Tuesday, September 9, 2014

"Die Botschaft der Palästinenser an Israel: Gebt uns Gerechtigkeit oder verschwindet" Info-sammlung von Anette Klepzig


 

http://icahd.de/?p=924 : Die Botschaft der Palästinenser an Israel: Gebt uns Gerechtigkeit oder verschwindet.   
  
 
 1 a ) Palästina – Massengrab aus dem Jahr 1948 Entdeckt. ( VIDEO 3:10 min  3. September 2014 )
 
Ein Massengrab, vermutlich aus dem Jahr 1948, wurde in Jaffa / Palästina entdeckt. 200 Leichen weisen eindeutige Spuren eines gewaltsamen Todes auf.   200 palästinensische Kinder, Frauen und Männer, so der Bericht, wurden von Israelis in einem Massaker ermordet welche sich weigerten ihr Land zu verlassen… für Juden!                            Die offizielle Version, dass die Palästinenser seinerzeit “friedlich vertrieben” wurden und das von einem Ritual-Fürsten “JHWH” versprochene Land von den dort lebenden palästinensischen Menschen rechtmäßig erworben hätten, grenzt nicht nur an scheinreligiösen Wahnsinn, es ist offenkundig eine weitere Lüge und somit nicht länger als historische Wahrheit haltbar....
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 1 b ) Palästina: „Ein Bild der Verwüstung“ . (fides 02.09.2014 gs) Radio Vatikan
Eine Delegation des lateinischen Patriarchats hat Gaza besucht und ein „Bild der Verwüstung wie nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg“ vorgefunden. Im Stadtviertel Sajaya seien vier von fünf Häusern „nur noch ein Trümmerhaufen“, sagte Bischof William Shomali vom lateinischen Patriarchat Jerusalem zu seinen Eindrücken nach dem kurzen Besuch in Gaza am 1. September. Die Menschen seien erleichtert über den Waffenstillstand. Andererseits hätten die jungen Menschen hier bereits drei Kriege gegen Gaza miterlebt, „und jedes Mal sei die Verwüstung größer als beim letzten Mal“. Es werde Jahre dauern, bis alles wieder so sei wie früher. Zwar trafen die Vertreter des Patriarchats keine Politiker, doch bei Gesprächen mit Christen und Muslimen sei „eine zunehmende Feindseligkeit gegenüber Israel deutlich geworden“, so Bischof Shomali. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 1 c ) Die Botschaft der Palästinenser an Israel: Gebt uns Gerechtigkeit oder verschwindet. Jeff Halper, Direktor des israelischen Kommitees gegen Hauszerstörungen (Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions – ICAHD). Man kann ihn erreichen unter: jeff@icahd.org.
 
Bis zur Operation ‘Fels in der Brandung’ (Protective Edge) kamen die meisten ‘Botschaften’ bezüglich des  israelisch-palästinensischen Konfliktes – zumindest diejenigen, die durch die Mainstream-Medien gingen – von israelischer Seite. Von den Anfängen des Zionismus in Palästina – vor etwa 110 Jahren – an hat die jüdische Gemeinschaft, und zwar weder der Yishuv (diejenigen Juden, die vor1948 in Palästina lebten) aus der Zeit vor der Staatsgründung, noch diejenige, die sich dann als Staat Israel konstitutierte, die Palästinenser ernst genommen. Sie waren dunkelhäutige ‘Eingeborene’ mit Palästinensertüchern um den Kopf, Fedayin oder Terroristen ohne Namen, Geschichte oder Menschlichkeit. Sie wurden als existenzielle Bedrohung unter der Rubrik ‘Araber’ wahrgenommen. - Auch im Jahre 1967, als Israel sich dann einer organisierten, sichtbaren und politisch bewussten palästinensischen Gesellschaft von Angesicht zu Angesicht gegenüber sah, kam die israelische Führung nicht im Traum auf die Idee, mit ihr zu reden.  Stattdessen nahmen sie lieber alles Land und alle Ressourcen, die sie in der West Bank gebrauchen konnten. Die palästinensische Bevölkerung sollte gefälligst an Jordanien ‘zurückgegeben’ werden. (Niemand in Israel hat bis auf den heutigen Tag die geringste Idee, was mit Gaza geschehen sollte, außer, es zu isolieren). Premierministerin Golda Meir leugnete lautstark und entschieden,...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/palestinian-message-disappear.html
 I d ) The Palestinian message to Israel: Deal with us justly. Or dissapear. Jeff Halper, Director of ther Israeli Committe Against House Demolitions (ICAHD)
------------------------------------------------------------------
 II a ) Polish-Jewish sociologist.doc: compares West Bank separation fence to Warsaw Ghetto walls.
Sygmunt Bauman says Israel 'terrified of peace' and 'taking advantage of the Holocaust to legitimize unconscionable acts,' in interview with Polish weekly 'Politika.'  

.....Bauman said Israel was "taking advantage of the Holocaust to legitimize unconscionable acts," and compared the separation fence to the walls surrounding the Warsaw Ghetto, in which hundreds of thousands of Jews perished in the Holocaust....

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

 
 II b ) Israel Steals Gaza’s Offshore Natural Gas: $15 Billion Deal with Jordan. By Julie Lévesque
 
While Gazans suffer from daily power shutdowns, Israel is signing an important deal to sell gas to Jordan, gas which, researchers say, was stolen from Palestinians.   In addition to confiscating Palestine’s energy resources, Israel has destroyed Gaza’s only power station in its latest military offensive.
Over a million people in Gaza could be without electricity after Israeli tank shells hit the fuel depot of the enclave’s only power station, causing it to shut down. Its director, Mohammed al-Sharif, said, “The power plant is finished.” (Gaza’s only power plant shut down by Israeli shelling, RT, July 29, 2014)  The Middle East Monitorreported September 4, 2014 that a Memorandum of Understanding ”is due to be signed between Israel and Jordan in the reservoir of Leviathan to export Israeli natural gas to Jordan during the next 15 years with a total value of $15 billion”. (Jordan to buy $15bn of Israeli gas, Middle East Monitor, September 4, 2014.)   Israel’s first natural gas export deal will also be signed by “the Leviathan field partner Noble Energy Inc. on behalf of itself and its partners Delek Group Ltd. units Avner Oil and Gas LP and Delek Drilling Limited Partnership and Ratio Oil Exploration (1992) LP.” (Leviathan partners signing $15b Jordanian gas deal, Globes, Israel business news, on September 3, 2014).....
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 II c ) When the school day ends with tear gas + more. International Solidarity Movement,2nd September 2014,Khalil team |Hebron, Occupied Palestine ISM watched over two different checkpoints in al-Khalil (Hebron) on the 31st of August, Qeitun (209) and Salaymeh (29), both separating the H1 and H2 zone in this occupied city (H1 is supposedly under full Palestinian Authority control, H2 under full Israeli military control).   At the Salaymeh checkpoint, three tear gas canisters were fired at children on their way home from school. One child threw a stone in the direction of the checkpoint, and due to apparent problems with the gun, the soldier at the checkpoint did not fire. A few moments later, a child approached the checkpoint in order to pass it and the soldier fired a tear gas canister right at the child’s....---------------------------------------------------------------------
 
http://www.epochtimes.de/Israel-Gaza-Krieg---Renommierter-Arzt-Palaestinensische-Kinder-gezielt-und-absichtlich-getoetet-a1179481.html

 3 a ) Israel Gaza Krieg - Renommierter Arzt: "Palästinensische Kinder gezielt und absichtlich getötet"

Epoch Times, Donnerstag, 4. September 2014 14:01
Ärzte und Menschenrechtsaktivisten sagen, dass es Beweise dafür gibt, dass Israel während der jüngsten Militäroffensive gegen den Gazastreifen international verbotene Waffen gegen Zivilisten eingesetzt hat. Dies berichtet Press TV. Laut den Experten, hat Israel während der letzten Offensive im Gaza erneut Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME) verwendet. Diesen Sprengstoff findet man in der Regel in Hellfire-Raketen die in den USA hergestellt werden. Diese Raketen sind in Wohngebieten in Gaza zum Einsatz gekommen, so die Experten. Israelverwendete diese Raketen auch während der Offensive in 2009. Die Verletzungen durch DIME-Bomben sind schlimmer als Verletzungen die durch andere Waffen hervorgerufen werden....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3 b ) DCI: Menschliches Schutzschild.rtf: Israelische Soldaten benützen palästinensischen Jugendlichen in Gaza als menschliches Schutzschild.      Defence for  Children International-Palestine, 21. 08.2014
Israelische Soldaten  benützten Ahmad Abu Raida,17, fünf Tage lang als menschliches Schutzschild, währen er als Geisel   bei Israels Bodeninvasion im Gazastreifen festgehalten wurde. Ahmad aus Khuzaa , in der Nähe der südlichen Gazastadt von Khan Younis war gerade mal 16 Jahre alt, als er seiner Familie am 23.Juli weggenommenwurde. Er war gezwungen worden, bei  gezückter Waffe fünf Tage lang, die Tunnel zu durchsuchen.     In dieser Zeit wurde er verhört,  verbal und physisch  missbraucht. Er bekam auch kein Essen und durfte nicht schlafen. Ahmad erzählte DCI-Palsestine in einem  unter Eid ausgesagten Bericht, dass israelische Soldaten versuchten, von ihm zu erfahren, was er von Hamas- Mitgliedern wusste, und wollten ihn als Informanten rekrutieren, bevor sie ihn am 27. Juli entließen.  „Das israelische Militär hat ständig.....

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

 3 c ) Nahost: Helfer unter Beschuss. Neuber, Harald  - Dtsch Arztebl 2014; 111(35-36): A-1456 / B-1253 / C-1193

Humanitäre Organisationen und Ärzte stehen im Gazastreifen großen Herausforderungen gegenüber. Oft geraten sie selbst ins Visier der israelischen Armee.   Gut eineinhalb Monate nach Beginn der israelischen Militäroffensive gegen Ziele im Gazastreifen legen die örtlichen Gesundheitsbehörden und internationale Organisationen erschreckende Zahlen vor. Bis Mitte August wurden nach Angaben des UN-Hilfswerks UNRWA knapp 2 000 Menschen getötet. Die meisten Opfer kamen bei Luftangriffen ums Leben, viele sind Zivilisten. Letzteres lässt sich kaum vermeiden: Der Gazastreifen ist mit mehr als 5 000 Einwohnern pro Quadratkilometer eines der am dichtesten besiedelten Gebiete der Erde. Die Folgen führt UNRWA auf: Rund 8 000 Menschenwurden bislang verletzt, gut 210 000 sind auf der Flucht... - EINGEKESSELT WOHIN DENN ? ! ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------

 4 a ) Viertes deutsches U-Boot unterwegs. Noch vor Jahresende wird ein fünftes Exemplar erwartet.

Schon in den kommenden Tagen wird Israel nach den Worten von Vize-Admiral Ram Rothberg, dem Marinekommandanten, ein viertes, modernes Exemplar der deutschen U-Boote vom Typ Delphin seiner Flotte einverleiben können. An einer Zeremonie für....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jungewelt.de/2014/09-03/012.php?print=1 
 4 b ) Erneuter Landraub. Karin Leukefeld

Israel konfisziert als »Strafaktion« 400 Hektar im besetzten Westjordanland

Die israelische Militärbehörde hat am Sonntag 400 Hektar palästinensischen Bodens südlich von Bethlehem konfisziert. Diesen neuerlichen Landraub im besetzten Westjordanland begründet Israel damit, daß dies eine Strafaktion wegen der Entführung und Ermordung von drei israelischen Jugendlichen Anfang Juni sei. Drei festgenommene Palästinenser aus Hebron werden der Tat beschuldigt, Beweise dafür liegen allerdings nicht vor.   Bei dem Gebiet handelt es sich um Ackerland und Olivenhaine, die seit Jahrhunderten von Palästinensern aus den Orten Surif, Husan, Al Jabaa und Bethlehem bearbeitet werden......
Ein Massengrab, vermutlich aus dem Jahr 1948, wurde in Jaffa / Palästina entdeckt. 200 Leichen weisen eindeutige Spuren eines gewaltsamen Todes auf.   200 palästinensische Kinder, Frauen und Männer, so der Bericht, wurden von Israelis in einem Massaker ermordet welche sich weigerten ihr Land zu verlassen… für Juden!                            Die offizielle Version, dass die Palästinenser seinerzeit “friedlich vertrieben” wurden und das von einem Ritual-Fürsten “JHWH” versprochene Land von den dort lebenden palästinensischen Menschen rechtmäßig erworben hätten, grenzt nicht nur an scheinreligiösen Wahnsinn, es ist offenkundig eine weitere Lüge und somit nicht länger als historische Wahrheit haltbar....
----------------------------------------------------------------
 
  4 c ) Weshalb Israelis Einsatz in Gaza verweigern

"Es ist so einfach für uns, einen Menschen zu töten".  Lissy Kaufmann

Versager. Verräter. Sich selbst hassender Jude. So werden junge Israelis beschimpft, die sich dem Einsatz im Gaza-Streifen verweigern. Oder das Grauen an der Front öffentlich machen wollen. Zwei Soldaten berichten über ihren Tabubruch.
Als der Anruf kam und sie ihm mitteilten, dass er eingezogen wird, hätte Eyal Shifra* eine Ausrede erfinden können. Dass er dieses Mal aus persönlichen Gründen nicht antreten könne. Aus familiären. Oder aus gesundheitlichen. Doch Eyal Shifra, 33 Jahre alt, wollte die Wahrheit sagen. Und endlich zu seiner Meinung stehen:  „Ich kann das nicht mit meinem Gewissen vereinbaren“, sagte er dem Soldaten am Telefon.  „Heißt das, du kommst?“   „Nein, ich kann aus Gewissensgründen nicht dienen.“    „Ich verstehe nicht ganz …?“    Verwirrt legte der Mann auf. „Die Soldaten, die da anrufen, rechnen vielleicht mit Ausreden. Aber dass jemand aus moralischen Gründen verweigert, das haben sie schlicht nicht verstanden“, sagt Shifra. Es dauerte ein wenig, dann klingelte erneut das Telefon....
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/medien/waffenruhe-zwischen-israel-und-der-hamas-gaza-kippt-sich-kriegsschutt-ueber-den-kopf/10620906.html

 4 d ) Waffenruhe zwischen Israel und der Hamas:   Gaza kippt sich Kriegsschutt über den Kopf.  

Im Gaza-Streifen kippen sich hunderte Menschen Schutt und Staub über ihre Köpfe. In Anlehnung an das Internet-Phänomen #IceBucketChallenge wollen sie auf die Situation nach dem Krieg im Küstenstreifen aufmerksam machen.
n Gaza hätten sie weder genügend Wasser, geschweige denn Strom um Eiswürfel zu produzieren. Nein, eine #IceBucketChallenge im vom Krieg gezeichneten Küstenstreifen komme nicht in Frage. So die einhellige Meinung der meisten User, die sich auf Twitter begeistert von der #RubbleBucketChallenge zeigen, der palästinensischen Version der viralen Spendenaktion im Internet....    ......In hunderten Videos kippen sich Menschen aus dem Gazastreifen, aus anderen arabischen Ländern und überall auf der Welt Eimer mit Sand, kleinen Kieselsteinen oder Staub über den Kopf.  Sie stehen dann, verstaubt vor ihrer Handykamera und reden über einen "asymmetrischen Krieg", der seit Kurzem in eine unbefristete Waffenruhe eingetreten ist. Sie wollen mit der Aktion auf die Situation der Menschen im Gazastreifen machen: Es fehle an allem, lautet immer die Botschaft dabei....
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Russia may close airspace in response to new Western sectoral sanctions — Medvedev

World
 September 08, 8:51 UTC+4
"If there are sanctions connected with energy or further restrictions for our financial sector, we will have to respond asymmetrically," the Russian prime minister says
Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev

© ITAR-TASS/Dmitry Astakhov
MOSCOW, September 08. /ITAR-TASS/. The Russian government does not rule out that Russia could close its airspace in response to new Western sectoral sanctions, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said.
Western nations “should be asked whether there will be new sanctions, but if there are sanctions connected with energy or further restrictions for our financial sector, we will have to respond asymmetrically,” Medvedev said in an interview with the Vedomosti business daily. “For example, with restrictions in the transport sphere.”

EU postpones final decision on anti-Russian sanctions till Monday
“We proceed from the fact that we have friendly relations with our partners, so the sky above Russia is open for flights; but if we are restricted, we will have to respond,” he said. “If Western carriers fly out beyond our airspace, it may lead to bankruptcy of many airlines that are teetering on the brink of survival.”
Medvedev, however, said it would be a bad option. “We would just like our partners to realize that,” he said. The premier regretted that the West already announced a few rounds of sanctions against Moscow. “I hoped our partners would be smarter,” he said.
Western sanctions vs Russia and Moscow's response
Russian officials and companies came under Western sanctions, including visa bans, asset freezes, and sectoral restrictions for Russia's incorporation of Crimea after a coup in Ukraine in February and for what the West claims is Moscow’s alleged involvement in mass protests in Ukraine’s embattled south-east, which Russia has repeatedly denied.
In response, Moscow imposed on August 6 a one-year ban on imports of beef, pork, poultry, fish, cheeses, fruit, vegetables and dairy products from Australia, Canada, the EU, the United States and Norway.
Sanctions are always double-edged
Sanction wars do not offer peace in Ukraine. On the contrary, they threaten the global security system, Medvedev said. “Most politicians realize that,” Medvedev said. “However, there is certain inertia of thought, and, regretfully, a desire to use force in international relations.”
Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott
Australia’s Tony Abbott announces additional sanctions against Russia
“We know that at first economic sanctions come, and they are followed by political sanctions in response; and political actions are not symmetrical and are worse than limited supplies: here is a risk of breaking the security system in the world,” the prime minister said. “I hope this is not what our Western counterparts aspire, and no one is insane are among decision-makers.” “Sanctions are always double-edged,” he noted.
“Those implementing sanctions first will incur limitations; by offering problems, for others they receive problems for themselves,” Medvedev said. History knows many examples of sanctions, he said. “As a rule, they did not bring positive results. Terms were different, but they were not endless.”
Medvedev spoke about China, against which sanctions were introduced in 1989. However, the sanctions did not affect the positive development of the country’s economy. “They simply used the domestic resources,” the Russian prime minister said.

READ ALSO

Italy’s Berlusconi accuses Western leaders of irresponsible policy towards Russia
Additional EU sanctions against Russia might hurt Slovenian economy
French society split over anti-Russian sanctions — lawmaker
Posted by at No comments:

"Palästina: Ein Bild der Verwüstung“ Radio Vatikan



Eine Delegation des lateinischen Patriarchats hat Gaza besucht und ein „Bild der Verwüstung wie nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg“ vorgefunden. Im Stadtviertel Sajaya seien vier von fünf Häusern „nur noch ein Trümmerhaufen“, sagte Bischof William Shomali vom lateinischen Patriarchat Jerusalem zu seinen Eindrücken nach dem kurzen Besuch in Gaza am 1. September. Die Menschen seien erleichtert über den Waffenstillstand. Andererseits hätten die jungen Menschen hier bereits drei Kriege gegen Gaza miterlebt, „und jedes Mal sei die Verwüstung größer als beim letzten Mal“. Es werde Jahre dauern, bis alles wieder so sei wie früher. Zwar trafen die Vertreter des Patriarchats keine Politiker, doch bei Gesprächen mit Christen und Muslimen sei „eine zunehmende Feindseligkeit gegenüber Israel deutlich geworden“, so Bischof Shomali.   (fides 02.09.2014 gs) Radio Vatikan
http://de.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/09/02/pal%C3%A4stina:_%E2%80%9Eein_bild_der_verw%C3%BCstung%E2%80%9C/ted-822981 

Posted by at No comments:

Seven-Point Peace Plan by Vladimir Putin Will Be Implemented


Obama Begs for More War

Did Putin Just Bring Peace to Ukraine?

by MIKE WHITNEY CounterpunchWEEKEND EDITION SEPTEMBER 5-7, 2014
“In the implementing of their policies, our western partners– the United States first and foremost – prefer to be guided not by international law, but by force. They believe in their own ‘exceptionalism’, that they are allowed to decide on the fate of the world, and that they are always right.”
– Russian President Vladimir Putin
“What did we do to deserve this? What did we do to deserve being bombed from planes, shot at from tanks, and have phosphorous bombs dropped on us? ….That we wanted to live the way we want, and speak our own language, and make friends with whom we want?”
– Alexander V. Zakharchenko, Chairman of The Council of Ministers of The Donetsk National Republic, The Vineyard of the Saker
There is no way to overstate the significance of what has transpired in Ukraine in the last three weeks. What began as a murderous onslaught on the mainly Russian-speaking population of east Ukraine, has turned into a major triumph against a belligerent and expansionistic empire that has been repulsed by a scrappy, battle-hardened militia engaged in a conventional, land-based war.  The conflict in east Ukraine is Obama’s war; launched by Obama’s junta government, executed by Obama’s proxy army, and directed by Obama’s advisors in Kiev. The driving force behind the war is Washington’s ambitious pivot to Asia, a strategy that pits Russia against Europe to prevent further economic integration and to establish NATO forward-operating bases on Russia’s western border. Despite the overheated rhetoric, the talk of a (NATO) “Rapid Reaction Force”, and additional economic sanctions; the US plan to draw Ukraine into the western sphere of influence and weaken Russia in the process, is in tatters. And the reason it is in tatters is because a highly-motivated and adaptable militia has trounced Obama’s troopers at every turn pushing the Ukrainian army to the brink of collapse. Check out this frontline update from The Saker:
“The (Ukrainian Army) is not retreating on one, two or even three directions, it is retreating everywhere (except north of Lugansk).  Entire battalions are leaving the front under orders of their battalion commanders and without the approval of the Junta leaders.  At least one such battalion commander is already being judged for desertion.  The entire Ukie leadership seems to be in a panic mode, especially Iatseniuk and Kolomoiski, while the Nazis are mad as hell at the Poroshenko administration.  There are constant rumors of an anti-Poroshenko coup by outraged Nazi nationalists…..
The bottom line is this: Poroshenko promised a victory in a matter of weeks and his forces suffered one of the most total defeats in the history of warfare. ….the most likely thing is that this ridiculous “Banderastan” experiment has seriously begun sinking now and that many rats are leaving the ship.
“The War in Ukraine“, Vineyard of the Saker
The fact that the demoralized Ukrainian army has been defeated by the superior fighting force is of little importance in the big scheme of things, however, the fact that Washington’s global resource war– which began on 9-11 and has reduced numerous sovereign countries into anarchic, failed states– has been stopped in its tracks, is significant. The so called War on Terror–which was recently rebranded under the ISIS moniker–has wreaked holy havoc and death on Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now Syria. By routing the Ukrainian army the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF)  has put the kibosh on Obama’s Great Game strategy  in Eurasia and torpedoed Washington’s plan to rule the world by force of arms. It could be that the battles of Lugansk and Donetsk are eventually regarded as the turning point, where the lumbering and over-extended empire finally met its match and began its precipitous decline. In any event, there’s no doubt that Friday’s ceasefire agreement is a serious blow to US hegemony.
THE PROBLEM IS NATO
“The defining factor in relations with NATO remains the unacceptability for Russia of plans to move the military infrastructure of the alliance towards our borders, including via enlargement of the bloc,”  said Mikhail Popov, deputy head of Putin’s Security Council.
The issue has always been NATO expansion, not the ridiculous claim that Putin wants to rebuild the Russian Empire. The only one interested  in stitching together a global Caliphate is Barack Hussein Obama and his nutcase neocon advisors. Putin is not interested in an empire. Putin just wants to make money like everyone else. He wants to sell gas to Europe, raise living standards and rebuild the country.  What’s wrong with that?
Putin’s not a troublemaker. He’s not sticking a freaking first-strike nuclear missile system in Havana just 60 miles from Miami. But that’s what Obama wants to do. Obama want to establish NATO bases on Russia’s doorstep and deploy his fake-named “missile defense system” a couple hundred miles from Moscow. Putin can’t allow that. No one in their right mind would allow that. It’s a direct threat to national security. Here’s how Putin summed it up in a recent press conference:
“Russia is an independent and active participant of international relations. Just like any nation it has national interests that must be taken into consideration and respected…..We stand against having a military organization meddling in our backyard, next to our homeland or in the territories that are historically ours. I just cannot imagine visiting NATO sailors in Sevastopol,” he stressed. “Most of them are fine lads, but I’d rather they visit us in Sevastopol than the other way around.” (Vladimir Putin)
Washington’s harebrained gambit was doomed from the get go. Who made the decision to topple Yanuchovych,  install a US-puppet in Kiev, fill-out the security services with neo Nazis, and wage a bloody ethnic cleansing purge on the Russian-speaking people in the east?  Who was it?  Isn’t there any accountability among the Obama team or is it all a matter of “failing upwards” like the Bush crowd? Here’s Putin again:
“Our western partners created the ‘Kosovo precedent’ with their own hands. In a situation absolutely the same as the one in Crimea they recognized Kosovo’s secession from Serbia legitimate while arguing that no permission from a country’s central authority for a unilateral declaration of independence is necessary….And the UN International Court of Justice agreed with those arguments. That’s what they said; that’s what they trumpeted all over the world and coerced everyone to accept – and now they are complaining about Crimea. Why is that?”
Doesn’t Putin have a point? Isn’t this what we’ve seen over and over again, that there’s one standard for the US and another for everyone else?
Of course it is. But Putin’s not going to stand for it. In fact, just this week, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expanded on Putin’s comments in an interview that never appeared in the western media.  Here’s what he said:
“The current stage of international relations is marked by a transition to a fundamentally new world order – a polycentric model based on due regard for the appearance of new economic and financial centres. And political weight comes with economic and financial influence. Transition to a polycentric world order reflects an objective trend according to which the world order should be based on the world’s cultural and civilisational diversity. This is objective reality, which no one can deny. …
After a long period of dominance in global economy and politics, these countries are trying to keep their positions by artificial means. They know that their economic positions are not as strong as they were after WWII, when America accounted for over half of global GDP, but they are trying to use all available military and political instruments, social media, regime-change technology and other instruments to keep back the objective process of the development of a democratic world order based on the equality of all sides.
Not everyone has realized yet that it is impossible to move contrary to an objective historical process. We strongly hope that this will happen, because otherwise more illegal unilateral sanctions will be approved against Russia, to which we will respond accordingly, as we have already tried to do. But this, I repeat, is not our choice; we don’t want confrontation.” (Press Conference: Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov)
“A new world order based on a polycentric model”? What a great idea. You mean, a world in which other sovereign nations get a say-so in the way the world is run?  You mean, a world in which the economic, political, and military decision-making does not emerge from one center of power that is dominated by privately-owned banks, transnational corporations and voracious western elites? You mean, a world in which international law can be applied evenly so that one country cannot unilaterally create off-shore gulags, or incite color coded revolutions, or carry out extra-legal abductions and killings, or order drone attacks on wedding parties or conduct any of the other heinous violations of human rights which imperial Washington engages in without batting an eye?
The NAF’s victory in east Ukraine brings us all one step closer to actualizing the multi-polar world of which Lavrov and Putin speak so glowingly. In fact, just hours ago Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko capitulated and signed a ceasefire agreement with the leaders of the anti-fascist militia, Igor Plotnitsky and Aleksandr Zakharchenko. (Remember: “We never negotiate with terrorists”?) Ukraine’s National Security Council (SNBO) has reported that its troops have halted all military actions. The government’s public statement reads as follows:
“According to the decision of the President of Ukraine and the order of the chief of the General staff of the military units of Ukraine, troops in the area of anti-terrorist operations ceased fire at 15.00 GMT.”
Peace at last?
It sure looks like it.
So while Obama is busy trying to ramp up the violence by rallying NATO to expand the wars around the world,  international peacekeepers will begin the thorny task of implementing a seven-point peace plan put forward by none-other-than Vladimir Putin.
The difference between the peacemakers and the warmongers has rarely been as stark as it is today.
MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.
Posted by at No comments:

NATO Summit: Look at Results

Arkady DZIUBA | 08.09.2014 | 00:00

The NATO Wales summit is an important event for the relationship between Russia and the West. It wound up with controversial results. 
It’s good the issue of Ukraine was not the only one to set the agenda, the situation in the Middle East, where the world witnesses British citizens severing heads of American journalists, stuns the world raising great security concerns. The US, Ukraine, the «young Europe» and some other members of the alliance wanted the situation in Ukraine to dominate. NATO claims global responsibility and it’s evident that the Islamic State poses a greater threat. The decision on new rapid response force did not exactly match the aspirations of Poland, Estonia, Romania and some other states that have recently joined the alliance. 
On a visit to Estonia President Obama said he would increase the presence of US Air Force in this country. The summit agreed to broaden the military infrastructure and hold frequent military exercises to repel the Russian «aggression» but there will be no permanent presence, the decision not to deploy troops permanently was to large extent influenced by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. 
The summit declaration included the guideline to spend a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product on defence with 20% of the budgets spent on major equipment. The guideline has been effective for already ten years carried out only by the USA, Great Britain, Greece and Estonia. The final declaration puts it rather mildly; it says the allies should «aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO's capability shortfall». The participants emphasized that collective defence is at the heart of the Washington Treaty as enshrined in Article 5. It commits members to protect each other in case of attack. It was stressed that this principle applies to the Baltic States as well.
The President of Ukraine got warm reception. NATO promised to increase the number of advisers in the country as cooperation is to be boosted in different areas, including bullet-proof jackets and other supplies except arms. The focus of NATO support will be on four areas; rehabilitation for injured troops, cyber defence, logistics, and command and control and communications. NATO’s assistance to Ukraine will amount to around 15 million euros. President Poroshenko said behind closed doors that some individual members will supply weapons on their own but the Ukrainian leader is treated rather skeptically being known for his propensity to news making. The information on arms deliveries to be included in the aid package has not been confirmed. The Ukrainian elite is known to be corrupted so the sum is just enough to meet the needs of only one Ukrainian general who would pocket the money to «modernize» himself and the next of kin. 
Secretary General Rasmussen by and large endorsed the Russia’s peace plan with some reservations made. He remained skeptical about the cease fire. Somehow he never puts forward any demands addressed to Kiev calling only on Russia and Donbass self-defence forces to comply. 
Jens Stoltenberg, former Prime Minister of Norway, was named NATO Secretary General designate. Sounds funny but Norwegian experts remembered that he was accused of working for the KGB at the start of his career. It made them predict that under his leadership NATO will toe a softer line on Russia. 
Now about the things to make one frustrated. Obama and Rasmussen used the language like if they were the same kind of people as Poroshenko or Galetey (Ukrainian Defence Minister).They accused Russia of all kinds of wrongdoing including an incursion into Donbass and sending thousands of troops there. It’s hard to say if the tough rhetoric used is kind of compensation for absence of tough measures, time will tell. 
Second, the US exerted enough pressure on the French President to make him say the delivery of the first of two assault navy ships ordered by Russia is halted. Hollande resisted for a long time, the refusal to carry the agreement out will entail penalty and protests staged by shipyard workers. Now the pressure has become too strong. 
Still the advocates of tougher line towards Moscow were unsatisfied. It’s enough to have a look at American media outlets: Has NATO Lost its Will as well as its Muscle? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-has-nato-lost-its-will-as-well-as-its-muscle/2014/09/05/c342b78e-3467-11e4-9e92-0899b306bbea_story.html), NATO Too Wary of Russian Threats to Let Ukraine Join (http://time.com/3271057/nato-ukraine-membership),
Ukraine abandoned (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-at-nato-summit-ukraine-abandoned/2014/09/04/ce45f13c-3467-11e4-a723-fa3895a25d02_story.html). Obama is accused of being irresolute and incoherent again. 
Now what we have? The United States finds it more difficult to make NATO take the desired decisions. There is a wide gap between the US and Europe’s interests. The crisis in Ukraine has become an acid test. It does not mean America will not meddle into Ukraine, especially as Obama comes under Republican pressure. 
The United States will be looking for other ways to interfere along with loyal allies and some post-Soviet states – Georgia and Moldova. The Islamists should not be turned a blind eye on. The Islamic factor will be used against Russia in Crimea and the Caucasus… The United States will apply efforts to counter the growing Russian influence in Ukraine. 
The Ukrainian President is threatened as a result of his acquiescence to cease fire. Of course, he did it as a result of failure to achieve military success in Donbass. Many Ukrainians are under the effect of propaganda and military advances in July-August. They refuse to see reality and put the blame for defeat on traitors. It brings to surface the possibility of third Maidan to make it the main result of the summit.
 http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/09/08/nato-summit-look-at-results.html
Tags: NATO Russia Ukraine US
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, September 6, 2014

The Whys Behind the Ukraine Crisis

EDITOR'S CHOICE | 05.09.2014 | 10:26

A senior U.S. diplomat told me recently that if Russia were to occupy all of Ukraine and even neighboring Belarus that there would be zero impact on U.S. national interests. The diplomat wasn’t advocating that, of course, but was noting the curious reality that Official Washington’s current war hysteria over Ukraine doesn’t connect to genuine security concerns.
So why has so much of the Washington Establishment – from prominent government officials to all the major media pundits – devoted so much time this past year to pounding their chests over the need to confront Russia regarding Ukraine? Who is benefiting from this eminently avoidable – yet extremely dangerous – crisis? What’s driving the madness?
Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, speaking to Ukrainian and other business leaders at the National Press Club in Washington on Dec. 13, 2013, at a meeting sponsored by Chevron.
Of course, Washington’s conventional wisdom is that America only wants “democracy” for the people of Ukraine and that Russian President Vladimir Putin provoked this confrontation as part of an imperialist design to reclaim Russian territory lost during the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. But that “group think” doesn’t withstand examination. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Who’s Telling the Big Lie on Ukraine?”]
The Ukraine crisis was provoked not by Putin but by a combination of the European Union’s reckless move to expand its influence eastward and the machinations of U.S. neoconservatives who were angered by Putin’s collaboration with President Barack Obama to tamp down confrontations in Syria and Iran, two neocon targets for “regime change.”
Plus, if “democracy promotion” were the real motive, there were obviously better ways to achieve it. Democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych pledged on Feb. 21 – in an agreement guaranteed by three European nations – to surrender much of his power and hold early elections so he could be voted out of office if the people wanted.
However, on Feb. 22, the agreement was brushed aside as neo-Nazi militias stormed presidential buildings and forced Yanukovych and other officials to flee for their lives. Rather than stand behind the Feb. 21 arrangement, the U.S. State Department quickly endorsed the coup regime that emerged as “legitimate” and the mainstream U.S. press dutifully demonized Yanukovych by noting, for instance, that a house being built for him had a pricy sauna.
The key role of the neo-Nazis, who were given several ministries in recognition of their importance to the putsch, was studiously ignored or immediately forgotten by all the big U.S. news outlets. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Ukraine’s ‘Dr. Strangelove’ Reality.”]
So, it’s hard for any rational person to swallow the official line that the U.S. interest in the spiraling catastrophe of Ukraine, now including thousands of ethnic Russians killed by the coup regime’s brutal “anti-terrorist operation,” was either to stop Putin’s imperial designs or to bring “democracy” to the Ukrainians.
That skepticism – combined with the extraordinary danger of stoking a hot war on the border of nuclear-armed Russia – has caused many observers to search for more strategic explanations behind the crisis, such as the West’s desires to “frack” eastern Ukraine for shale gas or the American determination to protect the dollar as the world’s currency.
Thermo-Nuclear War Anyone?
The thinking is that when the potential cost of such an adventure, i.e. thermo-nuclear warfare that could end all life on the planet, is so high, the motivation must be commensurate. And there is logic behind that thinking although it’s hard to conceive what financial payoff is big enough to risk wiping out all humanity including the people on Wall Street.
But sometimes gambles are made with the assumption that lots of money can be pocketed before cooler heads intervene to prevent total devastation — or even the more immediate risk that the Ukraine crisis will pitch Europe into a triple-dip recession that could destabilize the fragile U.S. economy, too.
In the Ukraine case, the temptation has been to think that Moscow – hit with escalating economic sanctions – will back down even as the EU and U.S. energy interests seize control of eastern Ukraine’s energy reserves. The fracking could mean both a financial bonanza to investors and an end to Russia’s dominance of the natural gas supplies feeding central and eastern Europe. So the economic and geopolitical payoff could be substantial.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Ukraine has Europe’s third-largest shale gas reserves at 42 trillion cubic feet, an inviting target especially since other European nations, such as Britain, Poland, France and Bulgaria, have resisted fracking technology because of environmental concerns. An economically supine Ukraine would presumably be less able to say no. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Beneath the Ukraine Crisis: Shale Gas.”]
Further supporting the “natural gas motive” is the fact that it was Vice President Joe Biden who demanded that President Yanukovych pull back his police on Feb. 21, a move that opened the way for the neo-Nazi militias and the U.S.-backed coup. Then, just three months later, Ukraine’s largest private gas firm, Burisma Holdings, appointed Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, to its board of directors.
While that might strike some of you as a serious conflict of interest, even vocal advocates for ethics in government lost their voices amid Washington’s near-universal applause for the ouster of Yanukovych and warm affection for the coup regime in Kiev.
For instance, Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, dismissed the idea that Hunter Biden’s new job should raise eyebrows, telling Reuters: “It can’t be that because your dad is the vice president, you can’t do anything,”
Who Is Behind Burisma?
Soon, Burisma – a shadowy Cyprus-based company – was lining up well-connected lobbyists, some with ties to Secretary of State John Kerry, including Kerry’s former Senate chief of staff David Leiter, according to lobbying disclosures.
As Time magazine reported, “Leiter’s involvement in the firm rounds out a power-packed team of politically-connected Americans that also includes a second new board member, Devon Archer, a Democratic bundler and former adviser to John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign. Both Archer and Hunter Biden have worked as business partners with Kerry’s son-in-law, Christopher Heinz, the founding partner of Rosemont Capital, a private-equity company.”
According to investigative journalism in Ukraine, the ownership of Burisma has been traced to Privat Bank, which is controlled by the thuggish billionaire oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky, who was appointed by the coup regime to be governor of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, a south-central province of Ukraine. Kolomoysky also has been associated with the financing of brutal paramilitary forces killing ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.
Also, regarding this energy motive, it shouldn’t be forgotten that on Dec. 13, 2013, when neocon Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland reminded Ukrainian business leaders that the United States had invested $5 billion in their “European aspirations,” she was at a conference sponsored by Chevron. She even stood next to the company’s logo.
So, clearly energy resources and the billions of dollars that go with them should be factored in when trying to solve the mystery of why Official Washington has gone so berserk about a confrontation with Russia that boils down to whether ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine should be allowed some measure of autonomy or be put firmly under the thumb of U.S.-friendly authorities in Kiev.
There’s also the issue of Russia’s interest in exploring with China and other emerging economies the possibility of escaping the financial hegemony of the U.S. dollar, a move that could seriously threaten American economic dominance. According to this line of thinking, the U.S. and its close allies need to bring Moscow to its geopolitical knees – where it was under the late Boris Yeltsin – to stop any experimentation with other currencies for global trade.
Again, the advocates for this theory have a point. Protecting the Mighty Dollar is of utmost importance to Wall Street. The financial cataclysm of a potential ouster of the U.S. dollar as the world’s benchmark currency might understandably prompt some powerful people to play a dangerous game of chicken with nuclear-armed Russia.
Of course, there’s also the budgetary interest of NATO and the U.S. “military-industrial complex” (which helps fund many of Washington’s “think tanks”) to hype every propaganda opportunity to scare the American people about the “Russian threat.”
And, it’s a truism that every major international confrontation has multiple drivers. Think back on the motives behind the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Among a variety of factors were Vice President Dick Cheney’s lust for oil, President George W. Bush’s psychological rivalry with his father, and the neocons’ interest in orchestrating “regime change” in countries considered hostile to Israel. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “The Mysterious Why of the Iraq War.”]
There are also other reasons to disdain Putin, from his bare-chested horseback riding to his retrograde policies on gay rights. But he is no Stalin and surely no Hitler.
The Neocons’ ‘Samson Option’
So, while it’s reasonable to see multiple motives behind the brinksmanship with Russia over Ukraine, the sheer recklessness of the confrontation has, to me, the feel of an ideology or an “ism,” where people are ready to risk it all for some larger vision that is central to their being.
That is why I have long considered the Ukraine crisis to be an outgrowth of the neoconservative obsession with Israel’s interests in the Middle East.
Not only did key neocons – the likes of Assistant Secretary Nuland and Sen. John McCain – put themselves at the center of the coup plotting last winter but the neocons had an overriding motive: they wanted to destroy the behind-the-scenes collaboration between President Obama and President Putin who had worked together to avert a U.S. bombing campaign against the Syrian government a year ago and then advanced negotiations with Iran over limiting but not eliminating its nuclear program.
Those Obama-Putin diplomatic initiatives frustrated the desires of Israeli officials and the neocons to engineer “regime change” in those two countries. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even believed that bombing Iran’s nuclear plants was an “existential” necessity.
Further, there was the possibility that an expansion of the Obama-Putin cooperation could have supplanted Israel’s powerful position as a key arbiter of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Thus, the Obama-Putin relationship had to be blown up – and the Ukraine crisis was the perfect explosive for the destruction. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Why Neocons Seek to Destabilize Russia.”]
Though I’m told that Obama now understands how the neocons and other hardliners outmaneuvered him over Ukraine, he has felt compelled to join in Official Washington’s endless Putin-bashing, causing a furious Putin to make clear that he cannot be counted on to assist Obama on tricky foreign policy predicaments like Syria and Iran.
As I wrote last April, “There is a ‘little-old-lady-who-swallowed-the-fly’ quality to neocon thinking. When one of their schemes goes bad, they simply move to a bigger, more dangerous scheme. If the Palestinians and Lebanon’s Hezbollah persist in annoying you and troubling Israel, you target their sponsors with ‘regime change’ – in Iraq, Syria and Iran. If your ‘regime change’ in Iraq goes badly, you escalate the subversion of Syria and the bankrupting of Iran.
“Just when you think you’ve cornered President Barack Obama into a massive bombing campaign against Syria – with a possible follow-on war against Iran – Putin steps in to give Obama a peaceful path out, getting Syria to surrender its chemical weapons and Iran to agree to constraints on its nuclear program. So, this Obama-Putin collaboration has become your new threat. That means you take aim at Ukraine, knowing its sensitivity to Russia.
“You support an uprising against elected President Viktor Yanukovych, even though neo-Nazi militias are needed to accomplish the actual coup. You get the U.S. State Department to immediately recognize the coup regime although it disenfranchises many people of eastern and southern Ukraine, where Yanukovych had his political base.
“When Putin steps in to protect the interests of those ethnic Russian populations and supports the secession of Crimea (endorsed by 96 percent of voters in a hastily called referendum), your target shifts again. Though you’ve succeeded in your plan to drive a wedge between Obama and Putin, Putin’s resistance to your Ukraine plans makes him the next focus of ‘regime change.’
“Your many friends in the mainstream U.S. news media begin to relentlessly demonize Putin with a propaganda barrage that would do a totalitarian state proud. The anti-Putin ‘group think’ is near total and any accusation – regardless of the absence of facts – is fine.”
Yet, by risking a potential nuclear confrontation with Russia — the equivalent of the old lady swallowing a horse – the neocons have moved beyond what can be described in a children’s ditty. It has become more like a global version of Israel’s “Samson Option,” the readiness to use nuclear weapons in a self-destructive commitment to eliminate your enemies whatever the cost to yourself.
But what is particularly shocking in this case is how virtually everyone in U.S. officialdom – and across the mainstream media spectrum – has bought into this madness.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s.
Tags: Ukraine US
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)