No Ban! No Wall! No War?

As I watched the corporate news on demonstrations against Trump’s travel ban, I was struck by the fact that on-going wars in the Middle East were not mentioned. It was as if these refugees were fleeing Nazi Germany. No, they are fleeing the wars that we the American people have been waging against them for many years

It is a good thing to show compassion, declare our solidarity with Muslims, or to talk about our own immigrant histories, but we will fail to oppose Trump and make a real difference if we do not act against war and empire.

The corporate media avoids connecting our wars to Trump’s ban because war and empire is a matter of agreement among the political elites, an elite that the corporate media is very much a part of.  In a remarkable reversal of the Russian hacking story — which was broadcast constantly for weeks without evidence — the connection between war and refugees is patently obvious and glaringly absent.  What are they trying to hide?

If a new anti-war movement emerged from the resistance to Trump it would have the potential to shake the entire system. So the Democrats try to focus as narrowly as they can on Trump’s social and psychological pathologies while waiting to make up for their loses in the 2018 mid-term elections as the default party. The corporate media follows suit.

The anti-war movement of the Vietnam era was so powerful not just because of its compassion for others and moral condemnation of evil, but because it was a real political resistance movement that led people beyond the “liberal consensus.” The liberal consensus was a set of interlocking cultural norms and beliefs. It basic assumption was that  America was the supreme and exceptional leader of the free world.   The passage beyond conventional ways of thinking and acting occurred because being anti-war demanded a deep criticism of the established order both liberal and conservative.

Remember that the Vietnam war was fought by liberals like John F. Kennedy  Kennedy’s war advisors became known as the “Best and the Brightest,” a high powered  team of academic and industrial superstars that could, it turned out, calculate everything but understand nothing. Lyndon Baines Johnson escalated the conflict but was also the president that passed civil rights legislation on a scale that no other modern president has even dared. Liberal leaders like Hubert Humphrey and Edward Kennedy pursued the war as well.

Nixon won in 1968 largely because he ran to Humphrey’s left, as an anti-war candidate of sorts.  He returned the war to conservative leadership but, it was a conservatism  that would fit comfortably within the corporate wing of the today’s Democratic Party. Both Nixon and Hillary Clinton embraced Henry Kissinger who, seeking power like a missile seeks heat, has now gone over to Trump’s side.

It was the anti-war movement, against this basket of political icons, that crossed the threshold to a meaningful, principled opposition.  Two example will suffice to show just how deep it all went.

In April 1967 Martin Luther King rocked the civil rights movement and the nation with his first major speech opposing the war in Vietnam and linking war to racism and poverty. King crossed into revolutionary territory, stepped outside the liberal consensus, and became the leader of a movement for peace, racial equality and economic democracy. Let’s not forget that King was not a Democrat or a Republican. Leading up to the 1968 election, King supported dissenting candidates and even considered an independent run for president.

We must also recall the other truly revolutionary frontier crossed by American soldiers and veterans. In an unprecedented political movement, thousands of American soldiers and veterans opposed the very war they had fought in.

The leadership of the GI and Veteran anti-war movement were not reluctant draftees but rather gung-ho volunteers who were willing to risk life and limb to do the right thing. When the reality of combat in Vietnam dashed their high hopes they turned against war and empire. The military peace movement made history in ways no other peace movement could: soldier resistance slowed the war effort through direct action while the political resistance of the veterans challenged the symbolic and cultural foundations of the war.

The Iraq Veterans Against the War and the Veterans for Standing Rock continue this tradition.  The Vietnam Veterans Against the War took the same smears and attacks Tulsi Gabbard does today for her courageous acts against war.

Endless wars have been fought by Republicans and Democrats to secure oil and produce huge profits for major corporations. No wonder the media is silent on just where all these refugees are coming from.

Nothing captures the deception better than Madeline Albright’s claim that she will register as a Muslim given her bloody record of killing Muslims in Iraq.  Albright agreed with New Mexican Bill Richardson, that “the price was worth it.”  That “price,” according to former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark and other observers, was the devastation of Iraq including the deaths of up to 500,000 people.

For us protestors, maybe its that war has been normalized. We started this cycle of conflict in the Greater Middle East in 1978 when we organized the Mujahideen in Afghanistan — the same rebels that would later become Al Qaeda and fight alongside of the “moderate rebels” we currently fund in Syria. We started bombing Iraq as far back as the First Gulf War in 1990. For many Americans these wars have been fought for their entire lives.

Trump’s war talk may or may not escalate beyond Obama’s rush to expand US military operations in Eastern Europe and Africa and invest a trillion dollars into nuclear weapons.  Trump is nonetheless challenging us to restart an anti-war movement that wages peace on many fronts: the Middle East, Iran, China, Mexico and the growing dangers of nuclear war.

Trump’s reckless provocations can only be answered by the renewal of a peace movement large enough to disrupt business as usual; by a peace movement that looks to soldiers and veterans for leadership; by a peace movement that understands, as Dr. King did, the deep connections between racism, war, economic exploitation, and now we must add, climate change.

Trump’s war plans, climate denial and support for big oil are a dangerous formula as it becomes increasingly clear that war and climate change are intimately connected. We will fail to oppose Trump and everything he stands for if we do not oppose war and empire.

No Ban! No Wall! No War!

Israeli Company Offers Its Services to Help Build Trump’s Wall

Posted on January 30, 2017

 photo wall_zpsve8wmakk.jpg

Israel-based Magal Security Systems Ltd. seeks this week to persuade officials in Washington to grant it a contract to take part in the construction of the wall the new US administration is planning to build on the American-Mexican borders.

According to Bloomberg News, Magal’s US-based Senstar branch will present its FiberPatrol product at a conference on border security which will be held on Tuesday in Alexandria, Virginia.

Continued here

Trump’s Brand

by on November 25, 2016

Trump has been a very successful businessman, not so much as a builder but as a salesman. He sold the brand he created: himself, or rather, his name. It doesn’t matter how many or how few of his buildings he actually owns: the world knows them as Trump towers. The use of his name fetches large fees and a percentage of the profit.

Some of his campaign speeches, in which he talked about the wall he wanted to build on the South border sounded like the rehearsed spiel he must have always used: “It will be BEAUTIFUL! You’ll see.” He sounded confident because, justifiably, he trusts his own spiel based on the track record. It has worked well for him.

The brand he fashioned is recognizably American in spirit: “Bigger is better and biggest is best, and we are the biggest and the best” as well as Jewish: “All that glitters is as good as gold. Ostentation is good because too much of a good thing is wonderful.” Common to both is the belief that who you are is what you have and what you have is the measure of what you can do (and get away with):

 

His America is New York City,a milieu where he made deals with, became friends with, and was helped along the way by many Jews, and where his children married Jews, so it makes sense that he expects this symbiotic cooperation to not only continue but to be taken to a new level.

His ego leads him to expect being able to “best” them in the biggest deal of his life: his project of “making America great again.” In exchange he will give them, say, a completely free hand in Palestine and, as a lagniappe, deeper deregulations here and then, in banking and industry, to make America “competitive.” Israel is already offering help with his beautiful wall project:

“Trump’s Mexican wall a boon for Israeli security company.”
The Israeli company that has built high-tech fences along the country’s volatile borders is now trying to build a bridge to the Trump administration — hoping to use its experience to cash in on the president-elect’s plan to seal the border with Mexico. Magal Security Systems has been a major player in building high-tech fences and walls along Israel’s volatile northern and southern borders, as well as the massive separation barrier that snakes along the frontier with the West Bank. “We believe that the U.S. government is going to increase its security budgets in the upcoming years and definitely we look forward to take part in it,” the company’s chief executive, Saar Koursh, told The Associated Press.”

Mexico also sees his wall as a good business opportunity! Was he right or was he right?

Based on the Gestalt of his life experience he may well sincerely believe that what the nation needs (and only he can provide) is a refurbished “America” brand. One so tall, so big and so intimidatingly shiny that the world will respect it again.

Some have said that the reason his team was so completely unprepared on November 8 — no transition plan, no clearly defined responsibilities of his team, and a vaguely sketched cabinet — was that Trump himself did not expect to win. I don’t believe this. He is not the type who forges ahead prepared to lose. I think he rather regards such preparations as he does the teleprompter: useful but not vital. If not available, he can always improvise. He will appoint “experts” (e.g., Mnuchin has vast expertise in finances, does he not?) to run the various departments, and he will busy himself cutting “deals” with foreign leaders that will all benefit “America” and will pacify areas of conflict in the world. One such obvious unresolved conflict is Palestine-Israel and he is already sketching a solution, working closely with his friend, Netanyahu. It will be beautiful.

Unlike the Clintons, greedy psychopathic liars sold to the highest bidder, which happens to be Jewish Power, I believe Trump is not only sincere, but also a patriot by his reckoning. He is sincere in his belief that the brand not only sells the product, but is the product. He is also a patriot who wants America to be “America” again — the shining brand the whole world used to admire and fear (“nobody will dare to mess with us”) — but his patriotism is local: he is a New York City patriot.

Despite his professions of understanding and identifying with those whom Hillary Clinton stupidly called “deplorables”–  in rural America and in the devastated, formerly thriving industrial states (Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania) — Trump’s campaign visits there were the safaris of a New Yorker for whom civilization as he knows it ends west of the Hudson River. Beyond is another country and “they do things differently there.”

Trump did not “feel their pain,” as Bill Clinton used to lie; I believe he felt sincere compassion for the suffering of those he encountered, and a self-affirming, confirmatory delight at the warm reception his “tell it like it is” spiel received from them. He truly wants to alleviate their plight. He thinks he knows how, and is sure that his friends and long-term associates can help because they are deeply American too: NYC Americans, like him and, in final analysis, all “good people.”

All this is not to say that Trump’s presidency will bring no changes. Whether unwittingly or by sly intent to grab himself a heretofore ignored constituency, he has unleashed a deep national current of distrust, disgust and even hatred for the elites and the “lying media” that will not abate soon, and through his speeches has cut a large hole in the gag of political correctness.

Nationalism, specifically white nationalism, has gone from being viewed as the loony obsession of a few skinheads and survivalists packing ammo in Idaho and Montana to something now called a dangerous trend to be discussed openly (and excoriated, of course) on television and in the MSM. But there is another nascent change in the works: nationalism is being kosherized and defanged  to make it safe for the sensitive, oppressed minorities (among which white Americans are not included yet). With kosher nationalism handed down to them — a sort of papalist populism– white Christian Americans will be able to have their cake without eating it. Jewish luminaries are calling it “pan-ethnic nationalism” and are telling hand-shy white liberals (“progressives”) that it’s ok, it has the rabbinical stamp. Ironically it resembles the democrat slogan, “We’re stronger together.” “America” means diversity, they explain, otherwise it is bigotry and worse: anti-semitism.

The unexpected number of women who voted for the “horrid misogynist” indicates that feminism has passed its sell-by date. No dramatic changes are to be expected on this score, however, but perhaps a more laissez-faire attitude regarding jokes and language so far considered male chauvinist will prevail.

The over-reaching of pro-immigration/open borders activists has fed the flames of anti-immigration sentiment to which Trump’s wall project appealed. This will not diminish and will still demand a solution, which the wall itself, absent changes in immigration and labor laws and social benefits distribution, does not represent.

So political correctness will be eroded in some areas to the chagrin of feminists and pro-immigration advocates, and Hallmark will print more “Merry Christmas” than “Happy Holidays” cards this Christmas.

When all is said and done, was the election joust only a skirmish between two factions of Jewish power? One that was won by the more astute manipulators who saw the surf and decided to ride it rather rail against it?

For now Trump’s deep motivation and intentions are still a puzzle.

What is certain is that the immediate danger of war with Russia has been averted and that is no small thing. It remains to be seen how Trump conducts himself in his interactions with Putin and other world leaders (like the Chinese), and if they see him as Chauncey, the gardner in Being There, or if he impresses them and their productive exchanges lead to mutually favorable agreements.

I agree with those who believe we should give him a chance and wait at least six months after the inauguration. Nevertheless, as physics teaches us, initial conditions determine much of the course of any event/phenomenon, and in the cone of shadow they cast, small indicators at the narrow end of the funnel are much amplified at the other end.

“But what if he fails?” asks Paul Craig Roberts. He answers his own question thus:      “If Trump fails, the only solution is for the American people to become more radical.”

________________________

Note: I chose a few drawings by a pre-eminent New Yorker, Saul Steinberg, to illustrate this essay because they seemed highly apposite.

See Also

 

Pope Hates Walls–Unless They’re Made in Israel

 

popefrancis

You may have missed this. I did until a friend sent me a link to it a couple of days ago. Earlier this year, Pope Francis leveled criticism at Donald Trump over his proposal to build a wall along the US-Mexico border. The pontiff even went so far as to suggest that Trump, because of his desire to secure the border, couldn’t possibly be a Christian.

The bishop of Rome set off the tiff aboard the papal plane as he was flying home from Mexico, the country whose government Trump has made a scapegoat for all that ails the United States. And as Pope Francis found himself answering questions from reporters about Trump, he did not mince words.

“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian,” Francis told reporters in response to a specific question about the presidential candidate, according to Reuters’ account. “This is not in the gospel.”

Asked by a reporter whether an American Catholic could vote for him, the pope demurred.

“As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he says things like that,” he said, before referring to Trump directly: “We must see if he said things in that way, and in this I give the benefit of the doubt.”

The above comes from an article that appeared on Politico back in February. The pope, of course, is well aware of the wall which Israel has built, but apparently he has nothing to say about that.

 photo wall_zpsve8wmakk.jpg

wallgraphic

Francis is not exactly a man of courage. Bashing Donald Trump is totally risk-free. Criticizing Israel, even its apartheid wall, which has been deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice, runs considerably greater hazards, and I guess the pope just isn’t up for it.

In responding to the comments, Trump called the Pope’s questioning of his faith “disgraceful.” In a way it’s hard to disagree.

“For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful,” he asserted. “I am proud to be a Christian and as President I will not allow Christianity to be consistently attacked and weakened, unlike what is happening now, with our current President.”

He also said “they”–without specifying who he was referring to–are using the pope as a “pawn,” and suggested that Francis might have a change of heart were the Vatican ever to be attacked by ISIS.

If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened. ISIS would have been eradicated unlike what is happening now with our all talk, no action politicians…

No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith. They are using the Pope as a pawn and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, especially when so many lives are involved and when illegal immigration is so rampant.

Who does Trump mean by “they”? I guess you’ll have to ask him that question. All I can really say is this: that while Trump has his faults certainly, it is pretty clear that the neocons, who are just itching to get a war started with Russia, would have far greater influence in a Clinton presidency than under a Trump administration. Maybe that should be of greater concern to us at this point than Trump’s demeanor toward women.

Gaza in Context… Watch it!!!

July 27, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

Jews and Walls

Jews and walls… Jews and shtetls …. Jews and paranoia…. collective insanity.
“They can’t be that crazy, ” says Aziz Oubid. Yes, Aziz, they can and they are!

Isaac Herzog

Saying he wants “to save Jewish lives,” the leader of the Israeli opposition is proposing to divide Jerusalem with more high walls and checkpoints, effectively banishing 200,000 Palestinian residents from the city.

The proposal by Isaac Herzog, formally adopted last month by the Labor Party, imagines building miles of new concrete barriers and smart fences to separate 28 Palestinian neighborhoods in East Jerusalem from Jewish neighborhoods and Jewish settlements in the city.

Herzog, co-leader of the Israeli Zionist Union party and the Labor Party’s leader describes his plan as “we’re here and they’re there,”and  says the walls must be built inside the city to stop Palestinians from killing Israeli Jews in knife, gun and car attacks.
The plan would transform vast stretches of Jerusalem from a demographically divided but physically contiguous metropolis into an archipelago of sectarian cantons served by roads and tunnels designed for either Israelis or Palestinians.

If the Herzog plan were to be implemented, Israel would reduce the Muslim population of Jerusalem from more than a third of the city to about 10 percent.

“They will put us behind a wall and say that 200,000 Palestinian residents of Jerusalem need a special permit to visit al-Aqsa Mosque? That is a religious war,” said Aziz Oubid, co-owner of an auto parts store in the Palestinian neighborhood of Issawiya just a few miles from the Old City.

“They can’t be that crazy,” he said.

Palestinians complain that the Herzog plan is impractical, radical and racist — that it amounts to “collective punishment” for hundreds of thousands of Arabs for the actions of a few dozen assailants, and would separate lifelong residents of Jerusalem, both Muslim and Christian, from their jobs, schools, hospitals and holy places. They do not seem to understand that this is precisely the intention of the plan.

“We are more than suspicious. Even talking like this increases the frustration, increases the anger,” said Darwish Darwish, the traditional leader, known as mukhtar, of the Issawiya neighborhood.

“Herzog is telling Palestinians of East Jerusalem that we don’t give a damn about them,” said Daniel Seidemann, founder of Terrestrial Jerusalem, a group that tracks development in the city.

“The threat to Jewish Jerusalem isn’t the Palestinians,” Seidemann said. “It’s the occupation.”

Jews and walls…

Read more here.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall and the Multiplication of Western Walls

11.15.2014 :: Analysis by James Petras

Introduction: On November 9, 2014, Germany and its Western Allies, celebrated the ‘Fall of the Berlin Wall’ and the subsequent‘re-unification’of the ‘two Germanys’. Prime Minister Merkel described the ‘historic event’ as a “victory of freedom for all peoples in Europe and across the world.”

The entire Western media and officialdom echoed Merkel’s rhetoric, as 300,000 Germans gathered at the Brandenburg Gate hailed their leader as she spoke of ‘one people, one nation and one state in freedom, peace and prosperity…’ But Merkel’s discourse is a self-serving chauvinist fabrication which distorts the real consequences of a united Germany. Moreover, the Western celebration of ‘fallen walls’ is very selective.

The notion that Germany was ‘unified’ democratically is of dubious historical accuracy. The consequences of a powerful unified Germany have not led to a peaceful prosperous Europe and Germany’s current role in world politics, particularly its policies toward the Middle East, North Africa and the Ukraine, has been anything but peaceful.

The Walls of Freedom and the Walls of Prison

While NATO regimes celebrate the ‘Fall of the Berlin Wall’ as the highest expression of freedom, these same political leaders support, finance and promote the construction of oppressive walls throughout world: Unified Germany and its NATO partners have supported Israel’s Separation Wall dividing and caging millions of Palestinians for the better part of two decades. Apparently there are progressive and reactionary ‘walls’ – ‘good walls’ and ‘bad walls’. Unlike the Palestinians, Berliners were never deprived of basic necessities and subject to random displacement or even murder – the Western airlift provided all for West Berliners.

Israel’s Separation Wall results in division and seizure of Palestinian land, ancestral homes, farms, schools and cultural sites while centuries-old olive groves are razed – depriving their owners of productive income.

The US has built its own massive ‘Security Wall’ along its Mexican border, incarcerating and even shooting refugees fleeing Washington’s militarization of Central America and Mexico. The US ‘Security’ Wall condemns millions of Mexicans and Central Americans to live in terror and misery in murderous US client narco-states. In the past seven years, over 100,000 Mexican civilians have been killed under the reign of US-backed Presidents, who were elected through fraud, as they relentlessly pursue the US mandated “War on Drugs”. Similar levels of killings ravage Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala where narco-gangs, with the backing of corrupt political, police and military officials, terrorize the cities and countryside. The death toll from US military interventions in Central America far exceeds those by the former-Soviet Union in Eastern Europe. The US border wall ensures that the survivors of this terror will remain exposed to the brutal rule of US-backed regimes.

At the same time, the civilized ‘European Union’ has erected its land and sea ‘Walls against refugees’ from Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon and Palestine, fleeing NATO directed invasions and proxy wars in their countries. According to the UN Commission on Refugees, 13 million civilians have been displaced by US wars in Iraq and Syria. Many fleeing the war zones crash up against the European ‘legal walls’ – immigration restrictions, concentration or “internment” camps and prolonged detentions welcome their “flight to freedom”.

Chancellor Merkel chose not to mention these ‘civilized’ walls against people fleeing NATO’s ‘humanitarian interventions’. Nor have the Prime Ministers and Presidents of Europe or the US and its ‘ally’ Israel acknowledged the deaths and suffering…because these are their Walls, their own ‘barriers to freedom’.

Democratic Re-Unification or Annexation by Force

Merkel glosses over the crucial fact that the East Germans were never consulted or allowed to hold a free election to decide what kind of relation they would like with the West German regime. They were never asked under what terms and in what time frame “reunification” would take place. The West German regime seized control and dictated economic and social policies that destroyed their eastern neighbors’ economy by fiat. Hundreds of thousands of East German factory-workers faced brutal arbitrary firings as the capitalist ‘West’ shut closed state factories. East German farmers looked on helplessly as their prosperous, stable co-operatives were dissolved on the orders of West German officials. Where was the democracy in this policy of brutal annexation and political viciousness that slashed the former ‘East’ Germans living standards, multiplied unemployment ten-fold, greatly prejudiced the welfare benefits and employment of female workers and devastated pensioners.? Over 1.5 million Eastern German workers were uprooted and became economic refugees in the ‘West’ where wages were double the rate in ‘liberated’ East Germany. The wages were higher, but so was the job insecurity and the loss of social welfare provisions of the East. And if the death of 138 East Germans during 28 years, trying to escape over the Wall, was a tragedy, then what should we call thethousands who have drowned or died other horrible deaths trying to cross the Mediterranean to reach Europe or to scale the Wall separating the US and Mexico, or Israel’s Wall strangling six million Palestinians?

There are many ‘death strips’ denying Latin Americans, Palestinians, Middle Easterners their freedom from want, blocking their escape from US-NATO wars and Israeli genocide. But those‘atrocious walls’ were not mentioned by Chancellor Merkel at the Brandenburg Gate as she celebrated the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The scribes and scribblers from theNew York Times, the Financial Times and the Washington Post did not mention these real, contemporary walls and their brutal toll. The selective denunciation of certain Walls contrasts with the politics of erecting ‘other’, more formidable Walls. Western walls of exclusion carry with them a denial of responsibility for the political and economic conditions that has driven millions of refugees to flee Central America, Palestine, the Middle East and North Africa.

US intervention and support of proxy death-squad regimes and the brutal military in Central America, from the 1960’s to the 1990’s, resulted in over 250,000 civilian deaths and the displacement of over 2 million refugees.

US-EU invasions and proxy wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria for over a decade have uprooted more than 13 million people and killed well over million civilians.

Israel’s wars and occupation against the Palestinian people have resulted in over 500,000 Jewish colonial settlers grabbing Palestinian land since 1967.

The self-proclaimed Jewish state forcibly displaced hundreds of thousands and killed, maimed and jailed over 300,000. To admit that the West constructs and maintains its own system of atrocious walls inevitably points to the policy of decades of prolonged bloody imperialist wars leading to millions of refugees.

Imperial wars are characterized by the construction and maintenance of complex ‘Western Walls’, far deadlier and brutal than the Berlin Wall and less likely to fall. In fact, Western Walls are multiplying and being fortified by the latest surveillance technology. Larger budgets and more lethal arms for anti-immigrant police, has led to the brutal hunt, capture and incarceration of refugees – as Western regimes become more like police states .

The Malignant Consequences of the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the Annexation of East Germany

The annexation of East Germany vastly increased the economic power of Germany, providing German capital with several million skilled workers and trained engineers at no cost. Germany’s enhanced power dictated the course of the European Union’s economic policy. With the onset of the economic crisis, Germany’s capitalist and political elite were well positioned to dictate the terms of ‘recovery’ – and impose the entire burden on the working and middle classes of Southern Europe and Ireland. Germany’s ruling class, in firm control of the EU directorate, forced “austerity programs” on Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy and Ireland. These regressive policies, which ensured that creditors would recover their loans with interest, led to spiraling unemployment rates, in some cases of over 50% for young people, and long-term, large-scale decline in living standards. ‘Unified Germany’ flexed its newly found economic muscle and extended its hegemony over the EU and ensured debt payments from its European subjects.

Unified Germany’s economic power led to renewed political and military aspirations to engage and assert its presence in the US led imperial wars in the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and the Ukraine. By the end of the first decade of the 21st century ‘united Germany’ was profitably supplying weapons, logistics and military missions in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq. It provided Israel with weapons and economic aid while Palestinians were expelled from their homes and land. Merkel’s imperial ambitions were revealed in her wholehearted backing of the far-right coup in Ukraine. Subsequently Germany imposed sanctions against Russia and supported the Kiev regime’s savage military blitz against the Donbass. In the Ukraine, Germany once again, as in the 1930’s, found allies among neo-Nazi collaborators and thugs willing to slaughter ethnic Russian speaking federalists in the East. Merkel’s dream is to convert the Ukraine into a German-American client state, where German exports would replace Russian goods and German agro-mineral investors can exploit the country’s raw materials.

Conclusion

It is obvious that Merkel, Obama and other imperialist rulers have a double standard with regard to ‘Walls’ – they denounce ‘Communist Walls’ while supporting murderous ‘Capitalist Walls’ against refugees; they celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall while they build bloodier Walls against the victims of their imperial wars.

Apart from the cant and hypocrisy of Western officialdom, there is a political logic guiding these policies. The West’s criteria , for deciding which Walls are worthy of support and which Walls should fall, runs along the following lines: Walls that keep out victims of imperialist wars are progressive and necessary for ‘national security’; Walls that protect Communist, nationalist or leftist regimes are repressive, dehumanizing and must fall.

If we consider the larger political consequences of an event, like the fall of the Berlin War and the subsequent arbitrary annexation of the East, it is clear that ‘re-unified’ Germany’s exercise of power has had a profoundly negative impact on the economies of Southern Europe and has concentrated dictatorial political powers in the hands of German decision-makers operating through EU headquarters in Brussels. Unified Germany has renounced its passive role and re-asserted its role in world politics: slowly at first as a passive junior partner to US imperialist wars in the Middle East and now, more decisively, by linking up with Ukraine rightists and thugs and imposing economic sanctions on Russia.

Germany’s ‘great fall’ after World War II required a half century to “put all the pieces together again”. But once in place, Germany seeks to project world power, particularly through its proxies in the EU and NATO, in alliance with US imperialism. The Fourth Reich increasingly looks back to the Third Reich.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

%d bloggers like this: