesischen Erdölunternehmen Unterstützung einer eventuellen Ölförderung im Nationalpark Yasuní auf den „ITT-Feldern und dem Block 31“ zu. Dieser von Ecuador abgelehnte, durchgestrichene Satz, der von der chinesischen Entwicklungsbank vorgeschlagen wurde, erscheint in dem von Herrn Villavicencio veröffentlichten Dokument allerdings so, als ob er nie gestrichen worden wäre.
Gegen Herrn Villavicencio wird gegenwärtig wegen Spionage und Herausgabe von Dokumenten, die auf unzulässige Weise in seinen Besitz kamen, ermittelt. Zudem hatte er Falschmeldungen bezüglich des Putschversuchs gegen die Regierung des Präsidenten Rafael Correa Delgado vom 30. September 2010 verbreitet. Gegen Herrn Villavicencio sind außerdem zwei Verfahren wegen Beleidigung sowie Aufruhr vor Gericht anhängig.
In einer Verlautbarung des ecuadorianischen Ministers zur Koordination der Wirtschaftspolitik, Patricio Rivera, heißt es, dass die Veröffentlichung eines verfälschten Dokuments zu diesem Thema just am Vorabend der Regional- und Kommunalwahlen in Ecuador „verdächtig“ erscheinen muss. Die Tatsache, dass ein dermaßen verfälschter Presseartikel zum Thema der Yasuní-ITT-Initiative veröffentlicht wurde (ein seit Monaten hinlänglich geklärtes Thema), stellt ein deutliches Zeichen dar, dass die gegen die Regierung Ecuadors gerichtete Destabilisierungskampagne fortdauert. Denn die unmittelbar vor den genannten Wahlen in Ecuador gestreute Desinformation wiegelte Umweltschützer, Ökologen sowie Anhänger der leider im vergangenen August abgebrochenen, erfolglosen (konzeptuell revolutionären) Initiative Yasuní-ITT gezielt gegen die Regierung auf.

Auch in Europa sollten im Umweltschutz aktive Menschen sehr achtsam sein, um ähnliche, aus gewissen Kapitalinteressen heraus lancierte Persuasions- und Ablenkungsmanöver, welche auf Manipulation und Lügen gründen, aufzudecken.
Botschaft von Ecuador in Deutschland · Joachimstaler Str. 12 · 10719 Berlin · 10. Stock
Tel.: 0049 (0) 30-800 96 95 · Fax: 0049 (0) 30-800 96 96 99 ·

The U.S. and Terrorism in Syria

Nikolai BOBKIN | 27.02.2014 | 00:04

The Obama administration is accusing the Russian authorities of not wanting to support U.S. peace initiatives on Syria. According to Secretary of State John Kerry, Moscow is refusing to help Western countries seek a political solution, by which the Americans mean the removal of President al-Asad from power. Washington, despite rumors of a new White House strategy with regard to Syria, still does not want to resolve the conflict as long as al-Asad is still in power. 

The Americans are irritated by Moscow's intractability(hartnackigkeit, widerspenstigkeit) in the UN Security Council. Since the beginning of the conflict in Syria in March 2011, Russia has used its veto power in the Security Council three times when it found the position of the U.S. and its allies unacceptable. The Kremlin will not help the West to «legalize» intervention against Syria using the UN Security Council. Moscow opposes the mention of possible sanctions in UN resolutions, which the White House insists on. Russia has offered its alternative draft of these resolutions, and Moscow is preparing to present a document on fighting terrorism in Syria. For now Russia has supported a recently passed resolution demanding that government forces and opposition troops cease «indiscriminate attacks» on civilians, lift sieges on towns and facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to war-affected regions. Furthermore, at the initiative of the Russian Federation a strong anti-terrorism section was included which refers to the declaration of the G8 heads of state at Lough Erne in June 2013.

The resolution «calls on the Syrian authorities and opposition groups to commit to combating and defeating organizations and individuals associated with Al-Qaeda, its affiliates and other terrorist groups». It was at Russia’s insistence that this clause was included in the resolution. America continues to assert in the teeth of the facts that the scale of al-Qaeda participation in the war in Syria is exaggerated. Recently Mohammed al-Golani, the leader of one of the largest Syrian Islamist groups, the al-Nusra Front, swore allegiance to al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. The Free Syrian Army (FSA) was quick to distance itself from the al-Nusra Front, but the Obama administration is in no hurry, although the U.S. has included this group in its list of terrorist organizations. 

It is first and foremost Americans who question this Obama administration policy. In Afghanistan the U.S. spent over a trillion dollars and lost over 2,000 of its citizens in the longest war of the past hundred years in order to kill one terrorist, bin Laden, and now the U.S. president is trying to repeat all this one more time in Syria. Obama's logic is impossible to understand; through his efforts, international terrorism is finding a new haven in Syria to replace Afghanistan. 

A conflict which began with anti-government demonstrations three years ago has turned into a war between militant groups. Furthermore, an entire army of foreign mercenaries who have no relation to Syria are operating in the country. The majority of the mercenaries (around 70 percent) are from Middle Eastern countries [1], mainly from Jordan (up to 2089 people), Saudi Arabia (1016), Tunisia (970), Lebanon (890) and Libya (556). However, over the past year the number of citizens of Western Europe who have joined the ranks of international terrorism has been growing at a frightening pace; in 2013 their number increased from 600 in April to 1900 by the end of the year. Western Europeans now comprise up to 20 percent of foreign mercenaries in Syria; the majority of new recruits are from France (412), Great Britain (366), Germany (240), Belgium (296) and the Netherlands (152). Over 200 Americans and Canadians are fighting in the ranks of the al-Nusra Front. There is no doubt that when they return, the European and American fighters for international terrorism will take up the same activities in their home countries. But for now they are fighting for the creation of an Islamic state in Syria as the foundation for a future caliphate. 

And here the Americans could ask their president: why does America want to replace al-Asad's regime with the Syrian equivalent of Taliban-era Afghanistan? Washington has implied many times that it could get the Syrian opposition to the negotiating table any time it needed to. However, it couldn't. Or else it wouldn't. Recently a real war has begun between the various rebel groups over the division of the territories under their control. Al-Qaeda's troops are fighting more successfully than others, while the FSA is losing ground. Chaos and disorder reign in the ranks of al-Asad's adversaries; since early January in the north and east of Syria there have been fierce battles between various rebel forces, and alliances between them form and disintegrate almost every day. 

Of course, John Kerry maintains that soon we can expect demilitarization of the situation and the opening of corridors for humanitarian aid, as well as an end to attacks against the civilian population. If he is talking about the Syrian authorities, there will not be any problems on their end. The Syrian government is prepared to cooperate with regard to the UN Security Council resolution, granting access for humanitarian cargos as long as the state's sovereignty is respected. But the discord in the rebel camp and their lack of a united coordinating center makes it impossible for them to implement the resolution. According to the Security Council document, a report on the situation in Syria is to be presented to the Council every 30 days, which means that before that time runs out the international community will not be able to react quickly to the rebels' noncompliance with the resolution's demands. It is difficult to believe that the U.S. State Department does not understand that. Kerry is once again demonstrating classic American disregard for the fate of other nations.

For America, the use of force is the priority course of action in Syria. Here the Americans will balk at nothing. The Free Syrian Army, as anyone can see, has not been capable of fighting without al-Qaeda for a long time, but Washington prefers to overthrow Bashar al-Asad by the hands of «moderates». The White House understands that the American public will not accept al-Qaeda coming to power in Damascus, but cannot refuse to make use of it. The Obama administration has gotten stuck in this impasse. It is in Washington's interests to remain ostensibly on the sidelines while allowing the rebels to continue to commit outrages in Syria and preventing al-Asad from ending the terrorist war which is exhausting the country...

(1) ICSR. King’s College London. ICSR Insight: Up to 11,000 foreign fighters in Syria; steep rise among Western Europeans.

Tags: Al Qaeda UN Middle East Syria

Assad Calls for Regional Cooperation on Terrorism

Assad calls for regional cooperation on terrorism

News | 27.02.2014 | 10:07
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has called for regional cooperation to eradicate terrorism and extremism.
Assad made the remarks during a meeting with an Iranian parliamentary delegation in the Syrian capital, Damascus, on Wednesday.
The Syrian president also described Wahhabi ideology as the biggest threat to regional and global peace, adding that there should be a unified approach by regional countries to counter this ideology.
The Iranian delegation is headed by Alaeddin Boroujerdi, the chairman of Iran's Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, who blamed the United States for supporting terrorist groups in Syria and warned that terrorism could backfire against Washington itself.
The Iranian legislator also stressed that the crisis in Syria has no military solution, and that no power is able to defeat Syria as long as the Syrian people stand with their army.
Syria has been gripped by deadly violence since 2011. Some sources say around 130,000 people have been killed and millions displaced due to the violence fueled by Western-backed militants.
According to reports, the Western powers and their regional allies -- namely Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey -- are supporting the militants operating inside Syria.

Syrien gibt trotz "Schocktherapie" nicht klein bei !

Von Irene Eckert, Berlin 

Trotz Terror, Verleumdung und alledem!

Syrien gibt, anders als die Ukraine, nicht klein bei. Die syrische Kulturnation, ihr Erbe, ihre Reichtümer, ihre großartigen Menschen sind zwar nach wie vor erheblich bedroht. Wenngleich aber die „Friedensbewegung“ hierzulande auf der ganzen Linie versagt hat und der Menschenrechtspropaganda auch diesmal wieder auf den verschimmelten Leim gegangen ist, so steht Syrien doch keineswegs allein da in der Welt. Die tapfere kleine Nation hat zuverlässige, große Verbündete und genießt die Sympathien weiter Teile der stilleren Weltöffentlichkeit. Sie verfügt über eine im Volk beliebte, unbeugsame Führungspersönlichkeit.
Diese positive Note mag vom Norden her vorerst nur als Schimäre erkennbar sein. Sie ist aber eine realpolitische Größe, mit der Friedenskräfte rechnen sollten und die sie unterstützen müssen. Die syrische Nation verfügt über Jahrhunderte alte Erfahrung im Kampf gegen imperialistische Übergriffe und weiß dieses Wissen zu nutzen. Obwohl die Kriegsgefahr also noch immer nicht endgültig gebannt ist und auch die Terrorismusgefahr weiterhin real, gibt es auch Anlaß dafür, positiv in die Zukunft zu schauen.
Dies gilt, obwohl der Terrorismus - trotz jüngster Erfolge der Regierungskräfte - unter dem schweigenden Auge unserer Medien wieder einmal in menschenverachtender Weise zugeschlagen hat. Das Angriffsziel der vorgeblich 'revolutionären' Contras war diesmal ein alawitisches Dorf. 1
Zwar sind die barbarischen Methoden der vom Westen hofierten 'Rebellen' seit Beginn der gesteuerten Unruhen im Pseudo-Revolutionsjahr 2011 immer grausiger geworden. Sie zielen auf Schwächung der Zentralmacht, sie zielen insbesondere auf Präsident Assad, auf einen modernen, aufgeklärten Angehörigen der alwawitschen Minderheit. 2  Bashar al Assad  ist zum bevorzugten Hassobjekt seiner gierigen Gegner im Westen geworden, weil er sich den imperialen Neuordnungsplänen für die Region mit von ihm vielleicht unerwarteter Entschiedenheit in den Weg gestellt hat. Millionen Syrer haben sich dagegen, trotz seines anfänglichen Entgegenkommens gegenüber den Interessen des Westens, immer wieder in beeindruckenden Massenmanifestationen hinter ihn gestellt. Er gewann Wahlen und ein konstitutionelles Referendum, das trotz der zugespitzten Lage im Land 2012 durchgeführt wurde. Er würde auch bei den jetzt bevorstehenden Wahlen wieder wiedergewählt, das gilt bei seinen Gegnern als gesichertes Wissen. 3

In Syrien herrscht kein Bürgerkrieg!

Was in Syrien seit drei Jahren stattfindet, ist also alles andere als ein Bürgerkrieg. Es ist die Gier der alten Kolonialmächte nach Rohstoffen, nach Pipelines und nach strategischer Vorherrschaft im Bunde mit neuen imperialen Ansprüchen, die das friedliche uralte Kulturland zu zerreißen drohen.

Über drei Jahre lang schon hält die vom Volke gestützte, zuverlässige Führung des Landes stand. Sie hält Stand trotz des entsetzlichen Wütens der vom Westen her gut besoldeten Contras. Immer neue Versuche, dem Lande von außen her eine neue, dem Westen dienende Regierung auf's Auge zu drücken, haben daher   bisher nichts gefruchtet. Trotz gut honorierter einzelner Überläufer verteidigt die Armee das Staatswesen und seine Bürger gegen die hinterhältigen und immer besser  und moderner ausgestatteten Söldnerbanden. Nach wie vor werden diese  von der Türkei aus, von Jordanien, von Saudi-Arabien und Katar eingeschleust.
Auf solche Weise sorgte man dafür, dass in allen Landesteilen im einst gut aufgestellten arabischen Land mittlerweile Not herrscht. Diese künstlich erzeugt Not ist schlimm genug, auch ohne den erbärmlichen, alltäglich gewordenen Terror. Hinter diesem steht allerdings  ein System, das man kennt: Ethnien aufhetzen gegen einander, religöse Minderheiten aufstacheln zum Hass, Unruhe stiften um jeden Preis, destabilisieren und  damit Vorwände für „humanitäre Interventionen“ schaffen, die dann alles noch verschlimmern und neue Vorwände für neues kriegerisches Eingreifen nach sich ziehen. Die Strategie wurde ihm PNAC-Papier „Für ein neues amerikanisches Jahrhundert“ ganz offen dargelegt. Sie hat ihre Gültigkeit in den Augen ihrer Macher keineswegs verloren, auch wenn ein Herr Ischinger das behauptet.

Bekämpfung des Terrors ist prioritär

Der Terror in Syrien richtete sich von Anbeginn besonders grausam gegen die christliche Minderheit, weil diese treu hinter der Regierung Assad stand. Seine säkulare Administration sicherte allen Minderheiten Schutz zu. Der seit fast drei Jahren wütende Terror verschont daher keinen, der durch Religionszugehörigkeit oder Ethnie verdächtig ist, mit der Regierung Bashar al Assads zu sympathisieren. Er verschont selbst die antiken, wertvollen Kulturdenkmäler christlicher Provenienz nicht.4
Die ganze Verlogenheit der selbsternannten Menschenrechtsverfechter kommt darin zum Ausdruck, dass den Regierungskräften im Lande, die sich um Begrenzung des Terrors bemühen, die Minderheiten  ebenso wie die  Mehrheit  ihrer friedlichen Bewohner zu schützen versucht, die Schuld für die schlimme Lage der Nation in die Schuhe geschoben wird. Nahezu zehn Millionen Menschen bedürfen heute nach unabhängigen Quellen der humanitären Hilfe. Das ist fast die Hälfte der gesamten Bevölkerung. Eine Viertelmillion Syrer leben in von Killern belagerten Dörfern oder Städten. Der letzte unabhängige arabische Staat ist damit ins Visier jener Mächte geraten, die sich vorgenommen haben, der arabischen Welt einen „revolutionären Frühling“ nach ihren Vorstellungen zu verpassen.

Warum die Genfer Gespräche scheitern mussten

Die Genfer Friedensgespräche konnten nichts Substantielles zur Besserung der Lage im Lande beitragen, weil das politisch von den Hintermännern des Terrors nicht gewollt war. Während der einzige Verbündete in der Region, der Iran, auf Geheiß der USA wieder ausgeladen wurde, waren im gleichen Atemzug und in buchstäblich letzter Sekunde noch zehn dem Westen genehme Mächte nach Montreux zur großen Eröffnungschau geladen worden. Während es den über 40 geladenen Mietlingen nur darum zu tun war, Syriens offizielle Regierungsdelegation vorzuführen, war diese gekommen, um ernsthaft zu verhandeln und zwar darüber, wie man dem Terror Einhalt gebieten könne. Wer möchte ihnen das verdenken?
Nach zwei ergebnislosen Verhandlungsrunden  mussten sie, die  im teuren Genf ganz bescheiden untergekommen waren,  unverrichteter Dinge und mit leeren Händen  nach Hause  zurückkehren.
Mit einer hilflosen Geste des guten Willens entschuldigte sich  daher zurecht der algerische UN-Unterhändler Lakhdar Brahimi am Samstag, den 16. Februrar nach dem Scheitern der 2. Verhandlungsrunde beim syrischen Volk dafür, dass „man nicht mehr helfen konnte" und gestand ein: "Es wurde kaum etwas erreicht".  Nun, an ihm hat es nicht gelegen.

Noch bevor die Verhandlungen in Genf ein vorläufig klägliches Ende gefunden hatten, bastelten  schon die Kulissenschieber  an einer neuen, nichts Gutes verheißenden UN-Sicherheitsresolution. Vorgeblich soll der neue Anlauf dazu dienen, der Not der Syrer   nun anderweitig Abhilfe zu schaffen. Der Textentwurf beschwor die „willkürlichen Verhaftungen und die Folter in syrischen Gefängnissen“ zu beenden und die dafür Verantwortlichen zur Rechenschaft vor 'Internationale Gerichte' zu bringen. China und Russland, die zum wiederholten Mal und  aus gutem Grund ihre Zustimmung zu dieser bösartigen Heuchelei verweigern, werden vor den Augen der Weltöffentlichkeit wieder als die Menschenrechtsverächter par excellence vorgeführt werden.5  Worum geht es aber wirklich?

Humanitäre Propaganda und Antiterrorkampf sind brüchige Fassaden für neoimperiale Ziele!

Die syrische Regierung war in Genf erstrangig vertreten und  jeden Tag aufs Neue darum bemüht, einen konstruktiven Gesprächsverlauf zu bewirken. Zwei Punkte waren ihnen begreiflicher Weise vorrangig. Ersten wollten sie die Beendigung des Terrors als Tagesordnungspunkt eins auf der Agenda sehen. Zweitens stimmten sie der Deutung der vom Westen millionschwer ausgehaltenen Oppositionsvertreter nicht zu, deren einzige, ofefnkundig ihnen vorgegebene Parole war: „Assad ist das Hindernis", "solange er der Regierung vorsteht, ist der Terror unüberwindbar“. Der syrische Staatschef wurde also als  das Hindernis per se für einen sinnvollen Fortgang der Gespräche ausgemacht, mit einem "Menschenschlächter" könne man nicht einmal reden, wurde scheinheilig vorgebracht. Man behauptet wider besseres Wisssen,  im Ergebnisprotokoll der ersten Genfer Gesprächsrunde vom Juni 2012 sei die Rede von einer Übergangsregierung ohne Assad als Vorbedingung für jedes Unterhandeln.

War nun entsprechend solch irrwitziger Interpretation  bereits die Anreise der Regierungsdelegation nach Montreux massiv beindert worden,  so war es nach absichtlich herbeigeführter Verspätung dem syrischen Außenminster Walid al-Muallim nicht erlaubt worden, seine Anklagerede gegen den Terrorismus, der sein Land verwüstet, zu Ende zu führen. Anschließend wurde   ihm von den westlichen Medien unterstellt, er habe eine „Brandrede“ gehalten. Der  Gegenseite, die man hätschelte, ließ man für ihre Verleumdungen  dagegen freie Hand.

Nicht nur forderten während dem Fortgang der 'Gespräche' im Völkerbundpalais auf dem UN Plaza in Genf die  aus dem europäischen Ausland, insbesondere auch aus Deutschland, angereisten Exil-Syrer samt Kind und Kegel lauthals die Beseitigung des „Kriegsverbrechers Assad“. Selbst auf der von Codepink/Madre und WILPF koorganisierten NGO-Konferenz der Frauen konnte die in den USA lebende, iranische Friedensnobelpreisträgerin Shirin Ebadi hetzerisch darlegen, dass sie die gegenwärtige syrische Regierung für das Haupthindernis zum Frieden hält.

Die fadenscheinige, humanitäre Propagandarede von den "Verbrechen, die die Assad-Regierung am eigenen Volk verübe", trübt die Sinne der  zum Mitgefühl begabten Menschen, insbesondere die  der feinfühligen Frauen. Fragwürdige Konzepte wie die unter dem Kürzel R2P6 eingeführte Schutzverantwortung, vom daher unter Umständen auch militärisch zu erzwingenden Regierungswechsel („Regime Change“) oder auch die ähnlich gelagerte Vorstellung von den angeblich gescheiterten Staaten („Failed States“) tragen seit langem dazu bei, die UN Charta in ihrem Wesensgehalt zu unterhöhlen. Dieser basiert auf dem Souveränitätsprinzip und verbietet im Interesse der friedlichen Konfliktaustragung die Einmischung in die inneren Angelegenheiten souveräner Nationen.

Um diese Vorschrift zu umgehen, operieren die ehemaligen Kolonialstaaten und die neuen imperialistischen Staaten der westlichen Hemisphäre mit dem Konzept der angeblich höher anzusiedelnden Menschenrechte und greifen aus der „Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte“ selektiv jene heraus, die ihnen zu pass kommen. Jene einäugigen Vorstellungen von Freiheit und "Democrazy", die ihnen eine Angriffsfläche für ihre „humanitären Interventionen“ bieten, werden von den Musterknaben der Demokratie, insbesondere von den mittelalterlich - feudalaristokratisch regierten Golfmonarchien  zitiert.  Sehr häufig aber werden die Menschenrechtsverletzungen überhaupt erst inszeniert, gegen die man dann vorgibt, einschreiten zu müssen.

Das Konzept ist uralt. Handelt es sich doch um die neokoloniale Auflage der Idee von der „Bürde des Weißen Mannes“ (R. Kipling), der in den barbarisch-unterentwickelten Ländern des Südens für Recht und Ordnung sorgen muss, bewaffnet versteht sich. Diese Art der Befriedung kommt der Ausplünderung der wertvollen Rohstoffen in der südlichen und fernöstlichen Hemisphäre sehr zu gute und dient auch der vom Kolonisator diktierten 'Freiheit des Handels'.

Der Antiterrorkampf ist nur die andere Seite der Medaille. Wo kein Terror herrscht, muss man ihn folglich einführen, um ihn dann um so besser bekämpfen zu können. Am Beispiel Syriens lässt sich das Prinzip der infiltrierten Zerstörung, die man dann wiederum durch Intervention von außen bekämpfen „muss“,  an einer klassischen Kulturnation exemplifizieren.

Wie man Terror infiltriert und dann nach humanitärer Intervention ruft.

Syrien war bis 2011 eine blühende, sich durch kulturelle und ethnische Vielfalt auszeichnende, starke Nation. Syriens Gesundheits- und Bildungswesen waren vorbildlich in der arabischen Welt, nachdem Libyen gefallen war. Wichtige Dienstleistungen waren staatlich organisiert und kostenfrei. Der Neoliberalismus hat im Lande noch nicht durchgegriffen.

Syrien war ein zuverlässiger Partner für das palästinensische Volk, nahm viele Flüchtlinge auf, gab ihnen Rechte und war den Israelis stets ein Dorn im Auge. Die syrische Frau war ein selbstbewusstes, gebildetes Wesen und konnte in der Hauptstadt Damaskus auch nachts allein gefahrlos nach Hause gehen.

Geopolitisch spielt Syrien als Partner Russland und des Iran eine wichtige Rolle. Syrien muss daher aus westlich-imperialer Sicht in die Knie gezwungen werden, damit durch Schwächung seiner Partner der Weg nach China am Ende frei wird. Dabei geht es selbstredend auch ganz direkt und unmittelbar  um Gasvorkommen, Pipelines und Handelsrouten.

Unter den fadenscheinigsten Vorwänden der Menschenrechtsverletzungen ausgerechnet im toleranten Syrien wurden aus den 'demokratischen Vorzeigenationen' Jordanien, Katar, Saudi-Arabien und der Türkei bewaffnete Söldner ins Land geschleust. Es wurden sogar verurteilte Mörder frei gelassen, mit der Auflage, schleunigst  nach Syrien zu verschwinden. Es wurden strategische Lager in grenznahen Bereichen eingerichtet, angebliche Flüchtlingslager, die in Wirklichkeit der Schulung von Kämpfern dienen.

Solche Lager in der grenznahen türkischen Provinz Hatay mögen neo-osmanische Phantasien beflügeln. Der in die Provinz über greifende Terror mobilisiert   aber den Widerstand der dort lebenden  und ebenfalls in ihrer Existenz bedrohten Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Auch ist  nicht vergessen, dass diese Provinz einst unter dem christlichen Namen 'Antiochia' zu Syrien gehörte. Die Sympathien für den syrischen Nachbarn ist also groß in dieser Region. Die Regierung Erdogan leistet dem eigenen Land und seiner Karriere  einen Bärendienst durch die aggressive Politik gegenüber dem Nachbarland.

Aufgaben für Friedenskräfte!

Wenn nun die jüngste UN-Sicherheitsresolution in humanitärem Kleide auftritt, so wäre es vornehme Aufgabe von Friedenskräften, den Text genau unter die Lupe zu nehmen und mit Hilfe alternativer Medien Ausschau zu halten, nach den eigentlichen Verletzern von Recht und Menschenrecht. Diese sind namentlich anzuprangern, anstatt immer wieder das verlogene Propagandalied gedungener Medienvertreter vom angeblichen 'Menschenschinder Assad' mitanzustimmen.

Wer die Kriegsverheerungen in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, im Yemen, in Somalia, im Sudan, in Mali und Zentralafrika und im Nahen und Mittleren Osten seit Jahrzehnten zu verantworten hat, der ist unglaubwürdig, wenn er ausgerechnet mit bewaffneter Assistenz humanitäre Belange in anderen souveränen Staaten regeln will. Das Völkerrecht ist nicht auf seiner Seite. Er sollte daher von Friedenskräften mit aller Entschiedenheit bedingungslos aufgefordert werden, sich aus den Kriegsgebieten zurückziehen und zu Hause nach dem Rechten schauen.

  • Solidarität mit Syrien und seiner gewählten, legitimen Regierung zu üben, das ist der Auftrag !
  • Respekt vor dem Völkerrecht einzufordern und den Abzug fremder Mietlinge ist Gebot der Stunde!
  • Ja zu sagen zu humanitärer Hilfe, aber Nein zur Einmischung in die Belange einer souveränen Nation!

Wenn es gelingt, solchen Forderungen Nachdruck zu verschaffen, dann wird den Menschenrechten aller Erdbewohner ein großer Dienst erwiesen und dem Menschheitsanliegen FRIEDEN wäre ebenfalls gedient.
1Am 9. Februar drangen Todeschwadronen in das bisher friedliche Dorf Maan in der Provinz Hama ein und töteten 25 Menschen, deren Namen und Adressen bekannt sind, 11 Frauen sollen darunter sein.
2 Der noch relativ junge, in London geschulte Augenarzt Assad hatte sich ursprünglich ganz und gar nicht nach einem politischen Amt gesehnt. Er war aber bereit sich der Verantwortung zu stellen und zeigte sich ihr gewachsen, als Not am Mann war.
3 U.N. Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, during a visit to Iran last summer: ‘If he runs, he will win the elections.’ By Daniel McAdams Global Research, February 13, 2014
4Man erinnere sich in ähnlicher Weise an die kriegseinleitende Zerstörung der antiken Buddhastatuen von Bamyan in Afghanistan (2001), an die Vorgehensweise der Hindutva-Bewegung, die sich in Indien gegen die Muslime und ihre großartigen Kulturstätten richtete, an die Zerstörung islamischer UNSECO „geschützter“ Weltkulturerbe Stätten in Mali und vieles mehr.
5 Gestern Abend (22.02.14) wurde bekanntgegeben, dass Russland nun einer Resolution des Weltsicherheitsrates seine Zustimmung erteilt hat. Zuvor hatte das russische Außenministerium klargestellt: „Russia will back a UN Security Council humanitarian draft resolution on Syria if it really assists to the situation and if it is not politicized, Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said.“Russia is working with its partners to make the text of the resolution balanced and to provide real humanitarian aid to Syria,” the spokesman said.
To this end, we will continue the consultations in the UN Security Council,” he said. (Quelle Itar-Tass)
Sehr wichtig auch :
„Military Humanitarian Intervention: the Shock Doctrine Applied to Syria“ von Rob Prince
February 14, 2014 Foreign Policy in Focus

6Responisibilty to Protect = „R2P“