Monday, June 30, 2014

What Common People of New EU Associate Members Have a Right to Know

Andrei AKULOV | 30.06.2014 | 00:00

On June 27 Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova signed association agreements with the EU. The move was presented as a decisive turn for democracy and human rights. But some issues related to the decision had been purposefully kept under the radar screen. Media assured the grassroots were not adequately provided information about some crucially important aspects of the step to be taken by their respective governments that have chosen the so-called European choice. So one day the people of those states may wake up to find themselves facing raw awakening they have never expected. True, the economic transition period from associated status to membership is not going to be a bed of roses. And there is a specific feature here - if there is any social discontent you’d better conceal it and keep mum …or else!
The European Gendarmerie Force (EGF) is a multinational initiative of six EU Member States - France, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, Romania and Spain – established in 2006 by treaty with the aim to strengthen international crisis management capacities and contribute to the development of the Common Security and Defense Policy. 
 EUROGENDFOR can be considered as an integrated police tool designed to carry out police missions in different theatres, including destabilized ones, in support of the EU, the UN, the OSCE and NATO, or possible ad hoc coalitions. The main feature of this armed force is flexibility. It can intervene quickly in any high intensity conflict under any military command (formally under the control of civilians), acting jointly with other divisions or in a totally autonomous. It may also intervene at any time of the conflict in the initial phase to stabilize or restore the order pre-existing alongside or replacing the local police force, during the transition phase will be called to serve a mission purely military in coordination with the local authorities, and finally in the final stage by facilitating the transfer of responsibilities from the military to the civilian chain of command. The methods of intervention are the following: replacement of the local police forces in certain areas where the conduct of the normal civil activity is in crisis (read – it deprives the country of national sovereignty – author’s note) andbuilding military facilities in an environment characterized by high levels of insecurity and crime due to the lack of an adequate rule of law (a pretext easy to invent – author’s note). There is the possible use during events considered to be particularly at risk such as the annual meetings of the G8 or the like.Once G8 has become G7 - the leading Western nations alone will decide the fate of sovereign states and make them do what they are supposed to. 
The unit’s contingent is about 2,500 men able to intervene within thirty days in every corner of the world. Article 29 determined that the staff members of Eurogendfor will not suffer any proceedings concerning the execution of a judgment against them in the host State in the receiving State or in a case connected to the fulfillment of their service. (!) Whatever atrocity the operatives commit – no responsibility entails. So you go to Ukraine, for instance, and indiscriminately shoot around to your heart content, there will be no consequences to face. 
According to the Declaration of Intent and the Treaty, ROGENDFOR is featured as an "Operational, pre-organized, robust and rapidly deployable"force contributing to the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) even when deployed under non-European Union structures. 
Non-European Union – that is not full-fledged members, please take notice. Are the people of Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova well informed about it? Are they aware of these facts? Anybody took the pain to inform and explain to them what it all means in practice? Hardly so! A vitally important aspect ignored on purpose! Tricky politics! 
The international police presence may be mandated to perform the full range (or just some) of the police functions, thus being entitled to executive police powers, and should therefore be armed.
June 24 is the day the Council of the European Union adopted a decision on the rules and procedures for the implementation of the solidarity clause (Article 222 TFEU). (3) The solidarity clause provides for the Union and its member states to act jointly in assisting another member state being the object of a terrorist attack (Donetsk and Luhansk republics in the east of Ukraine?) or the victim of a natural or man-made disaster. The Union willmobilize all the instruments at its disposal. The Commission and the High Representative, assisted by the European External Action Service, will in particular identify all Union instruments and capabilities that can best contribute to the response to the crisis, and take all the necessary measures under their competence. The June 24 decision also provides for an immediate activation of the Integrated Political Crisis Response arrangements (IPCR), a mechanism approved in June 2013 by the Council. This will allow a rapid involvement of the political authorities across the EU in order for the Council to ensure the strategic direction of the response and to take appropriate action to the benefit of the member state affected. 
“On Tuesday, the representatives of the EU Member States in the Council adopted a decision on the so-called ‘solidarity clause’. Were a disaster or a loosely defined crisis to occur, the organs of the European Union would be obliged to assist using all the instruments at their disposal. This includes military resources”, warned Member of the Bundestag from German Left Party Andrej Hunko. According to him, “The adoption at the General Affairs Council took place in secret: the point was not mentioned on the agenda of the meeting. The press was not informed. Yet this is one of the most controversial clauses contained in the EU treaties. That is precisely the reason why agreement on the details of the solidarity clause was postponed to a later point at the time of the signature of the Lisbon Treaty”.
According to Andrej Hanko, the clause strengthens the course towards militarization of home-affairs policy, since military personnel can be sent to another Member State on request. “I am concerned that this is about the home-affairs version of the Article 5 clause on mutual defence: it would apply in situations which may have an adverse impact on people, the environment or property”. Even politically motivated blockades in the areas of energy and transport and general strikes are covered.”
Remember Nigel Farage, the leader of UKIP? Somehow the events make recall his warning. On May 15 he said, “We face the prospect of mass civil unrest, even revolution in Europe
* * *
That’s when the situation Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia comes to mind. It’s an open secret all these states face a threat of mass discontent on the way of implementation the agreement provisions. Will common people be happy with the living standards falling? What if they start thinking and asking questions about where the countries are heading to? Then EGF is there for them.

US Aggression in Ukraine and the Eurasian Union

Olga SHEDROVA | 30.06.2014 | 00:00
America’s colonial takeover of Ukraine and Europe’s siding with them was a serious factor in the stepping-up of integration processes on the Eurasian continent.
In particular, the real breakthrough came with the formation of a strategic partnership between Russia and China. In addition to the 51 major agreements that were reached following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to China on 20-21 May 2014, a joint statement was also adopted establishing a new stage of comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation. The alliance is a geopolitical one. In the joint statement (1) adopted by the leaders of the two countries, both sides agreed to strengthen a close coordination of activities in their foreign policies that will lead to a strengthening of their positions and influence in the international arena in the interests of establishing a fairer and more rational world order.
Echoes of the Ukrainian crisis are reflected in a number of the document’s provisions… For example, Russia and China will oppose any attempts and methods of intervention in internal affairs, and support strict adherence to the fundamental provisions of international law enshrined in the UN Charter, unconditional respect for the rights of their partner to independently choose their own development path, and the right to preserve and defend their own cultural, historical, ethical and moral values. Far removed from the European fronts of the Second World War, meanwhile, China has expressed its willingness to take part in the 70th anniversary of the defeat of German fascism and continue their “resolute opposition to attempts to falsify history and undermine the postwar world order”. The two countries also emphasised the need “to respect the historical legacy of countries, their cultural traditions and independently-chosen social and political systems, their value systems and development paths; to oppose interference in the internal affairs of other countries, to reject the language of unilateral sanctions, or organising, aiding, financing or encouraging activity aimed at changing the constitutional system of another country or drawing it into any multilateral bloc or union.”
By way of practical measures to counter America’s expansionist policy, both sides resolved “to establish close cooperation in the financial sphere, including an increase in direct payments in the Russian and Chinese national currencies in trade, investments and loan services, and to deepen the dialogue on macroeconomic policy issues.” During the visit, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the People’s Bank of China signed an agreement to pay each other in domestic currencies for transactions between the two countries. Needless to say, such a decision is a significant blow to the domination of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
The joint statement also contains a response to and condemnation of the activities of the West to develop a global missile defence system, as well as plans to strengthen alternative international structures to Western ones like the G20, BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), the Russia-India-China trilateral and so on.
As Putin declared in an interview summing up the visit, “a new geopolitical centre is emerging in the world, a “G2” if you like, represented by Russia and China. So, whether they like it or not, this is something that every world power is going to have to reckon with” (2).
Worthy of special attention is the package of agreements signed in China on the supply of Russian gas to China, which became the largest contract in the history of the USSR and Russia. A key geopolitical consequence of this contract is the opportunity it opens up for Russia to diversify supplies from west to east and from east to west. And this, in turn, makes gas blackmail by the US and the European Union impossible.
The geopolitical implications of the gas agreements extend much further than just eliminating the possibility of Russia being blackmailed by a united Europe and Washington. The Japanese are once again talking about their desire to import Russian gas, for which the construction of a gas pipeline in Japan along the bottom of the sea has been proposed. It is not the first time that proposals like these are being heard, but this time they could actually get off the ground. Until recently, Russia had treated the initiatives of the ‘Land of the Rising Sun’ with reserve, not just because of the project’s technical complexity, but also because of allied relations between Japan and the US. According to a member of the Expert Council of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy, Innovative Development and Entrepreneurship R. Teryokhin, “Japan is a profitable customer for Russia, but taking into account that it is not a very easy country and quite a risky partner, especially in terms of its commitment to US policy and its territorial disputes with Russia, a pipeline construction project in Japan in reality seems economically unjustified” (4).
Nevertheless, Japan’s latest steps in its foreign policy give reason to suppose that the country is gradually moving away from the dictate of the US and making timid steps towards its partners in the Asia-Pacific Region. In particular, the free trade agreement imposed by Washington was never signed, Japan and China are extending an agreement on giving up the dollar in mutual trade, and the Prime Minister of Japan, Shinzō Abe, proved to be the only G7 leader to attend the Sochi Olympics. His Sochi meeting with Putin was the sixth such meeting in the last year.
In order to assess the importance of intensifying the dialogue between the Moscow-Beijing-Tokyo triangle, one only needs to remember that until relatively recently, these countries were practically enemies, divided by a number of mutual territorial claims. Now, however, it seems that America’s attempts to play on territorial disputes are giving way to economic feasibility. And that, in turn, could jeopardise the whole system of America’s allied relations in the Asia-Pacific Region.
One can also note a number of other seemingly insignificant events. Recep Erdoğan, the Prime Minister of Turkey, another of America’s strategic allies, declared that if Turkey joined the SCO, then it would withdraw its application to join the EU (5). In addition, Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev said that Turkey could become an associate member of the recently established Eurasian Economic Union.
During a visit to India on 8 June 2014, Chinese Foreign Affairs Minister Wang Yi emphasised China’s willingness “to reach a final solution” on the border issue with India (6). Although there are still no discernible arrangements for resolving the issue, it is a significant statement.
May was marked by one more breakthrough in the sphere of Eurasian integration. On 29 May, an agreement was signed in Astana on the creation of a Eurasian Union, which is highly undesirable for the US. As US State Secretary Hillary Clinton announced at the time, “The US is trying to prevent Russia from recreating a new version of the Soviet Union under the ruse of economic integration. There is a move to re-Sovietise the region. It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called a customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that. But let’s make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it” (7). So far, attempts are failing. A number of countries, including US allies such as New Zealand, Turkey and Israel, are willing to sign free trade agreements with the EaEU.
But the most important aspect regarding the creation of the Eurasian Union is the fact that it can incorporate other organisations established in the former USSR. In particular, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko noted that in the future, the CSTO could become the military component of the Eurasian Economic Union: “I think we will soon see the Collective Security Treaty Organisation become part of the union. It will be our military organisation.”
Of course, it would be incorrect to say that these tectonic shifts happened solely as a result of US and EU aggression against Ukraine. Nevertheless, the Ukrainian tragedy accelerated a number of unification processes on the Eurasian continent that in different circumstances could have taken much longer. As noted by Mohammad Marandi, a professor at the University of Tehran, “Following the US’ threats towards Russia, many other world powers are raising the alarm, since they see themselves as potential targets of the American authorities” (8).
There are grounds for such fears, since Washington is already imposing economic sanctions against Russia that are damaging to the EU economy and jeopardising the continent’s energy security. The world also cannot fail to understand that the White House’s foolhardy policy aimed at instigating a full-scale war involving Russia bears a direct threat to every country without exception. Nobody will be left on the sidelines.


Wikileaks Cables Confirm New Ukrainian President Has Been Working For US Gov't Since 2006 

By SCG News
19 June 14
 There's not much point in staging a coup if you don't influence who is placed in power in the aftermath. Of course in order for a puppet government to be effective, they can't be perceived as such. You wouldn't want the natives to get restless would you?
The evidence that the U.S. was behind the toppling of the Ukrainian government early this year is so overwhelming at this point that the subject really isn't up for debate, however initially it was unclear how the election of Petro Poroshenko fit in. The ecstatic response by Washington when he was declared the winner, and their unbending support in spite of his ongoing military assault against civilians in the east, made it clear that he was the chosen one, but the paper trail wasn't immediately obvious.
As it turns out, the evidence that Poroshenko is in the pocket of the U.S. State Department has been available all this time, you just had to know where to find it. In a classified diplomatic cable from 2006 released by, U.S. officials refer to Poroshenko as "Our Ukraine (OU) insider Petro Poroshenko".
A separate cable also released by Wikileaks makes it clear that the U.S. government was considered Poroshenko corrupt.
"Poroshenko was tainted by credible corruption allegations, but wielded significant influence within OU; Poroshenko's price had to be paid."
The U.S. government knew Poroshenko was dirty, but he was influential, and arguably their most dependable mole.
Perhaps the most interesting revelation comes from a 2009 cable where Poroshenko told then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton he supported "the opening of a U.S. diplomatic presence in Crimea" and "He emphasized the importance of Crimea, and said that having U.S. representation there would be useful for Ukraine." Poroshenko's role as an informant for the U.S. government continued in cables in 2010 as well.
Reading through the cables, I have to wonder if Poroshenko was actually breaking Ukrainian law by sharing the kind of strategic information that he did. Considering that this information was certainly used when planning the coup against Yanukovich, one could argue that he committed treason.
Poroshenko, however, isn't the only Ukrainian politician mentioned. For example, the cables mention the scandal surrounding Oleksandr Turchynov's destruction of SBU documents tying Julia Tymoshenko to organized crime, and note that the accusation that Tymoshenko wanted Turchynov get the Interior Minister position so that she could gather damaging information on her enemies. The cable refers to this accusation as "not farfetched". Turchynov went on to be installed as the acting president of Ukraine in the provisional government.
In order to grasp the extent of the U.S. government's tinkering in Ukraine it is worth reading the documents for yourself.
See cables Wikileaks 2006, 2009, 2010 

Friday, June 27, 2014

"Everyone, Except the Brainwashed American public, Knows that the «Crisis in Ukraine» is Entirely the Work of Washington." Paul Craig ROBERTS

A New Recession and a New World Devoid of Washington’s Arrogance?

Paul Craig ROBERTS | 27.06.2014 | 14:00

June 25, 2014.  A final number for real US GDP growth in the first quarter of 2014 was released today. The number is not the 2.6% growth rate predicted by the know-nothing economists in January of this year.  The number is a  decline in GDP of -2.9 percent.
The negative growth rate of -2.9 percent is itself an understatement.  This number was achieved by deflating nominal GDP with an understated measure of inflation. During the Clinton regime, the Boskin Commission rigged the inflation measure in order to cheat Social Security recipients out of their cost-of-living adjustments. Anyone who purchases food, fuel, or anything knows that inflation is much higher than the officially reported number.
It is possible that the drop in first quarter real GDP is three times the official number.
Regardless, the difference is large between the January forecast of +2.6 percent growth and the decline as of the end of March of -2.9 percent.  
Any economist who is real and unpaid by Wall Street, the government, or the Establishment knew that the +2.6 percent forecast was a crock.  Americans’ incomes have not grown except for the one percent, and the only credit growth is in student loans, as those many who cannot find jobs mistakenly turn to «education is the answer.»
In an economy based on consumer demand, the absence of income and credit growth means no economic growth.  
The US economy cannot grow because corporations pushed by Wall Street have moved the US economy offshore. US manufactured products are made offshore.
Look at the labels on your clothes, your shoes, your eating and cooking utensils, your computers, whatever. US professional jobs such as software engineering have been moved offshore. An economy with an offshored economy is not an economy.  All of this happened in full view, while well-paid free market shills declared that Americans were benefiting from giving America’s middle class jobs to China and India.
I have been exposing these lies for a decade or two, which is why I am no longer invited to speak at American universities or to American economic associations. Economists love the money that they receive for lying. A truth teller is the last thing that they want in their midst.
An official decline of -2.9 percent in the first quarter implies a second quarter GDP decline.  Two declines in a row is the definition of recession. 
Imagine the consequences of a recession.  It means that years of unprecedented Quantitative Easing failed to revive the economy.  It means that years of Keynesian fiscal deficits failed to revive the economy.  Neither fiscal nor monetary policy worked.
What then can revive the economy?  
Nothing except to force the return of the economy that the anti-American corporations moved offshore.
This would require credible government.  Unfortunately, the US government has been losing credibility since the second term of the Clinton regime.  It has none left.
Today no one anywhere in the world believes the US government except the brain dead Americans who read and listen to the «mainstream media.»  Washington’s propaganda dominates the minds of Americans, but produces laughter and scorn everywhere else. 
The poor US economic outlook has brought America’s two largest business lobbies--the US Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers (or what is left of them) into conflict with the Obama regime’s threat of further sanctions against Russia.
According to Bloomberg News, beginning tomorrow (June 26), the business groups will run advertisements in the New York Times, Wall St Journal, and Washington Post opposing any further sanctions on Russia. The US business organizations say that the sanctions will harm their profits and result in layoffs of American workers.  
Thus, America’s two largest business organizations, important sources of political campaign contributions, have finally added their voice to the voices of German, French, and Italian business.
Everyone, except the brainwashed American public, knows that the «crisis in Ukraine» is entirely the work of Washington.  European and American businesses are asking: «why should our profits and our workers take hits in behalf of Washington’s propaganda against Russia.» 
Obama has no answer.  Perhaps his neocon scum, Victoria Nuland, Samantha Powers, and Susan Rice can come up with an answer.  Obama can look to the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and Weekly Standard to explain why millions of Americans and Europeans should suffer in order that Washington’s theft of Ukraine is not endangered.
Washington’s lies are catching up with Obama. German chancellor Merkel is Washington’s complete whore, but German industry is telling Washington’s whore that they value their business with Russia more than they value suffering in behalf of Washington’s empire.  French businessmen are asking Hollande what he proposes to do with their unemployed workers if Hollande goes along with Washington. Italian businesses are reminding that government, to the extent that Italy has one, that uncouth Americans have no tastes and that sanctions on Russia mean a hit to Italy’s most famous and best recognized economic sector--high style luxury products.
Dissent with Washington and Washington’s two-bit puppet rulers in Europe is spreading.
The latest poll in Germany reveals that three-quarters of Germany’s population reject permanent NATO bases in Poland and the Baltic states. The former Czechoslovakia, currently Slovakia and the Czech Republic, although NATO members, have rejected NATO and American troops and bases on their territory. Recently, a Polish minister said that pleasing Washington required giving free oral sex for nothing in return. 
The strains that Washington’s morons are putting on NATO might break the organization apart.  Pray that it does. NATO’s excuse for existence disappeared with the Soviet collapse 23 years ago.  Yet, Washington has increased NATO far beyond the borders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.  NATO now runs from the Baltics to Central Asia.
In order to have a reason for NATO’s continued expensive operation, Washington has had to construct an enemy out of Russia.
Russia has no intention of being Washington’s or NATO’s enemy and has made that perfectly clear.  But Washington’s military/security complex, which absorbs about $1 trillion annually of US hard-pressed taxpayers’ money, needs an excuse to keep the profits flowing.  
Unfortunately the Washington morons picked a dangerous enemy. Russia is a nuclear armed power, a country of vast dimensions, and with a strategic alliance with China.  
Only a government drowning in arrogance and hubris or a government run by psychopaths and sociopaths would pick such an enemy.  
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has pointed out to Europe that Washington’s policies in the Middle East and Libya are not merely total failures but also devastatingly harmful to Europe and Russia.  The fools in Washington have removed the governments that suppressed the jihadists. Now the violent jihadists are unleashed.  In the Middle East the jihadists are at work remaking the artificial boundaries set by the British and French in the aftermath of World War I.  
Europe, Russia and China have Muslim populations and now must worry if the violence that Washington has unleashed will bring destabilization to regions of Europe, Russia and China.
No one anywhere in the world has any reason to love Washington.  Least of all Americans, who are being bled dry in order that Washington can parade military force around the world.  Obama’s approval rating is a dismal 41 percent and no one wants Obama to remain in office once his second term is complete.   In contrast, two-thirds of the Russian population want Putin to remain president after 2018.
In March the poling agency, Public Opinion Research Center, released a report that Putin’s approval rating stood at 76 percent despite the agitation against him by the US financed Russian NGOs, hundreds of fifth column institutions that Washington established in Russia during the past two decades.
On top of US political troubles, the US dollar is in trouble. The dollar is kept afloat by rigged financial markets and Washington’s pressure on its vassal states to support the dollar’s value by printing their own currencies and purchasing dollars.  In order to keep the dollar afloat, much of the world will be inflated.  When people finally catch on and rush into gold, the Chinese will have it all.
Sergey Glazyev, an adviser to President Putin, has told the Russian president than only an anti-dollar alliance that crashes the US dollar can halt Washington’s aggression. That has long been my opinion.  There can be no peace as long as Washington can print more money with which to finance more wars. 
As the Chinese government stated, it is time to «de-Americanize the world». Washington’s leadership has totally failed the world, producing nothing but lies, violence, death, and the promise of more violence.  America is exceptional only in the fact that Washington has, without remorse, destroyed in whole or part seven countries in the new 21st century.  Unless Washington is replaced with more humane leadership, life on earth has no future.

Paul Craig ROBERTS
The Honorable Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan Administration. As a presidential appointee to a secret committee, he played a role in the Reagan / Gorbachev negotiation of the end of the Cold War. In 1961 Roberts was a member of the US/USSR student exchange program.  In 1989 and 1990, Roberts addressed the Soviet Academy of Sciences in Moscow on the subject of liberty. His book, Alienation and the Soviet Economy (1971 and 1990) is widely accepted as the explanation of the ideological origin and failure of the Soviet economy. Roberts was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal and columnist for Business Week and Scripps Howard News Service.   He has had many university appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University where his colleagues were Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and James R. Schlesinger.

    Can Putin’s Diplomacy Prevail Over Washington’s Coercion? Paul Craig Roberts

    | 27.06.2014 | 00:01

    June 24, 2014.  Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is trying to save the world from war.  We should all help him. 
    Today Putin’s presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov reported that President Putin has asked the Russian legislature to repeal the authorization to use force that was granted in order to protect residents of former Russian territories that are currently part of Ukraine from the rabid Russophobic violence that characterizes Washington’s stooge government in Kiev.  
    Washington’s neoconservatives are jubilant. They regard Putin’s diplomacy as a sign of weakness and fear, and urge stronger steps that will force Russia to give back Crimea and the Black Sea naval base.
    Inside Russia, Washington is encouraging its NGO fifth columns to undercut Putin’s support with propaganda that Putin is afraid to stand up for Russians and has sold outUkraine’s Russian population. If this propaganda gains traction, Putin will be distracted by street protests. The appearance of Putin’s domestic weakness would embolden Washington. Many members of Russia’s young professional class are swayed by Washington’s propaganda. Essentially, these Russians, brainwashed by US propaganda, are aligned with Washington, not with the Kremlin.
    Putin has placed his future and that of his country on a bet that Russian diplomacy can prevail over Washington’s bribes, threats, blackmail, and coercion.  Putin is appealing to Western Europeans. Putin is saying, “I am not the problem.  Russia is not the problem. We are reasonable. We are ignoring Washington’s provocations. We want to work things out and to find a peaceful solution.”
    Washington is saying: “Russia is a threat.  Putin is the new Hitler. Russia is the enemy. NATO and the US must begin a military buildup against the Russian Threat, rush troops and jet fighters to Eastern European NATO bases on Russia’s frontier. G-8 meetings must be held without Russia. Economic sanctions must be put on Russia regardless of the damage the sanctions do to Europe.”  And so forth.
    Putin says: “I’m here for you. Let’s work this out.”
    Washington says: “Russia is the enemy.”
    Putin knows that the UK is a complete vassal puppet state, that Cameron is just as bought-and-paid-for as Blair before him.  Putin’s hope for diplomacy over force rests on Germany and France.  Both countries face Europe’s budget and employment woes, and both countries have significant economic relations with Russia. German business interests are a counterweight to the weak Merkel government’s subservience to Washington.  Washington has stupidly angered the French by trying to steal $10 billion from France’s largest bank. This theft, if successful, will destroy France’s largest bank and deliver France to Wall Street.
    If desire for national sovereignty still exists in the German or French governments, one or both could give the finger to Washington and publicly declare that they are unwilling for their country to be drawn into conflict with Russia for the sake of Washington’s Empire and the financial hegemony of American banks.
    Putin is betting on this outcome.  If his bet is a bad one and Europe fails not only Russia but itself and the rest of the world by accommodating Washington’s drive for world hegemony, Russia and China will have to submit to Washington’s hegemony or be prepared for war.
    As neither side can afford to lose the war, the war would be nuclear.  As scientists have made clear, life on earth would cease, regardless of whether Washington’s ABM shield works.
    This is why I oppose Washington’s policies and speak out against the arrogance and hubris that define Washington today.  The most likely outcome of Washington’s pursuit of world hegemony is the extinction of life on earth.
    Dr. Paul Craig Roberts,

    Paul Craig ROBERTS
    The Honorable Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan Administration. As a presidential appointee to a secret committee, he played a role in the Reagan / Gorbachev negotiation of the end of the Cold War. In 1961 Roberts was a member of the US/USSR student exchange program.  In 1989 and 1990, Roberts addressed the Soviet Academy of Sciences in Moscow on the subject of liberty. His book, Alienation and the Soviet Economy (1971 and 1990) is widely accepted as the explanation of the ideological origin and failure of the Soviet economy. Roberts was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal and columnist for Business Week and Scripps Howard News Service.   He has had many university appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University where his colleagues were Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and James R. Schlesinger
    Zum Diskurs um die Montagsmahnwachen: Friedens“bewegung“ versus Friedensbewegung?

    Ein Kommentar zum einem völligen schiefen Diskurs von Irene Eckert am 27. Juni 2014

    Es ist zum Steinerweichen:
    S'ist Krieg, s'ist Krieg und ich begehre, dass  mein Land  dagegen sich  erwehre.

    Deutschland bleiche Mutter

    Wie jedes gute Land, so leidet auch meine bleiche Mutter, mein gutes deutsches Land unter den kriegerischen Verheerungen, die um sie herum stattfinden. Nicht nur, weil diese Zerstörungsprozesse wieder einmal von seinem Führungspersonal mitgetragen, mitverantwortet, ja sogar angeheizt werden. Nicht nur, weil kein Volk sich seiner Errungenschaften freuen kann, um deretwillen andere Völker darben. Nein, unsere Menschen fühlen darüber hinaus eine manchmal noch diffuse Bedrohung auf sie zukommen: Flüchtlingströme drohen in unsere „Wohlstandsinsel“ vorzudringen. Der sagenhafte Wohlstand unseres, für seinen Fleiß berühmten Landes, schwindet täglich sichtbar und fühlbar dahin. Die schleichende Inflation frisst den ungeliebten Euro und die Ersparnisse für schlechtere Tage. Diese rücken näher. Das Damoklesschwert 'Arbeitslosigkeit' zwingt zur Akzeptanz von Niedrigstlöhnen. Gut ausgebildete Jugendliche werden mit Almosen abgespeist. Kinderlos warten sie auf bessere Zeiten. Altersarmut droht. Eine indessen gut geschmierte Rüstungsindustrie schafft wenig Arbeitsplätze, weil hochtechnisiert. Steuergroschen schluckt sie dennoch munter. Diese fehlen anderswo.
    Niemand nimmt sich der Bürgersorgen wirklich an. Die Bürger werden stattdessen abgespeist mit 'Public Viewing' . Noch lassen sich solches begeistert bieten.

    Was aber geschieht unter dessen und was kommt am Tag danach?

    Ein blutleere Friedensbewegung

    Eine längst blutleere gewordene Friedens“bewegung“ beißt jeden weg, der ihnen den Platz streitig machen könnte, ganz wie in der großen Politik: Alternativen unerwünscht. Große Antikriegsmanifestationen brachte diese FB schon lange nicht mehr auf die Beine. Das ist so, weil sie den Friedensgegner nicht klar zu benennen weiß. Dies ist so,  weil sie immer schön ausgewogen, nach allen Seiten hin austeilt und weil sie die Antikriegsstimmung der Deutschen keineswegs aufzugreifen  und in Bewegung umzusetzen versteht. Ihre alternden Platzhirsche, sprich selbsternannten Sprecher und Sprecherinnen, fühlen sich gleichwohl berufen, eine nicht mehr existente Friedensbewegung großkotzig zu repräsentieren.

    Kein Wunder, dass angesichts dieser Umstände und angesichts der 80% igen Weigerung der Deutschen  der Kriegshetze von oben Folge zu leisten, etwas bewegungsmäßiges geschehen musste.

    Montagsmahnwachen treten auf den Plan

    Seit einiger Zeit machen Montagsmahnwachen für den Frieden von sich reden. Möglich, dass gewisse Kreise daran gedreht haben. Möglich, dass sie künstlich inszeniert wurden, um der Friedenssehnsucht der Menschen unseres Landes ein Ventil zu verschaffen. Möglich, dass einige ihrer plötzlich aufgetretenen Organisatoren und Sprecher, der Sache nicht mit ganzem Herzen verpflichtet sind, für die sie  rethorisch geschickt agitieren. Aber die Mahnwachen bringen immerhin ein echtes Anliegen zum Ausdruck und vieles, was da publikumswirksam vorgetragen wurde und wird, ist einfach sachlich richtig und wichtig und muss artikuliert werden. Man sehe sich nur einmal das Interview an, das Ken Jebsen  am 9. Juni mit Willy Wimmer 90 Minuten lang geführt hat. KenFM im Gespräch mit: Willy Wimmer - YouTube

    Nun wird eine künstliche, mediale Debatte angefacht, um den Diskurs auf Abwege zu bringen. Die Sprecher der „neuen Friedensbewegung“ werden öffentlich verbrannt, als „Antisemiten“ oder „Neurechte“ gebrandmarkt und die „alte Friedensbewegung“ hat endlich wieder ein Thema. Sie kann sich als echte FB und als vor allem als waschechte 'Antifa' ins Spiel bringen. Es wird munter von allen Seiten her wieder Debattenkultur gepflegt und das eigentliche Thema ist aus dem Blickfeld verschwunden. Das Thema, das da lauten müsste:  Eindeutige Positionierung gegen Faschismus und Krieg! 
    Da wir dieses Thema meiden, gleiten wir nach 100 Jahren, nach 81 Jahren, nach 75  wieder einmal   „schlafwandlerisch“, nein  diesmal fußball-wandlerisch in das Verhängnis hinein.

    Freunde des Friedens, der Demokratie und des Menschenrechts wacht endllich auf.

    Begehrt auf dagegen, dass man euch wieder einmal an der Nase herum und in ein diesmal noch größeres Verhängnis führt. Nehmt Stellung:

    Gegen das Zwillingsmonster Faschismus und Krieg und vor allem wisst es zu erkennen, da wo es auftaucht.

    Thursday, June 26, 2014

    Russia Breaks EU Blockade
    On June 24 President Vladimir Putin wound up his visit to Austria – the second trip abroad after the situation in Ukraine took a turn for the worse.  He went to Normandy in early June to take part in the 70 th Anniversary of D-Day commemoration. The launching of the «the second front» delivered a powerful blow against the US-led anti-Russian European alliance. The summit in Austria laid a foundation for Russia’s further economic cooperation with Western partners... It’s an open secret that many Western leaders perceive these issues as intertwined... Some circles in Brussels try to play an «anti-Russian» card at the time the European Union is unable to refuse the role of obedient junior partner of the United States. 

    full article:

    Pyotr ISKENDEROV | 26.06.2014 | 00:00

    On June 24 President Vladimir Putin wound up his visit to Austria – the second trip abroad after the situation in Ukraine took a turn for the worse. He went to Normandy in early June to take part in the 70th Anniversary of D-Day commemoration. The launching of the «the second front» delivered a powerful blow against the US-led anti-Russian European alliance. The summit in Austria laid a foundation for Russia’s further economic cooperation with Western partners. 
    Mr. Putin had a broad range of issues to discuss with President Heinz Fischer, Federal Chancellor Werner Faymann and Austrian businessmen. The situation in Ukraine and South Stream dominated the agenda. It’s an open secret that many Western leaders perceive these issues as intertwined. The United States and the European Union have recently intensified efforts to stymie the Russia’s South Stream plans. As a result, Bulgaria has already stopped the pipeline’s construction; the government of Serbia also has this issue on its agenda. Sergei Lavrov has met his Serbian counterpart Ivica Dacic. The both confirmed the intent to proceed with the construction in accordance with the reached agreements. (1) 
    Under the circumstances the time is right for those EU members who understand the importance of cooperation with Russia to raise their voices and say the issue is too vital to make it depend on foreign policy fluctuations. Austria is the one. President Fischer defended the South Stream project stating that «no one can tell me why... a gas pipeline that crosses NATO and EU states can't touch 50 kilometers (31 miles) of Austrian territory». According to him, the project is expedient and useful. If Austria is to be rebuked for participation then Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary and a range of European companies are also to come under the criticism. (2) 
    Amid the rising tensions over the issue OMV general director Gerhard Roiss said the implementation of South Stream pipeline project should be expedited. (4) According to him, it would «ensure energy security for Europe, particularly for Austria». The South Stream gas pipeline could become an exception from the EU pipeline requirements, Gerhard Roiss, CEO of the Austrian company OMV, told the WirtschaftsBlatt financial daily on June 23.«Clearly, everything must be done in accordance with European law but there can be exceptions», he said. Roiss believes that the European Union should discuss such exceptions with Russia’s Gazprom and that negotiations on the project should be accelerated not put on hold. Some time ago Austria kept away from participation in the project. Now it is trying to catch up. The problem is familiar. Austria remembers the winter of 2008-2009. (5) The country’s business is traditionally willing to take part in many ventures.Alexey Miller, Chairman of Gazprom and Gerhard Roiss, CEO of OMV inked a Shareholders Agreement for the South Stream Austria joint project company during the visit. The Agreement envisages the parties' cooperation while constructing the Austrian section of the South Stream gas pipeline with the annual capacity of 30 to 32 bcm running from the Hungarian border to the end point in Baumgarten.
    Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov said the document, specifies an array of administrative matters, such as the company’s structure, management and profit sharing. (6) 
    Just 20 hours before the visit started the parties signed over twenty agreements of different kinds. Diamond Aircraft Industries CEO Christian Dries told it plainly addressing the politicians in Brussels. Commenting on the breakthrough in economic relationship with Russia, he said that sanctions are a wrong policy. Partners should sit at the round table and discuss the problems together. Especially once the cooperation with Russia is so intense. At last month's Paris airshow, Rostech announced a tie-up with Austria's Diamond Aircraft to start production of a new 19-seat utility plane intended for local air services in Russia.
    Gerfried Thuer, Rhomberg Sersa Rail Group, said it’s all politics, but business needs dialogue, so we support fruitful cooperation with the Russian partners. (7) 
    Talking about Ukraine, the time has come for a greater role of leading international organizations. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is certainly one of them. It’s widely believed that its role has greatly diminished recently mainly limited by surveillance of national elections in different countries. Off and on it has demonstrated preconceived and biased attitudes. The Security Organization has failed to prevent or tackle the crisis sparked in Ukraine. Fierce fighting was raging in the east of Ukraine while the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe was as usual concentrated on something that could hardly be considered to be serious business under the circumstances. For instance, it was pretty busy arranging round tables and experts meetings good for breeze shooting and exchanging long-winded speeches destitute of substance. 
    Didier Burkhalter, the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, has to face hard questions about the effectiveness and credibility of the organization he heads. «Our direct contact and dialogue is very important», he said meeting President Putin in Austria. The OSCE Chairperson considers it necessary to make at least some progress on the way of finding solutions to the issue of Ukraine in the next several days, reports RIA Novosti. «Right now we are in a very delicate phase and it is necessary that in the next few days for us to find at least some of the solutions, and I hope that all parties will make a contribution to it», Burkhalter said at a meeting with the head of Russia. (8) 
     No way could the West tackle the problems of Ukraine without Russia. It’s worth to note that on June 23 the EU Council failed to make any decisions to tighten sanctions against it. Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands Franz Timmermans said on arrival at the meeting of foreign ministers of the European Union, «The decisions on sanctions we  will not make today», he said. (9) The European Union evidently needs a pause to think over the further actions. 
    Russia is frustrated with the European Union and what it does. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has issued a special statement devoted to the anniversary of Russia-EU Partner-ship and Cooperation Agreement that states that the European Union, current policy undermines the strategic nature of the partnership. It’s a pity the European Union has decided to suspend the efforts to reach a founding Russia-EU agreement instead of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. The work on preparing a document designed to cement ties mutually beneficial for the citizens and business circles of Russia and the European Union was suspended to the detriment of strategic in-terests of the whole Europe. (10) 
    The reasons for this policy are well known. Some circles in Brussels try to play an «anti-Russian» card at the time the European Union is unable to refuse the role of obedient junior partner of the United States. It’s time to make conclusions for EU, hope bearing ones…
    [1] ITAR-TASS 06.18.2014 12:45
    [2] RBK Daily 06.25.2014.
    [4] ITAR-TASS 06.17. 2014 16:34
    [6] ITAR-TASS 06.20.2014 14:07
    [8] Ria NOVOSTI 06/25/2014 00:17

    Russia  Refuses to Tolerate Human Rights Violations

    News | 26.06.2014 | 00:32
    Russia intends to monitor the situation in Ukraine and will not stand on sidelines if violence in the country continues, the speaker of the upper house of Russian parliament, Federation Council, Valentina Matvienko said Wednesday.
    “The situation in southeastern Ukraine remains tense. Naturally, Russia will continue to monitor the situation by all available means, including promoting a peaceful solution with the participation of our foreign partners. Naturally, we won’t stand aside,” Valentina Matvienko told journalists.
    “If the rights of ethnic Russians, of Ukrainian citizens who are Russian speakers, are violated… if there are other types of human rights abuses, then we have enough forms, methods and instruments to defend our compatriots,” the speaker said, adding that Wednesday’s recall of an act authorizing the use of military force in Ukraine “does not mean that we will turn a blind eye to blatant violations of human rights.”
    Matvienko echoed the statements made by Russian President Vladimir Putin after high-level talks with the Austrian president earlier on Tuesday.
    The Russian leader stressed that Moscow would always protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine and the part of the Ukrainian population that feels inextricable ethnic, cultural and linguistic ties with Russia.
    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier said military action in the east of Ukraine verged on ethnic cleansing, and expressed hope Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko would do everything possible to avert similar scenarios in the future.
    According to Matvienko, currently there is no need to deploy a peacekeeping contingent to the crisis-hit country. “In my opinion, there is no need to deploy any kind of peacekeeping contingent at present. It’s an internal political crisis, and Kiev and the southeast [of Ukraine] should find a mutually acceptable solution within the framework of negotiations,” the speaker said.
    At the same time Matvienko stressed it is impossible to settle the crisis in Ukraine without Russia’s participation.
    “Today it seems, it has already been confirmed, that in order to settle the situation in Ukraine without taking into perspective Russia’s interests or without Russia’s participation is impossible. Therefore I hope that a pragmatic approach, common sense in settling the issue, forming cooperation between the two neighboring states, between two brotherly peoples will prevail,” the federation council speaker said.
    Earlier in the day, the upper chamber of Russian parliament revoked the authorization to use Russian military forces in Ukraine upon the request of President Putin. President Poroshenko said the move was the “first practical step” toward reconciliation in eastern Ukraine.

    "Beitritt der Krim in die Russische Föderation entsprach nicht der ukrainischen Verfassung, wohl aber dem Völkerrecht" Putin laut Junge Welt

    De jure und de facto

    Hintergrund. Juristisches zum Krim-Konflikt

    Von Hermann Klenner
    Der Beitritt der Krim in die Russische Föderation entsprach
    Der Beitritt der Krim in die Russische Föderation entsprach nicht der ukrainischen Verfassung, wohl aber dem Völkerrecht (Rußlands Präsident ­Wladimir Putin mit Militärs am Tag der Befreiung, 9.5.2014, auf der Krim)
    Aktuell versucht die ukrainische Regierung mit militärischen Mitteln, den Widerstand gegen sie im Osten des Landes niederzumachen. Aber auch die Krim, sie hatte sich am 18. März für einen Beitritt in die Russische Föderation entschieden, bleibt im Visier der neuen Machthaber: »Die Krim war und bleibt ukrainisch«, betonte der Präsident und Oligarch Petro Poroschenko in seiner Antrittsrede am 7. Juni 2014.
    Zur juristischen Seite der Überführung hielt Prof. Dr. Hermann Klenner vor Mitgliedern der Kommunistischen Plattform vor kurzem einen Vortrag. Der folgende Beitrag ist der Abdruck seines Referats, das nun im Juni-Heft der Mitteilungen des Zusammenschlusses in der Linkspartei ­erschien. (jW)
    mehr: 16.06.2014 / Thema / Seite 10Inhalt
    Brecht hat recht! Solidarität mit den Opfern der NATO-Aggressionen üben - Zusammenhänge begreifen! 

    Irene Eckert 26. 06. 2014

    Immer mehr  Beweise werfen Licht auf die finsteren Kräfte, die von den  NATO-Mächten seit Jahren in unserem Namen gesponsert werden.   Erinnern wir uns an die Unterstützung für  die Volks-Mujahedin gegen die Sowjets in Afghanistan, an die Schulung der Taliban an Hand von  Koranexemplaren aus den USA.
     In der Ukraine, in Syrien, im Irak, in Libyen, in Afghanistan, in Ägypten, in Mali, Nigeria und im Sudan. Wohin wir auch schauen, sehen wir die Kräfte der Zerstörung am Werk. Denken wir  an die Jahrzehnte andauernde, himmelschreiende, völkerrechtswidrige Politik Israels gegenüber seinen Nachbarn. All dies wäre nicht möglich ohne die Rückendeckung der selben tonangebenden Mächte, allen voran ihrer 'Leadnation' (+) und deren allgegenwärtigen Diensten.
    Es ist höchste Zeit, dass wir  die Verursacher der Misere beim Namen nennen. Daraus folgt, dass wir den Widerstand leistenden Menschen in der Ukraine, in Syrien, in Palästina und überall dort,  wo 'unsere Staatsraison' die Agressoren direkt oder indirekt unterstützt, SOLIDARITÄT BEKUNDEN. Ihr Widerstand nützt letztlich auch uns. Wir müssen  den antikolonialen Kräften den Rücken stärken und wir können das auch. Den Widerstand gegen das kämpfende vietnamesische Volk haben die aufgeklärten Menschen der Welt einst mit Kräften unterstützt. Auch Nikaragua wurde im Kampf gegen die „Kontras“ noch Solidarität zuteil, bis die Gegenpropaganda griff.

    Heute scheint es – dank des Erfolgs eben dieser Gegenpropagnda - schwierig zu erkennen, dass der Widerstand gegen die neokoloniale Aggression, denn  genau darum handelt es sich flächendeckend noch immer, im Interesse der ganzen Menschheit liegt. Diese Einsicht  ist aber unvermeidbar. Ob in Afghanistan, ob im Irak, ob im Nahen Osten, ob auf dem schwarz - afrikanischen Kontinent, ob in der  Ostukraine, Widerstand gegen die von außen gesteuerte Aggression ist  für die Völker der Welt überlebensnotwendig. 
     Was können wir tun? Anstatt begriffs- und fassungslos auf die  faschistische Brutalität zu starren, die unsere Medien  zynischer Weise der Opferseite anlasten, müssen wir die  Verursacher bei  ihrem wahren Namen nennen. Sie verstecken sich heute hinter Islamofaschisten. Vor allem seit 9/11 heucheln sie den Kampf gegen den Terrorismus, der ihre hauseigene Züchtung ist. Es sind die Islamo-Terroristen, eben  Söldnerbanditen, die  immer wieder mit neuen Namen aus der Taufe gehoben werden. Heute ISIS im Irak und Boko Haram in Nigeria, gestern Taliban und Al Quaida und morgen? Diese PseudoIslamisten, in Wahrheit Terroristen, die die SA-Banden von damals  längst in  Sachen Brutalität und Gnadenlosigkeit in den Schatten stellen, haben nicht das geringste mit dem Islam zu tun. Sie haben so wenig mit dem Islam zu tun wie der National'sozialismus' ,den dieselben Kräfte an die Macht  gebracht haben, mit Sozialismus zu tun hatte oder der Zionismus etwa mit Judentum. Das gilt es zu erkennen. Die Schöpfer solcher Monsterbabies sind jene, die Weltherrschaft wollen, weil sie die Reichtümer der Erde für sich alleine beanspruchen. Ihre Tage sind immerhin gezählt, ihre ökonomische Machtbasis zerfällt mit jedem Tag sichtbarer. Diese antischöpferischen Kräfte ahnen wohl, dass sie von der Bühne der Geschichte verdrängt werden. Um so rücksichtsloser handeln sie in ihrem Todesabwehrkampf. Die Verwirrung der Menschheit mithilfe der Kreation immer neuer Handlanger, die ihnen zu traurigen Diensten stehen, scheint fast ihr einziges Allheilmittel. Wir aber, ihre potentiellen Opfer, wir die wir uns gegen Ausplünderung und Versklavung stellen, wir müssen ihr düsteres Spiel durchschauen. Wir dürfen ihren Sprachspielereien, mit deren Hilfe sie unsere Gedanken zu steuern suchen, nicht auf den Leim gehen.

    Wir müssen uns zu  jenen bekennen,  die mit Hilfe der  Waffe des Völkerrechts  Widerstand leisten. Wer den Frieden herbeisehnt und ein Ende der Ausplünderung nationaler Ressourcen, muss die inzwischen  längst wieder positive Rolle Russlands in diesem Machtkampf aufzeigen. Wir, die wir nur scheinbar zum Zuschauen verdammt sind, müssen uns auf die Seite der Überfallenen, der Unterdrückten stellen. Von  Nationen wie  Russland können wir Diplomatie lernen. Anhand der Strategie des kriegsgeplagten russischen  Volkes können wir erkennen, was man trotz  relativer Schwäche zu tun vermag.  Unsere Aufgabe ist es,  uns in erster Linie gegen die Wahrheitsverdreher zu wenden. Wir müssen Stellung beziehen gegen jene Propaganda-Medien, die  die wahren Verhältnisse auf den Kopf stellen. Wir müssen aufbegehren gegen jene, die uns die Lüge als Leckerbissen  darbieten.

    Es gilt dagegen, unseren Einspruch geltend zu machend. Wir sind längst nicht so schwach, wie es manchmal scheinen mag. Die Mehrheit unserer Landsleute ist auf unserer Seite, trotz der medialen Dauerhetze. Das immer hysterischer werdende mediale Dauerfeuer ist Ausdruck ihrer Schwäche, nicht ihrer Stärke.

    Die Welt hat sich gegenüber 1914 und auch gegenüber 1939 beträchtlich verändert. Der Faschismus ist heute in der Defensive. Um so rabiater schlagen seine Adepten um sich. Sie kämpfen allerdings einen verzweifelten, aussichtslosen Todeskampf. Die Kräfteverhältnisse haben sich - entgegen dem Anschein - entschieden zugunsten der Friedenskräfte in der Welt geändert. Das kommunistisch regierte China1, das bevölkerungsreichste Land der Erde,  ist im Begriff die Wirtschaftsmacht Nummer 1 zu werden. Die große und geschichtsbewusste Kulturnation hat  mit dem rohstoffreichen Russland, dem flächenmäßig größten Land der Welt über 40 Handelsabkommen abgeschlossen. Der lateinamerikanische Kontinent setzt unter dem CELAC-Siegel gegen die imperiale Vorherrschaft der USA ein Friedenssignal. Selbst auf dem geschundenen Kontinent Afrikas gibt es starke gegen den Strom schwimmende Kräfte, etwa in Südafrika und Simbabwe, trotz aller auch dort vorhandenen Widersprüche. Die Schwächung des aufstrebenden Kontinents durch die Beseitigung eines unabhängigen Libyen ändert nichts daran, dass die antiimperialen Gegenkräfte nicht schlafen. Niederlagen dienen der Sammlung neuer Kräfte.

    Auch wir Allerweltsmenschen sind gefordert uns zu sammeln, uns zu besinnen und vor allem nicht zu verzweifeln. Ihre Chance ist unsere Hoffnungslosigkeit. Diese Chance müssen wir ihnen vereiteln. Sie tippen darauf, dass wir die herrschenden Zustände für alternativlos halten, nach Margret Thatchers Motto TINA.2 Halten wir  also dagegen.  Spucken wir in ihre trübe Suppe. Halten wir  nach Gleichgesinnten und Verbündeten Ausschau, nach Menschen und nach Nationen (!) , die dem Völkerrecht und dem  Frieden verpflichtet  sind.

     Danken wir vor allem  jenen mutigen Vorstreitern aus allen politischen Lagern , die öffentlich Flagge zeigen. Danken wir solchen Politikern wie  Sevim Dagdelen  und Sahra Wagenknecht,  Jürgen Todenhöfer, Willy Wimmer und Peter Gauweiler3.  Solcher Dank heißt natürlich keinesfalls, dass wir uns Illusionen hingegeben dürfen, über die parteipolitische Landschaft in unserer Republik und ihrer positiven Wandlungsfähigkeit.  Die Politik wird in sämtlichen Parteien - einschließlich der Partei der Linken manipulativ von Seiten des Führungspersonals definiert, zum Teil sogar gegen  ihre eignen programmatischen Aussagen. Wenn wir also etwa Willi Wimmer für sein seit 1999  sichtbar gewordenes Antikriegs-Engagement  danken, so wundern wir uns doch  über die positive Rolle, die er Helmuth Kohl als Friedenskanzler zuspricht. Wenn wir Peter Gauweilers Einspruch gegen die offene Kriegsbefürwortung unseres unheilvollen Präsidenten würdigen, so unterstützen wir noch lange nicht sein sonstiges Engagement als CSU-Politiker. Wenn wir Todenhöfers bedeutungsvolle Bücher und  seine Einsätze in den Kriegszonen Afghanistans und im Irak begrüßen und vor allem seine  jüngste Forderung nach Ächtung des Krieges in der Mainzer Zeitung unterstützen, so haben wir damit nicht seine Rolle als CDU-Politiker in der Vergangenheit vergessen und übersehen auch nicht manchen  seiner Widersprüche und Inkonsequenzen. Wir müssen  uns auch  nicht wie Sahra Wagenknecht und Sevim Dagdelen mit  den Widersprüchen  befassen, die für diese Frauen  mit ihrer Parteimitgliedschaft verbunden sind. Aber wir wissen ihren mutigen Einspruch gegen die Positionierungen ihrer Parteiführung sehr zu schätzen und wollen sie darin bestärken. Diese profilierten Individuen brauchen im Zweifel genauso unsere Solidarität, wie jeder der gegen den Strom schwimmt. Jeder, der ausschert, wird  doch bekanntermaßen  an den Pranger gestellt und das genau dürfen nicht unwidersprochen geschehen lassen.   Danken wir  also all jenen Mitbürgern, die sich öffentlich gegen die kriegstreiberischen Gauck-Reden und die seiner Kollegen stellen. Schreiben wir ihnen Dankesbriefe und stützen wir uns so gegenseitig  den Rücken.
    Machen wir unsere Stimmen bemerkbar. Zeigen wir ebenso kompromisslos unsere Unterstützung für den Widerstand der Bürger der Ostukraine, deren Diffamierung als Terroristen wir uns mit aller Entschiedenheit entgegenstellen müssen.

    Der Widerstand gegen Kiew und seine Hintermänner in der Ukraine bedarf in diesen Tagen unserer besonderen Solidarität. Die Opfer, die dort erbracht werden, werden auch für uns erbracht. Dies gilt es zu begreifen. Solidarität meint Unterstützung für die gemeinsame Sache:

    "Denn wer im Stich lässt seinesgleichen, der lässt doch nur sich selbst im Stich (3)


    + Die US-Amerikaner bezeichnen sich selbst  als 'Leadnation', als Führungsnation im NATO-Bündnis. Nun gaben die Vereinigten Staaten gewiss 1776  mit ihrer Gründungsurkunde einmal ein führendes Beispiel  und inspirierten die Welt mit einem der wirkungsmächtigsten Dokumente der demokratischen Staatsphilosophie. Bedeutende Staatsmänner und Denker standen Pate, so Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin. Tom Paine. Das Land hatte einst bedeutende Präsidenten wie Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, die Kennedy Brüder und vielleicht noch Jimmy Carter.  Demokratiegeschichtlich und friedenspolitisch  wichtige Denker und Dichter gab es einst auch,  so Ralph Waldo Emerson, David Henry Thoreau, Walt Whitman. Aber wo steht das Land denn heute? Auf wen außer auf Noam Chomsky kann sich ein Friedensfreund noch berufen? Und Chomsky wird in den USA unter dem Ladentisch gehandelt. Gewiss gibt es noch Gelehrte wie Norman G. Finkelstein, aber sie bekommen kein Amt. Das Andere Amerika ist leider so wenig bekannt bei uns, wie  wir uns unsere eigenen großen Denker und unsere eigene Demokratiegeschichte aus den Augen verlieren. Das muss sich wieder ändern.

    1Es führt kein Weg daran vorbei, sich mit China eingehend zu befassen. Das Land holt in der Tat den Kapitalismus nach, in den es vom Feudalzeitalter in den Sozialismus springend, den Rückwärtsgang einlegend, nach dem Leninschen Motto „Zwei Schritte vorwärts einer zurück“, vorübergehend und nur halbwegs zurückgeglitten ist. Die Führung ist die einer langfristig planenden kommunistischen Partei, die aus den Fehlern der Vergangeheit lernend die Zukunft zu gestalten sucht. Das 1,4 Milliarden Volk kann heute seine Menschen ernähren und ist auf dem Weg zu einem, wenn auch in weiten Teilen noch sehr bescheidenen Wohlstand, der eben derzeit große Disparitäten aufweist, derer sich die Führungsmannschaft allerdings wohl bewusst ist. China-Bashing ist konterproduktiv. Verstehen ist angesagt.

    2„THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE – Es gibt keine Alternative zum Neoliberalismus, sprich zur kapitalistischen Ausplünderung, verkündete Frau Thatcher regierungsamtlich als Chefin der einstigen Kolonialmacht Großbritannien.

    3 MdB Dr. Peter Gauweiler hat am 4. Juni 2014 in der Helmut-Schmidt- Universität/ Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg auf Einladung der Fakultät für Wirtschaft und Sozialwissenschaften über „Souveränität, Bündnisloyalität und mehr Verantwortung in der WeltSinnhaftigkeit und Grenzen von Bundeswehreinsätzen im Ausland“ gesprochen. Die Einladung und Themenstellung durch das Institut für Internationale Politik der Universität gingen dabei von folgender Vorgabe aus: Deutschland ist eines jener Länder, die sich in besonderer Weise zur Entwicklung und Festigung des Völkerrechts und anderer Normsetzung in den internationalen Beziehungen auf Basis grundlegender Vorgaben des Grundgesetzes bekennen. Zugleich verstehe es sich als Teil der westlichen Wertegemeinschaft. Eine Reihe von Ereignissen in den vergangenen zwei Jahrzehnten haben das prekäre Verhältnis Grundgesetz, Völkerrecht, staatliche Souveränität und Bündnisloyalität besonderen Belastungen ausgesetzt.“ Als Beispiel wurden dabei unter anderem die praktische Umsetzung des Irak-Kriegs und die zeitweise Unterstützung der Operation Enduring Freedom“ in Afghanistan genannt. MdB Dr. Gauweiler legte seinem Vortrag die These von Bundespräsident Gauck anlässlich der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz am 31. Januar 2014 zugrunde, wonach es zur außenpolitischen Gesamtstrategie Deutschlands gehören solle, wenn alle diplomatischen Möglichkeiten ausgeschöpft“ sind, zu militärischen Einsätzen der Bundeswehr in anderen Ländern nicht mehr aus Prinzip Nein zu sagen“. Nach Dr. Gauweiler war aber genau dieses Prinzip von den Verfassern des Grundgesetzes ausdrücklich beabsichtigt, wurde zur Geschäftsgrundlage für den erfolgreichen Aufbau der Bundeswehr und garantierte durch die so aufgestellte Bundeswehr eine über 50jährige „Friedensdividende“ – bis zur Bombardierung Restjugoslawiens. MdB Dr. Gauweiler legte dar, dass die aus analogen historischen Gegebenheiten hervorgegangenen Selbstverteidigungskräfte Japans bis heute strikt an einer verfassungsrechtlichen Beschränkung auf die Landesverteidigung festhalten und dabei besser ausgerüstet sind, als die Bundeswehr seit ihrer Umorganisation zu einer „weltweiten Einsatzarmee“Die Rede von MdB Dr. Gauweiler ist im Anhang zu dieser Erklärung in vollem Umfang wiedergegeben und auf abrufbar. 

    4 )Bertolt Brecht, Soldiaritätslied

  • Solidaritätslied aus dem Film Kuhle Wampe - YouTube

    30.07.2009 - Hochgeladen von Rongart
    Solidaritätslied (1931/32) Text: Bertolt Brecht ("Vorwärts und nicht vergessen") Musik: Hanns Eisler.
  • Refrain:
    Vorwärts und nicht vergessen,
    worin unsere Stärke besteht!
    Beim Hungern und beim Essen,
    vorwärts und nie vergessen:
    die Solidarität!

    1. Auf ihr Völker dieser Erde,
    einigt euch in diesem Sinn,
    daß sie jetzt die eure werde,
    und die große Näherin.

    2. Schwarzer, Weißer, Brauner, Gelber!
    Endet ihre Schlächterei!
    Reden erst die Völker selber,
    werden sie schnell einig sein.

    3. Wollen wir es schnell erreichen,
    brauchen wir noch dich und dich.
    Wer im Stich läßt seinesgleichen,
    läßt ja nur sich selbst im Stich.

    4. Unsre Herrn, wer sie auch seien,
    sehen unsre Zwietracht gern,
    denn solang sie uns entzweien,
    bleiben sie doch unsre Herrn.

    5. Proletarier aller Länder,
    einigt euch und ihr seid frei.
    Eure großen Regimenter
    brechen jede Tyrannei!
    Vorwärts und nicht vergessen
    und die Frage konkret gestellt
    beim Hungern und beim Essen:
    Wessen Morgen ist der Morgen?
    Wessen Welt ist die Welt?