The Future for China

Source

The Future for China

July 15, 2020

by Eric Zuesse for the Saker Blog

On July 14th, the two conjoined gangster-regimes, U.S. & UK, simultaneously started, with deadly seriousness, their aggressive economic war against China.

Business Insider headlined “US Navy warship challenges China in South China Sea as US blasts Beijing’s ‘unlawful’ claims and ‘gangster tactics’” and reported that,

After the US Department of State declared Beijing’s maritime claims in the South China Sea and efforts to assert dominance to be unlawful, the US Navy destroyer USS Ralph Johnson further challenged China with a sail-by operation.

The Navy released a couple of photos on Tuesday of the destroyer sailing near the contested Spratly Islands, and a Navy spokesman confirmed that the ship conducted a freedom-of-navigation operation in the area.

The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Ralph Johnson (DDG 114) steams near the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Ralph Johnson is deployed conducting maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts for a free and open Indo-Pacific. U.S. Navy Photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Anthony Collier

On the same day, Russia’s RT headlined “George Galloway: UK ban on Huawei is national self-harm. China’s riposte could devastate the ailing British economy”, and he reported that

Having alienated the remaining 27 members of the European Union and set Anglo-Russian relations back a century, Boris Johnson has just declared an economic war on China. … The proximate reason – that allowing Huawei into Britain’s 5G roll-out is a “security risk” – is patently false. If that were true for 5G, it would be true of 3 and 4G. If it were true then the company would have to be banished now, not in 2027 (by when, incidentally, 5G will be so last year).

There is not a shred, not a scintilla, not a jot or tittle, of evidence that Huawei has ever done anything wrong during its highly successful penetration of the British market, from which Britain has economically benefited mightily.

And if Chinese investment in 5G is not wanted – indeed, is being ejected – what of China’s powerful stake in Britain’s energy sector? What happens if China pulls the plugs on its nuclear power stations? Do all our lights go out? Has anyone thought this Chinese Kick-Away through? … BoJo’s decision to throw the Huawei 5G deal on the scrapheap shows UK poodle still obeys its US master

In this triple whammy of sanctions, gunboats and settlement, the brassy note of Jingoism plays ‘Rule Britannia’, but no one seems to have noticed that China is a vastly richer and more powerful adversary than it was when we extorted Hong Kong from them in punishment for their attempt to halt the flood of British opium into China which caused the addiction of 90 million Chinese people.

The economic sanctions imposed on China in the Huawei affair will be returned several-fold by Beijing.

Galloway might be correct, that China will be able to survive UK’s attempts to stifle China’s rise as a global economic competitor to the UK-U.S. empire, but if the U.S. is allowed to block China’s shipments through the South China Sea, then the war against China has already been won. It’s much more serious.

China has internationally been losing each one of the major rounds in its territorial disputes regarding its territorial claims in the South China Sea. It’s as if the U.S. were losing territorial claims in the Caribbean, except that the South China Sea is far more geostrategically important to China than the Caribbean is to the United States. So, China’s losses here are geostrategic ones. Those are disputes versus the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia, and the U.S. regime has played a decisive role in each case on the basis of its bilateral treaties, such as the 1951 U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty, which enables the Philippines to call upon U.S. military backing in case the Philippines needs muscle in order to assert a territorial claim against another country, such as, say, China, which is the giant in their neighborhood.

U.S. President Harry S. Truman strongly disagreed with his predecessor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s, opposition to imperialism, and he went for it almost as soon as he became the U.S. President. Actually, he became President at FDR’s death on 12 April 1945, and then, less than four months later, on 26 July 1945, committed himself to the Military-Industrial Complex’s dream of establishing an all-encompassing U.S. global empire. He made that decision, on 26 July 1945, which subsequently created the coups, military invasions, importations of thousands of Nazi officials into The West, to help America’s fight against the Soviet Union, and construction of the CIA’a program to control what international ‘news’ would be off-limits to report in the U.S., and in its vassal-nations.

Elliott Roosevelt, FDR’s son who accompanied his father during crucial international meetings, felt that Truman was a traitor to his father’s anti-imperialistic legacy. FDR, according to his son, Elliott, also wasn’t too fond of Churchill, who agreed with Truman because Churchill had always been a champion of British imperialism and he needed U.S. acceptance of that.

Elliott wrote:

——

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/

Roosevelt and Churchill Discuss Colonial Questions, August 10, 1941, excerpt from Elliott Roosevelt, As He Saw It (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1946).”

Father [FDR] started it.

“Of course,” he remarked, with a sly sort of assurance, “of course, after the war, one of the preconditions of any lasting peace will have to be the greatest possible freedom of trade.”

He paused. The P.M.’s [Churchill’s] head was lowered; he was watching Father steadily, from under one eyebrow.

“No artificial barriers,” Father pursued. “As few favored economic agreements as possible. Opportunities for expansion. Markets open for healthy competition.” His eye wandered innocently around the room.

Churchill shifted in his armchair. “The British Empire trade agreements,” he began heavily, “are — ”

Father broke in. “Yes. Those Empire trade agreements are a case in point. It’s because of them that the people of India and Africa, of all the colonial Near East and Far East, are still as backward as they are.”

Churchill’s neck reddened and he crouched forward. “Mr. President, England does not propose for a moment to lose its favored position among the British Do-minions. The trade that has made England great shall continue, and under conditions prescribed by England’s ministers.”

You see,” said Father slowly, “it is along in here somewhere that there is likely to be some disagreement between you, Winston, and me.

I am firmly of the belief that if we are to arrive at a stable peace it must involve the development of backward countries. Backward peoples. How can this be done? It can’t be done, obviously, by eighteenth-century methods. Now — ”

Who’s talking eighteenth-century methods?”

Whichever of your ministers recommends a policy which takes wealth in raw materials out of a colonial country, but which returns nothing to the people of that country in consideration. Twentieth-century methods involve bringing industry to these colonies. Twentieth-century methods include increasing the wealth of a people by increasing their standard of living, by educating them, by bringing them sanitation — by making sure that they get a return for the raw wealth of their community.”

Around the room, all of us were leaning forward attentively. [Harry] Hopkins [a major FDR adviser] was grinning. Commander [C. R.] Thompson, Churchill’s aide, was looking glum and alarmed. The P.M. himself was beginning to look apoplectic.

“You mentioned India,” he growled.

“Yes. I can’t believe that we can fight a war against fascist slavery, and at the same time not work to free people all over the world from a backward colonial policy”

What about the Philippines?”

I’m glad you mentioned them. They get their independence, you know, in 1946. And they’ve gotten modern sanitation, modern education; their rate of illiteracy has gone steadily down

There can be no tampering with the Empire’s economic agreements.”

They’re artificial …”

They’re the foundation of our greatness.”

The peace,” said Father firmly, “cannot include any continued despotism. The structure of the peace demands and will get equality of peoples. Equality of peoples involves the utmost freedom of competitive trade. …”

It was after two in the morning when finally the British party said their good nights. I helped Father into his cabin, and sat down to smoke a last cigarette with him.

Father grunted. “A real old Tory, isn’t he? A real old Tory, of the old school.”

“I thought for a minute he was [you were] going to bust, Pop.”

“Oh,” he smiled, “I’ll be able to work with him. Don’t worry about that. We’ll get along famously.”

“So long as you keep off the subject of India.”

“Mmm, I don’t know. I think we’ll even talk some more about India, before we’re through. And Burma. And Java. And Indo-China. And Indonesia. And all the African colonies. And Egypt and Palestine. We’ll talk about ’em all.”

http://east_west_dialogue.

At the Casablanca Conference

A similar kind of discussion occurred between Roosevelt and Churchill at the Casablanca Conference in January 1943. The following is Elliott’s description of his father’s talk with him one evening during that meeting:

His thoughts turned to the problem of the colonies and the colonial markets, the problem which he felt was at the core of all chance for future peace. ‘The thing is,’ he remarked thoughtfully, replacing a smoked cigarette in his holder with a fresh one, ‘the colonial system means war. Exploit the resources of an India, a Burma, a Java; take all the wealth out of those countries, but never put anything back into them, things like education, decent standards of living, minimum health requirements — all you’re doing is storing up the kind of trouble that leads to war. All you’re doing is negating the value of any kind of organizational structure for peace before it begins.

‘The look that Churchill gets on his face when you mention India!

India should be made a commonwealth at once. After a certain number of years — five perhaps, or ten — she should be able to choose whether she wants to remain in the Empire or have complete independence.

As a commonwealth, she would be entitled to a modern form of government, an adequate health and educational standard. But how can she have these things, when Britain is taking all the wealth of her national resources away from her, every year? Every year the Indian people have one thing to look forward to, like death and taxes. Sure as shooting, they have a famine. The season of the famine, they call it.’

He paused for a moment, thinking.

‘I must tell Churchill what I found out about his British Gambia today,’ he said, with a note of determination.

‘At Bathurst?’ I prompted.

This morning,’ he said, and now there was real feeling in his voice, ‘at about eight-thirty, we drove through Bathurst to the airfield. The natives were just getting to work. In rags … glum-looking. … They told us the natives would look happier around noontime, when the sun should have burned off the dew and the chill. I was told the prevailing wages for these men was one and nine. One shilling, ninepence. Less than fifty cents.’

An hour?’ I asked, foolishly.

A {day!} Fifty cents a {day!} Besides which, they’re given a half-cup of rice.’ He shifted uneasily in his big bed. ‘Dirt, disease. Very high mortality rate. I asked. Life expectancy — you’d never guess what it was. Twenty-six years. Those people are treated worse than the livestock. Their cattle live longer!’

He was silent for a moment.

Churchill may have thought I wasn’t serious, last time. He’ll find out, this time.’ He looked at me thoughtfully for a moment. ‘How is it, where you are? How is it in Algeria?’ he asked.

I told him it was the same story. Rich country, rich resources, natives desperately poor, a few white colonials that lived very well, a few native princes that lived very well, otherwise poverty, disease, ignorance. He nodded.

And then he went on to tell of what he thought should be done: France to be restored as a world power, then to be entrusted with her former colonies, as a trustee. As trustee, she was to report each year on the progress of her stewardship, how the literacy rate was improving, how the death rate declining, how disease being stamped out, how. …

Wait a minute,’ I interrupted. ‘Who’s she going to report all this to?’

The organization of the United Nations, when it’s been set up,’ answered Father. It was the first time I’d ever heard of this plan. ‘How else?’ I asked Father. ‘The Big Four — ourselves, Britain, China, the Soviet Union — we’ll be responsible for the peace of the world after. …

‘… It’s already high time for us to be thinking of the future, building for it. … These great powers will have to assume the tasks of bringing education, raising the standards of living, improving the health conditions — of all the backward, depressed colonial areas of the world.

And when they’ve had a chance to reach maturity, they must have the opportunity extended them of independence. After the United Nations as a whole have decided that they are prepared for it.

If this isn’t done, we might as well agree that we’re in for another war.’

https://www.marxists.org/

Elliott’s book as quoted in the 17 September 1946 Look Magazine:

Father remarked,” says Elliott Roosevelt, “on how British and French financiers had dredged riches out of colonies. …” He continued later, “How do they belong to France? Why does Morocco, inhabited by Moroccans, belong to France? By what logic and custom and historical rule?”

——

Obviously, Winston Churchill’s dream came true when FDR died on 12 April 1945 and became replaced by Truman.

Among those statements by FDR, the one specifically regarding the Philippines has particular relevance today. The 1951 U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty violated what FDR had said to Churchill, “I’m glad you mentioned them. They get their independence, you know, in 1946.” That U.S. commitment, “freedom,” to the Philippine nation, had already been made. He promised to Churchill that it would be fulfilled, and that therefore Churchill would not be able to say that America is an imperialist power as England is. It was a basic commitment from him. Furthermore, FDR said:

No artificial barriers,” Father pursued. “As few favored economic agreements as possible. Opportunities for expansion. Markets open for healthy competition.” His eye wandered innocently around the room.

Churchill shifted in his armchair. “The British Empire trade agreements,” he began heavily, “are — ”

Father broke in. “Yes. Those Empire trade agreements are a case in point. It’s because of them that the people of India and Africa, of all the colonial Near East and Far East, are still as backward as they are.”

And: “‘The peace,’ said Father firmly, ‘cannot include any continued despotism. The structure of the peace demands and will get equality of peoples.’”

He linked bilateral, and also multilateral, trade treaties, to the creation of both World Wars. The United States, after his death, has used them in exactly the same way — building toward a WW III. Truman was the death of FDR’s plan. For example, Barack Obama’s proposed TTIP international-trade treaty for the Pacific was specifically designed against China, so as to isolate and diminish China in international trade — precisely the sorts of things that FDR had condemned in his statements to Churchill. Obama was an anti-FDR, pro-Truman, Democrat, who repeatedly emphasized, “The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation.” Every other nation is “dispensable.” Hitler had agreed with Obama’s view, except that in Hitler’s mind, Germany was the only indispensable nation.

In a sense, Hitler posthumously won WW II. His ideology, imperialistic fascism certainly did.

The Philippine President, Rodrigo Duterte, condemns U.S. imperialism and repels any dependency of his country upon the U.S. military. He explains “I have nothing against America. They’re perfectly alright. Trump is my friend. But my foreign policy has shifted from the pro-Western one. I am now working on alliance with China, and I hope to start a good working relationship with Russia. Why? Because the Western world, the EU, and everything – it’s all this double talk.”

CONSEQUENTLY:

The path forward for China will be increasingly for China to serve as a defender of the independence of the nations in its area (such as the Philippines), so that they won’t need to accept the U.S. regime’s offers of military assistance. Either this, or else China itself will cede control of its own neighborhood over to a distant enemy-nation, the ceaselessly grasping U.S. regime, and might as well just quit altogether, and become an American pawn itself.

Either all of the nations in that area will thrive together, or else the U.S.-UK alliance will succeed at crushing and swallowing-up them all.

This means that in the conflicts that China has with its nearby nations, China must grant those nations’ interests as being also China’s interests. China must accept its obligation to defend their interests in order to become enabled to assert its own. Only if this is done will those nearby nations ally with China against the U.S. Empire, not just militarily, but also in regard to commerce and trade. For China not to take on this obligation would be unacceptable, not only for China, but for the entire world. Regardless of what China wants, China has this obligation, now, to protect its region, against America’s billionaires, and their military, and their corporations.

However, the U.S. regime’s unmistakable threat now to block China’s freight-traffic through the South China Sea will succeed if China becomes the first side to attack and tries to down any U.S. forces there. Even if the U.S. strikes without warning and with no clear excuse, China will need to hold back for a while, before retaliating. The U.S. has arrayed an awesome striking force in that area. China will have to wait until the U.S. attacks it first, in any event, but now is the time for China to negotiate with its neighbors. Otherwise China will have almost the whole world against it, if China provides the bad optics of having been the first to strike.

During this time, therefore, China needs to be negotiating with each of the other regional players in order to persuade each one that only a unified facing-down against the U.S. in that region can even possibly salvage the independence of each one of them from now on. Russia may also need to be brought into the arrangement as a protector of China, just in case the U.S. turns out to be uncompromising in its intention to take over the entire world. Either Russia will soon enter this new World War that the UK-U.S. regimes are already waging, or else Russia will be forced to enter it only after Russia’s major allies will already have been swallowed-up by the U.S. The safer choice for Russia is consequently to enter the war sooner, as a guarantor for their side, their allies, the independent nations, than to enter it after those nations have already been defeated and swallowed-up.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

بين تموز 2006 وتموز 2020… المقاومة المنتصرة والمستهدفة ومعركة تنويع خيارات لبنان الاقتصادية

حسن حردان

في مثل هذه الأيام من شهر تموز عام 2006 كان رجال المقاومة في جنوب لبنان يسطرون ملاحم البطولة ويحطمون جبروت جيش الاحتلال الصهيوني ويلقنونه دروساً في القتال بكلً أنواعه، في ميادين بنت جبيل ومارون الراس وعيتا الشعب وسهل الخيام… فانهارت معنويات جنود النخبة الصهاينة الذين وجدوا أنفسهم امام قتال حقيقي أصبحوا فيه شخوصاً يصطادهم المقاومون في الليل والنهار. فيما دبابات الميركافا التي كان يحتمي فيها جنود العدو تحوّلت إلى توابيت لهم بعد أن احرقها المقاومون بصواريخ الكورنيت…

وفي مثل هذه الأيام كان يُصنع النصر في كل يوم من أيام العدوان الصهيوني الأميركي رغم الدعم والغطاء اللذين حظيا به من الحكومات الرجعية العربية التابعة، وقوى في الداخل اللبناني امتهنت التآمر مع الأعداء لطعن المقاومة في ظهرها.. كان المطلوب سحق المقاومة وإنهاء النموذج الذي جسّدته بإلحاق الهزيمة بجيش الاحتلال بإجباره على الرحيل مهزوماً ذليلاً عن معظم المناطق التي كان يحتلها في الجنوب والبقاع الغربي، بلا قيد ولا شرط او أيّ ثمن مقابل وذلك للمرة الأولى في الصراع العربي الصهيوني… لكن ميادين القتال كانت تقول انّ من كان يسحق وتدمر قوّته هو جيش العدو الذي حاول دون جدوى تبديد صورة هزيمته عام 2000 امام المقاومة فإذا به يتعرّض لهزيمة ثانية أقسى محدثة زلزالاً في قلب الكيان وجيشه الذي يشكل أساس وجوده…

نفس قوى العدوان وأدواتها تشنّ هذه الأيام عدواناً جديداً على لبنان لكن عبر وسائل الحرب الاقتصادية، بعد أن اخفقت الحرب الإرهابية الكونية بقيادة أميركا في إسقاط ظهر وحصن المقاومة، الدولة الوطنية السورية، وفشلت في القضاء على المقاومة وإخماد شعلتها، وانتصاراتها التموزية التي زلزلت كيان الاحتلال وحوّلت جيشه إلى قوة مهزومة ومردوعة.. واشنطن نقلت الحرب من الميدان الصلب إلى الميدان الناعم حسب نظرية جوزيف ناي.. والهدف طبعاً تقويض عوامل قوة المقاومة المنتصرة والمتنامية، قدرة وشعبية…

لكن المقاومة التي يتألم جمهورها من الحرب الاقتصادية نتيجة تفاقم الأزمات الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والمعيشية.. والتي عرفت كيف تهزم العدو الصهيوني وقوى الإرهاب التكفيرية، هي اليوم قرّرت خوض غمار التصدي للحرب الاقتصادية.. وتحويلها إلى فرصة لإحداث التغيير في السياسات الريعية التي تسبّبت بالأزمات المالية والاقتصادية وأوجدت الثغرات التي استغلتها الإدارة الأميركية لتسعير نار هذه الأزمات ومحاولة النيل من التفاف الناس حول مقاومتهم بتحمّلها مسؤولية تدهور أوضاعهم المعيشية…

مواجهة هذه الحرب ليست سهلة، وهي تحتاج إلى رؤية واستراتيجية متكاملة مرحلياً واستراتيجية لإحباط أهدافها وصناعة النصر في ميدان الحرب الاقتصادية كما صنع في ميادين مقاومة الحروب العسكرية والإرهابية.. وهذه الرؤية والاستراتيجية أعلنها قائد المقاومة سماحة السيد حسن نصر الله، وعنوانها إعلان الجهاد الزراعي والصناعي، ايّ تحويل الاقتصاد الريعي إلى اقتصاد إنتاجي.. أما العنوان الثاني في مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية، فهو التوجه شرقاً لحلّ الأزمات الراهنة وإبطال النتائج السلبية التي ادى إليها الحصار الاقتصادي والمالي الأميركي.. وهذا التوجه يرتكز إلى عوامل قوة تقوم على التشابك الاقتصادي مع العراق وإيران وسورية وتلقف العروض الصينية.. بدءاً من الإسراع في توقيع عقود مقايضة المنتجات الزراعية والصناعية اللبنانية بالنفط ومشتقاته والفيول من العراق.. والاتفاق مع الشركات الصينية للبدء بتنفيذ مشاريع بناء وتأهيل البنية التحتية وانشاء معامل إنتاج الكهرباء ومعالجة النفايات إلخ… انها معركة مقاومة حرب الاستنزاف الاقتصادية الأميركية، بإيجاد بدائل تكسر الحصار وتضع حدا لهذا النزف الذي يرهق الشعب اللبناني..

إنّ إمكانية الانتصار في هذه الحرب الجديدة مرتبطة بترجمتها من الحكومة اللبنانية إلى خطوات عملية سريعة بأن تسارع إلى توقيع الاتفاقيات مع العراق والاستفادة من أيّ عروض مماثلة قد تبدي ايّ دولة عربية او إسلامية او عالمية الاستعداد لتقديمها إلى لبنان.. وفي طليعة هذه الدول التي قدمت العروض المغرية للبنان وغير المشروطة، إيران والصين..

وقد أعلن الرئيس حسان دياب عزمه على السير في هذا الاتجاه وغيره من الاتجاهات طالما انها تحقق مصلحة لبنان الاقتصادية وتساعده على حلّ أزماته.. وأبلغ ذلك للسفيرة الأميركية التي زارته مؤخراً لاحتواء تنامي الغضب ضدّ التدخلات الأميركية السافرة وتوحي بأنّ بلادها تريد مساعدة لبنان. بعد أن كانت وراء دفعه إلى الانهيار الاقتصادي وتدهور قيمة العملة الوطنية والوضع المعيشي للبنانيين…

فهل نشهد في الأيام المقبلة إنجازات في مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية على غرار الإنجازات التي كانت تحققها المقاومة في مثل هذه الأيام خلال تصدّيها للعدوان الصهيوني في تموز عام 2006؟

هذا ما ننتظره لنسجل انتصارات جديدة لكن في ميادين مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية وإسقاط أهدافها القاتلة للناس.. فكل الشروط متوافرة لتحقيق ذلك، لا سيما انّ المقاومة المنتصرة والمقتدرة تحمي اليوم ليس فقط ثروات لبنان النفطية والمائية من الأطماع الصهيونية، وإنما تحمي أيضاً أيّ قرارات تأخذها الحكومة في تنويع خيارات لبنان الاقتصادية وعلاقاته مع كلّ دول العالم في الشرق والغرب وفي الجنوب والشمال انطلاقاً من مصلحة لبنان وهو أمر يسهم في تحرير قرار لبنان الاقتصادي من التبعية عبر وضعه على طريق تحقيق الاستقلال الاقتصادي المرهون بالنهوض بالإنتاج الوطني والتنمية المستقلة..

لماذا قرّرت واشنطن التدخل علناً في لبنان وتشكيل إدارة للحرب الاقتصادية ضدّه؟

حسن حردان

لوحظ بشكل لافت وغير اعتيادي أنّ هناك تواتراً في إطلاق التصريحات للمسؤولين في وزارة خارجية الولايات المتحدة الأميركية وسفيرتهم في بيروت، والتي تتدخل بشكل فظ في الشؤون الداخلية للجمهورية اللبنانية، في مؤشر على استنفار أميركي واضح لإدارة الحرب الاقتصادية المالية التي بدأتها، منذ شهور، ضدّ لبنان.. لا سيما أنّ التصريحات تضمّنت إنذارات واضحة بأنّ أميركا لن تسمح للبنان بالحصول على أيّ قروض مالية من صندوق النقد الدولي ومؤتمر سيدر إذا لم يقبل بالشروط التالية..

أولاً، إقصاء حزب الله المقاوم وحلفائه عن السلطة التنفيذية، وتشكيل حكومة اختصاصيين موالية لواشنطن..

ثانياً، قبول مقترح السفير الأميركي فريدريك هوف لترسيم الحدود البحرية والبرية بما يعطي كيان العدو الصهيوني جزءاً من مياه لبنان الإقليمية الخالصة في البلوكين 9 و10 الغنيين بالنفط والغاز، تقدر مساحته بـ 360 كلم مربع..

ثالثاً، إضعاف وتحجيم المقاومة وإبعادها عن الحدود مع فلسطين المحتلة، وتعديل قواعد الاشتباك في القرار 1701 بما يسمح لقوات اليونيفيل لعب دور أمني في جنوب الليطاني لضمان أمن كيان العدو الصهيوني وتمكينهُ من العودة إلى سرقة مياه الوزاني وحرمان البلديات الجنوبية منها..

هذه الأهداف الأميركية ظهر جزء منها كشعارات رفعت في التظاهرات من قبل مجموعات الـ المدرّبة أميركياً لقيادة الثورات الملوّنة للإطاحة بالحكومات غير الموالية لواشنطن وتقف عقبة أمام تحقيق مشاريعها الاستعمارية، على غرار ما حصل في أوكرانيا والبلقان والربيع العربي إلخ… فشهدنا بدايةً أنّ هذه المجموعات ركزت على مطلب يستقطبُ اللبنانيون عامة، الذين اكتووا بنار الأزمة المعيشية، وهو محاربة الفساد والاقتصاص من الفاسدين، والقول إنّ كلّ من هم في السلطة فاسدون أو يحمون الفساد، والهدف طبعاً هو شُمول حزب الله بذلك وتحميلهُ هو وحلفاؤه في السلطة المسؤولية عن حماية النظام الفاسد ومنع محاربة الفاسدين واستعادة الأموال المنهوبة إلخ… ثم تطورت الشعارات حتى كشفت هذه المجموعات عن الهدف الحقيقي وهو الإتيان بحكومة اختصاصيين لا يكون فيها ممثلون لـ حزب الله وحلفائه تكون مهمتُها تنفيذ الانقلاب الأميركي وتحقيق الشروط التي وضعتها واشنطن لرفع الحصار عن لبنان… وعندما فشلوا في ذلك، بعد استقالة حكومة الرئيس سعد الحريري، وتشكيل حكومة حسان دياب بدعم من الأكثرية النيابية، تقرّر إخراج الأهداف الأميركية المُراد تحقيقها، من خلال محاولة الاستيلاء على السلطة، إلى العلن، وهي المطالبة بتنفيذ القرار 1559ونزع سلاح المقاومة ونشر القوات الدولية على الحدود مع سورية تحت ذريعة وقف التهريب.. وصولاً إلى ما صرّح به أخيراً المسؤولون الأميركيون بالربط بين قبول لبنان ترسيم الحدود البحرية وفقَ مقترح هوف، ورفع الحصار المفروض عليه لتمكينه الاستفادة من ثروته في مياهه الإقليمية..

لكن فشل القوى والمجموعات الموالية لواشنطن في تحقيق الأهداف المطلوبة من الحصار المالي، وما أدى إليه من تفجير للأزمة المالية النقدية والاجتماعية المعيشية في الشارع.. على الرغم من دعم الماكينة الإعلامية لحركة هذه القوى والمجموعات 24/24 .. شعرت واشنطن أنّ الثورات الملونة التي نجحت في أوكرانيا ودول البلقان وطُبق نموذجها في الربيع العربي.. تواجهُ التعثر في لبنان ومهدّدة بتداعيات سلبية على النفوذ الأميركي بإضعاف القوى الموالية للولايات المتحدة، والتي ترتكز إليها في تدخُلها بشؤون لبنان الداخلية.. فقرّرت الإدارة الأميركية الاستنفار وتشكيل لجنة من الخارجية لإدارة الحرب الاقتصادية والمالية عبر تكثيف التدخل الأميركي والمجاهرة علناً بما تريده واشنطن من لبنان، وهو الخضوع لشروطها القاضية بتنازل لبنان عن جزء من ثروته النفطية وإقصاء حزب الله وحلفائه عن السلطة عبر استقالة حكومة حسان دياب وتشكيل حكومة جديدة موالية لواشنطن، وتعديل القرار 1701 مقابل رفع الحصار عن لبنان..

ولتحقيق ذلك بدأت إدارة حرب الحصار بقيادة وزير الخارجية الأميركي مايك بومبيو ومعاونيه تصعيد الضغوط الاقتصادية والمالية، عبر…

1

ـ تحريض الأطراف اللبنانية الموالية لواشنطن على التحرك لإسقاط الحكومة اللبنانية باعتبارها حكومة حزب الله.. والعمل على تشكيل حكومة موالية للسياسة الأميركية وقادرة على تنفيذ ما تريده واشنطن من طلبات تخدم السياسة الأميركية الإسرائيلية…

2

ـ تحريض اللبنانيين ضدّ المقاومة وسلاحها من خلال الزعم بأن المقاومة هي سبب الأزمة الاقتصادية والمالية..

إنّ واشنطن تدرك أنّ سلاح المقاومة هو الذي يقف حائلاً دون تمكن كيان العدو الصهيوني من سرقة نفط وغاز ومياه لبنان.. وهو الذي أسهم في إحباط أهداف الحرب الإرهابية الاستعمارية ضدّ سورية ولبنان، والتي استهدفت قصم ظهر محور المقاومة، مما حال دون تعويم مشروع الهيمنة الاستعمارية الأميركية على كامل المنطقة، وتمرير خطة القرن لتصفية القضية الفلسطينية.. ولهذا فإنّ الإدارة الأميركية استشعرت الخوف من أن يتفلت لبنان من قيود الحصار الاقتصادي الأميركي، وأن يتجرأ على الاتجاه نحو دول الشرق لتنويع علاقاته الاقتصادية وإيجاد أسواق لتصدير إنتاجه واستيراد حاجاته من دول تقبل التداول بالعملات الوطنية بديلاً عن الدولار.. وبالتالي تقليص حاجة لبنان للدولار.. إلى جانب حلّ مشكلات لبنان المالية والخدماتية من قبول العروض الصينية والإيرانية والروسية المتنوّعة والتي تُجنّب الحكومة اللبنانية الخضوع لشروط صندوق النقد الدولي ومؤتمر سيدر، بل تجعلُها في موقع قوة في التفاوض معهما للحصول على قروض ميسّرة غير مشروطة إذا أراد..

إنّ لجوء واشنطن إلى إشهار الحرب الاقتصادية والمالية لتجويع الشعب اللبناني بهدف دفعه إلى التخلي عن مقاومته وسيادته وجزء من ثرواته، إنما يعكسُ من جهة الوجه البشع للسياسة الاستعمارية الأميركية، ومن جهة ثانية يكشفُ مدى إفلاس السياسة الأميركية وفشلها في تحقيق أهدافها بوساطة حروبها العسكرية المباشرة والإرهابية غير المباشرة..

لكن كما تؤكد التجربة فإنّ المقاومة وحلفائها الذين صمدوا في مواجهة أشرس حرب إرهابية ونجحوا في تحقيق الانتصارات الهامة عليها وإحباط أهدافها، سيتمكنون من الصمود في مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية المالية وإحباط أهدافها بإيجاد البدائل الاقتصادية التي تحبط أهداف الحصار الاقتصادي، وتحوّله إلى فرصة لبناء اقتصاد منتج والانفتاح على الشرق لتسويقه، وبالتالي إفقاد أميركا آخر سلاح تملكهُ للضغط على لبنان…

Global Capitalism, “World Government” and the Corona Crisis

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, June 03, 2020

Global Research 1 May 2020

When the Lie Becomes the Truth There is No Moving Backwards

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.

The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. (President Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961)

***

The World is being misled concerning the causes and consequences of the corona crisis.

The COVID-19 crisis is marked by a public health “emergency” under WHO auspices which is being used as a pretext and a  justification to triggering a Worldwide process of economic, social and political restructuring. 

Social engineering is being applied. Governments are pressured into extending the lockdown, despite its devastating economic and social consequences.

What is happening is unprecedented in World history. 

Prominent scientists support the lockdown without batting an eyelid, as a “solution” to a global health emergency.

Amply documented, the estimates of the COVID-19 disease including mortality are grossly manipulated. 

In turn, people are obeying their governments. Why? Because they are afraid? 

Causes versus solutions?

The closing down of national economies applied Worldwide will inevitably result in poverty, mass unemployment and an increase in mortality. It’s an act of economic warfare. 

Stage One: Trade War against China

On January  30, 2020 the WHO Director General determined that the coronavirus outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). The decision was taken on the basis of 150 confirmed cases outside China, First cases of person to person transmission: 6 cases in the US, 3 cases in Canada, 2 in the UK.

The WHO Director General had the backing of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Big Pharma and the World Economic Forum (WEF). The decision for the WHO to declare a Global Emergency was taken on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland  (January 21-24).

One day later (January 31) following the launch of the WHO Global Emergency, The Trump administration announced that it will deny entry to foreign nationals “who have traveled in China in the last 14 days”. This immediately triggered a crisis in air transportation, China-US trade as well as the tourism industry. Italy followed suit, cancelling all flights to China on January 31.

The first stage was accompanied by the disruption of trade relations with China as well as a partial closedown of export manufacturing sector.

A campaign was immediately launched against China as well ethnic Chinese. The Economist reported that

“The coronavirus spreads racism against and among ethnic Chinese”

“Britain’s Chinese community faces racism over coronavirus outbreak”

According to the SCMP:

“Chinese communities overseas are increasingly facing racist abuse and discrimination amid the coronavirus outbreak. Some ethnic Chinese people living in the UK say they experienced growing hostility because of the deadly virus that originated in China.”

And this phenomenon is happening all over the U.S.

Stage Two: The Financial Crash Spearheaded by Fear and Stock Market Manipulation

A global financial crisis unfolded in the course of the month of February culminating in a dramatic collapse of stock market values as well as a major decline in the value of crude oil.

This collapse was manipulated. It was the object of insider trading and foreknowledge. The fear campaign played a key role in the implementation of the stock market crash. In February, roughly $6 trillion have been wiped off the value of stock markets Worldwide. Massive losses of personal savings (e.g. of average Americans) have occurred not to mention corporate failures and bankruptcies. It was a bonanza for institutional speculators including corporate hedge funds. The financial meltdown has led to sizeable transfers of money wealth into the pockets of a handful of financial institutions.

Stage Three: Lockdown, Confinement, Closing Down of  the Global Economy

The financial crash in February was immediately followed by the lockdown in early March. The lockdown and confinement supported by social engineering was instrumental in the restructuring of the global economy. Applied almost simultaneously in a large number countries, the lockdown has triggered the closing down of the national economy, coupled with the destabilization of trade, transport and investment activities.

The pandemic constitutes an act of economic warfare against humanity which has resulted in global poverty and mass unemployment.

Politicians are lying. Neither the lockdown nor the closing down of national economies constitute a solution to the public health crisis.

Who Controls the Politicians?

Why are politicians lying?

They are the political instruments of the financial establishment including the “Ultra-rich philanthropists”. Their task is to carry out the global economic restructuring project which consists in freezing economic activity Worldwide.

In the case of the Democrats in the US, they are largely concerned in opposing the reopening of the US economy as part of the 2020 election campaign. This opposition to reopening the national and global economies is supported by “Big Money”.

Is it opportunism or stupidity. In all major regions of the World, politicians have been instructed by powerful financial interests to retain the lockdown and prevent the re-opening of the national economy.

The fear campaign prevails. Social distancing is enforced. The economy is closed down.  Totalitarian measures are being imposed. According to Dr. Pascal Sacré

… in some countries, patients can leave hospital by agreeing to wear an electronic bracelet. This is only a sample of all the totalitarian measures planned or even already decided by our governments in favor of the coronavirus crisis. It goes much further, it’s limitless and it affects a good part of the world, if not the whole world.
.

The “Herding Instincts” of Politicians

Are corrupt governments acting like “police dogs” with “herding instincts” going after their sheep.

Is “the herd” too scared to go after their “government”?

The analogy may be simplistic but nonetheless considered relevant by psychologists.

“Some breeds of dogs [corrupt politicians] have herding instincts that can be brought out with the right training and encouragement [bribes]. …. teach your dog [political proxy] basic obedience and see if it [he, she] displays herding tendencies. … Always look for a trainer who uses reward-based training methods [bribes, personal gain, political support, accession to high office]” (How to Teach Your Dog to Herd)

But there is another dimension. Politicians in high office responsible for “convincing their herd” actually believe the lies which are being imposed upon them by higher authority.

The lie becomes the truth. Politicians endorse the consensus, they enforce “social engineering”, they believe in their own lies.

It’s Not an Epidemic, It’s An Operation

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo  (slip of the tongue) tacitly admits in a somewhat contradictory statement that the COVID-19 is a “Live Exercise”, an “Operation”:

“This is not about retribution,… This matter is going forward — we are in a live exercise here to get this right.”

To which president Trump retorted “you should have told us”.

Those words will go down in history.

Geopolitics

Let us be under no illusions, this is a carefully planned operation. There is nothing spontaneous or accidental. Economic recession is engineered at national and global levels. In turn, this crisis is also integrated into US-NATO military and intelligence planning. It is intent not only upon weakening China, Russia and Iran, it also consists in destabilizing the economic fabric of the European Union (EU).

“Global Governance”

A new stage in the evolution of global capitalism is unfolding. A system of  “Global Governance” controlled by powerful financial interests including corporate foundations and Washington think tanks oversees decision-making at both the national and global levels. National governments become subordinate to “Global Governance”. The concept of World Government was raised by the late David Rockefeller at the Bilderberger Meeting, Baden Germany, June 1991: “We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. … It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” (quoted by Aspen Times, August 15, 2011, emphasis added) .In his Memoirs David Rockefeller states: .“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure, one world if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (Ibid) .The Global Governance scenario imposes a totalitarian agenda of social engineering and economic compliance. It constitutes an extension of the neoliberal policy framework imposed on both developing and developed countries. It consists in scrapping “national autodetermination” and constructing a Worldwide nexus of pro-US proxy regimes controlled by a “supranational sovereignty” (World Government) composed of leading financial institutions, billionaires and their philanthropic foundations. .The 2010 Rockefeller Foundation’s  “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development Area” produced together with Global Business Monitoring Network, GBN) had already outlined the features of  Global Governance and the actions to be taken in relation to a Worldwide Pandemic.  The Rockefeller Foundation proposes the use of scenario planning as a means to carry out “global governance”..

The Report envisages (p 18) a simulation of a Lock Step scenario including a global virulent influenza strain:

.

“LOCK STEP: A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing. 8 million in just seven months”

It is worth noting that this simulation was envisaged in the year following the 2009 H1N1 Swine flu Pandemic, which was revealed to be a totally corrupt endeavor under the auspices of the WHO in liaison the Big Pharma which developed a multibillion dollar vaccine program.


Remember the “Fake” 2009 H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic: Manipulating the Data to Justify a Worldwide Public Health Emergency

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 02, 2020 


“World Government”

Instructions are transmitted to national governments worldwide.  The fear campaign plays a crucial role in building acceptance and social submission to this “supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and bankers”..Global governance establishes a consensus which is then imposed on “sovereign” national governments Worldwide, described by David Rockefeller as “national auto-determination practiced in past centuries”.  Essentially, this is an extended form of “regime change”..Thousands of politicians and officials must be convinced and/or bribed for this operation to succeed. It’s an unsubtle form of “political arm twisting” (while respecting “social distancing”)..The decision to close down the global economy with a view to “saving lives” has not only been accepted as a means to combating the virus, it has been sustained by media disinformation and the fear campaign.

People do not question the consensus, a consensus which borders on the absurd.

.

Global Capitalism and “The Economic Landscape”

The crisis redefines the structure of the global economic landscape. It destabilizes small and medium sized enterprises Worldwide, it  precipitates entire sectors of the global economy including air travel, tourism, retail trade, manufacturing, etc. into bankruptcy.  The lockdown creates famine in developing countries. It has geopolitical implications.

The Pentagon and US intelligence are involved. The corona crisis affects to conduct of US-NATO led wars in the Middle East including Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan and Yemen. It is also used to target specific countries including Iran and Venezuela.

This engineered crisis is unprecedented in world history. It is an act of war.

The lockdown triggers a process of disengagement of human and material resources from the productive process. The real economy is brought to a standstill. Curtailing economic activity undermines the “reproduction of real life”. This not only pertains to the actual production of the “necessities of life” (food, health, education, housing) it also pertains to the “reproduction” of  social relations, political institutions, culture, national identity. At the time of writing, the lockdown is not only triggering an economic crisis, it is also undermining and destroying the very fabric of civil society not to mention the nature of government and the institutions of the state (crippled by mounting debts), which will eventually be privatized under the supervision of Big Money creditors.

There are conflicts within the capitalist system which are rarely addressed by the mainstream media. Billionaires, powerful banking and financial institutions (which are creditors of both governments and corporations) are waging an undeclared war against the real economy. Whereas the Big Money financial and banking establishment are “creditors”, the  corporate entities of the real economy which are being destabilized and driven into bankruptcy are “debtors”.

Bankruptcies

This diabolical process is not limited to wiping out small and medium sized enterprises. Big Money is also the creditor of  large corporations (including airlines, hotel chains, hi tech labs, retailers, import-export firms, etc.) which are now on the verge of bankruptcy.

The global financial establishment is not monolithic. It is marked by divisions and rivalry. The dominant Big Money faction seeks to destabilize its competitors from within. The results of which would be a string of  bankruptcies of regional and national banking institutions as well as a process of global financial consolidation.

In the US, numerous retailers, airlines, restaurant and hotel chains filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in February. But this is just the beginning. The big gush of bankruptcies will occur in the wake of the lockdown (“The New Normal”). And at the time of writing, the financial establishment is relentlessly pressuring (corrupt) national governments to postpone the lifting of the lockdown. And the governments are telling us that this is to “protect people against the virus”.

Canada’s province of Alberta which is largely dependent on oil revenues is bankrupt.

“Countries that represent over 50 per cent of the world’s global GDP are closed for business. Economists looking for historical comparisons mention the 1929 stock crash, the 1974 economic crisis or the 2008 recession. But they admit that these all fall short of the toll that this pandemic could have.” (Wired News UK, April 29, 2020

In Britain, recent reports state (It’s very British”) “we do not know how many have gone bankrupt”.

A chunk of Britain’s business landscape may have already been permanently erased, as some 21,000 more UK businesses collapsed in March alone than the same month a year ago, according to data gathered by the Enterprise Research Centre, a group of university researchers.

What these reports fail to mention are the unspoken causes: a fear campaign on behalf of the creditors, instructions by corrupt governments to close down the economy, allegedly to “save lives”, which is a big lie. Lives are not being saved, and they know it.

The coronavirus crisis “has ground U.S. business to a halt”. National economies are destabilized. The objective of Big Money is to weaken their competitors, “pick up the pieces” and eventually buy out or eliminate bankrupt corporations. And there are many to choose from.

Global Finance Capitalism

The interests of Big Money (global financial interests) overlap with those of Big Pharma, Big Oil, the Defense contractors, etc. Major banking institutions in the US including JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, State Street Co. and Goldman Sachs, are investing in the war economy including the development of nuclear weapons under Trump’s 1.2 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program (first established under Obama). 

The ultimate objective of “Big Money” is to transform nation states (with their own institutions and a national economy) into “open economic territories”. That was the fate of Iraq and Afghanistan. But now you can do it without sending in troops, by simply ordering subservient proxy governments integrated by corrupt politicians to close down their economy on humanitarian grounds, the so-called “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) without the need for military intervention.

Impossible to estimate or evaluate. More than half the global economy is disrupted or at a standstill.

Let’s be clear. This is an imperial agenda. What do the global financial elites want? To privatize the State? To own and privatize the entire planet?

The tendency is towards the centralization and concentration of economic power. Heavily indebted national governments are instruments of Big Money. They are proxies. Key political appointments are controlled by lobby groups representing Wall Street, The Military Industrial Complex, Big Pharma, Big Oil, the Corporate Media and the Digital Communications Giants, etc.

Big Money in Europe and America (through Washington Lobby groups) seek to control national governments.

In what direction are we going? What is the future of humanity? The current corona crisis is a sophisticated imperial project, which consists in Worldwide domination by a handful of multibillion dollar conglomerates. Is this World War III? Global capitalism is destroying national capitalism.

The unspoken intent of global capitalism is the destruction of the nation state and its institutions leading to global poverty on an unprecedented scale.

The following citation by Lenin dated December 1915 at the height of the First World War pointed with foresight to some of the contradictions which we are presently facing. On the other hand, we should understand that there are no easy solutions and that this crisis is intended to reinforce imperialism and the clutch of global capitalism:

“There is no doubt that the development is going in the direction of a single World trust which will swallow up all enterprises and all states without exception. But the development in this direction is proceeding under such stress, with such a tempo, with such contradictions, conflicts and convulsions not only economical, but political national, etc. etc — that before a single world trust will be reached, before the respective financial national capitals will have formed a “World Union” of ultra imperialism, imperialism will explode and capitalism will turn into its opposite.

(V. I. Lenin, Introduction to Imperialism and World Economy by N, Bukharin, Martin Lawrence, London, printed in the US, Russian Edition, November 1917)

How to reverse the tide. The first priority is to repeal the lie.

In this regard, it is unfortunate that many people who are “progressive” (including prominent Left intellectuals) are –despite the lies–  supportive of the lockdown and closing down of the economy as a solution to the public health emergency. That’s the stance of the Democratic Party in the US, which goes against common sense.

Truth is a powerful weapon for repealing the lies of the corporate media and the governments.

When the Lie Becomes the Truth There is No Moving Backwards

Without the fear campaign and media propaganda, the actions taken by our governments would not have a leg to stand on.

“Social Distancing” does not prevent the financial elites from providing instructions to corrupt politicians.

On the other hand, “social distancing” combined with confinement is being used as a means of social subordination. It prevents people from meeting as well as protesting this so-called New World Order.

Organization, Truth and Solidarity are essential to reversing the tide. The first step of a worldwide movement is “counter-propaganda”.


Related articles

2009 H1N1 Vaccine Caused Brain Damage in Children. Dr. Anthony Fauci on “Vaccine Safety” Issues

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 03, 2020

After the Lockdown: A Global Coronavirus Vaccination Program…

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 25, 2020The original source of this article is Global ResearchCopyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2020

خطرُ حكومة الرأسين الإسرائيليّة: كيف يواجَه؟

العميد د. أمين محمد حطيط

بعد نيّف وسنة وبعد 3 انتخابات عامة توصّل نتنياهو إلى تشكيل حكومة ائتلاف مع حزب «أزرق أبيض» ضمن فيه رئاسة الحكومة في الكيان الصهيوني لـ 18 شهراً تعقبها 18 شهراً أخرى يكون فيها رئيس حكومة بديلاً. فترة يظنها كافية لتصفية ملفاته القضائية التي إذا فعلت ووصلت إلى منتهاها فإنها تقوده إلى السجن بعيداً عن أيّ منصب رسمي.

في المقابل ضمن بني غانتس رئيس «أبيض أزرق» والذي فشل في تشكيل حكومة بمفرده بعيداً عن الليكود ورئيسه نتنياهو، الوصول لأول مرة إلى منصب «رئيس حكومة بديل» الآن ورئيس حكومة أساسي بعد 18 شهراً أيّ بعد انتهاء مدة رئاسة نتنياهو. ومع تشكل هذا الائتلاف الحكومي ذي الرأسين في كيان العدو تطرح أسئلة كثيرة حول الأداء الإسرائيلي في الإقليم بشكل عام وتنفيذ «رؤية ترامب للسلام» والمسماة «صفقة القرن» التي قد تستوجب من الثنائي الإسرائيلي الأميركي عمليات عسكرية تلزمها لإزالة العوائق من أمامها.

قبل مناقشة هذه الأسئلة والإجابة عليها، لا بدّ من استعادة مقولة قديمة تفيد بأنّ «إسرائيل» في كلّ مرة يتعاظم فيها مأزق داخلي أو يشتدّ بتصورها خطر خارجي أو يتزامن الاثنان معاً فإنها تلجأ إلى حكومة ائتلاف تسمّيها «حكومة وحدة وطنية» تذهب بها لمواجهة المأزق أو الخطر بفتح جبهة حرب تنسي جمهورها المأزق او تبعد او تعالج الخطر.

وصحيح أنّ تشكيل الحكومة الراهنة أملته ظواهر عجز أيّ من الطرفين عن تشكيل حكومته الخاصة رغم محاولات تكرّرت بعد 3 دورات انتخابية، إلا انّ الواقع الإسرائيلي من حيث التحديات الداخلية وما تتصوّره من مخاطر خارجية يوحي بأنّ مثل هذه الحكومة ذات الرأسين الأساسي والاحتياط المتناوبين على رئاستها هي حكومة تشكل مصلحة لـ «إسرائيل» الآن، في ظلّ ما تضخمه حكومة نتنياهو الراحلة من خطر خارجي محدق يتمثل حسب زعمها بالوجود الإيراني في سورية وبتنظيم المقاومة في جبهة الجولان بالتعاون والتنسيق بين سورية وحزب الله الذي بات يملك حسب الزعم الإسرائيلي 150 ألف صاروخ متفاوتة المدى فضلاً عن 1000 صاروخ ذات رؤوس الدقيقة. وهذه ترسانة تغطي كامل مساحة فلسطين المحتلة. وكلّ ذلك لا يعالج برأيهم إلا بالعمل العسكري الذي يجهض هذا الخطر بتدمير هذا السلاح.

أما التحدي الآخر ففيه أيضاً ما يستحق «جمع الكلمة» على حدّ قول أحد خبرائهم الاستراتيجيين حيث إنّ من مصلحة «إسرائيل» أن تبدأ بتنفيذ «رؤية ترامب للسلام» المسماة «صفقة القرن» بما فيها من ضمّ أرض وإطاحة حلم الدولة الفلسطينية، وصولاً إلى التصفية النهائية للقضية الفلسطينية كلياً بإسقاط حق العودة وتشكيل «دولة إسرائيل» نهائياً على أساس أنها «وطن قومي لليهود» أو كما جاء في قانونهم الأخير «دولة يهودية». ومن أجل ذلك وفي غضون 48 ساعة من إعلان الاتفاق على تشكيل حكومة ائتلاف اعلن نتنياهو انه «آن الأوان لتضمّ إسرائيل نهائياً مستعمرات الضفة الغربية وغور الأردن» التي تشكل مساحة 30% من الضفة الغربية.

إذن أمام حكومة الرأسين الإسرائيليين ملفان وتحديان كبيران، فكيف ستعالجهما أو كيف ستتصرف حيالهما؟

بالنسبة للموضوع الأول أيّ إيران وحزب الله، تتمنّى «إسرائيل» ان تواكبها الولايات المتحدة في قرار مشترك للذهاب إلى حرب تدميرية واسعة وخاطفة تفرض على إيران الخروج من سورية، وتدمّر ترسانة صواريخ حزب الله. فهل هذا في متناول يد حكومة الرأسين؟

في الإجابة نقول إنّ الزمن الذي كانت الحرب في المنظور الإسرائيلي بمثابة مناورة تحدّد هي وقتها ومدّتها ونطاقها وحجم المغانم التي تريدها، ثم تذهب إليها وتنفذها كما خططت أو بأفضل مما خططت، إنّ هذا الزمن ولى إلى غير رجعة حيث كانت الصورة الأخيرة لها في العام 1982 في لبنان، أما بعدها فقد رسمت صورة جديدة في العام 2006 وفي لبنان أيضاً حيث كسرت المقاومة التي يقودها وينظمها حزب الله كلّ معادلات «إسرائيل» وتصوّرات قادتها وحطمت مقولة الجيش الذي لا يُقهر، ثم كانت الحرب العدوانية على سورية وتطورات رافقت هذه الحرب لتعزز مقولة الردع الاستراتيجي المتبادل ومقولة ان «إسرائيل يمكن ان تطلق الطلقة الأولى إيذاناً ببدء الحرب لكنها لن تستطيع التحكم بشيء من مجرياتها».

فـ «إسرائيل» اليوم وفي مواجهة محور المقاومة المتماسك والمتكامل في قدراته العسكرية الميدانية تبدو عاجزة عن شنّ حرب تحقق لها ما تشاء وتتحمل فيها الخسائر التي تنزلها بها قوات العدو. نعم «إسرائيل» تملك القوة العسكرية التدميرية الهامة لكنها لا تملك القدرة الكافية لتحقيق الإنجاز العسكري الذي حدّدته أيّ إنهاء الوجود الإيراني في سورية وتدمير سلاح حزب الله، كما أنها غير قادرة على احتواء ردة الفعل على جبهتها الداخلية التي فشلت في الارتقاء إلى مستوى «شعب يعمل تحت النار» رغم كلّ الجهود التي بذلت من أجل ذلك. ونشير أيضاً إلى انّ الوجود الإيراني في سورية ليس من الطبيعة التي يعالج بها بحرب من دون ان تصل إلى مستوى احتلال شامل، فهو وجود مستشارين موزعين هنا وهناك يصعب تحديدهم وإحصاؤهم.

وفي ظلّ استبعاد لجوء «إسرائيل» بمفردها إلى شنّ حرب على الجبهة الشمالية تبقى مناقشة فكرة حرب الثنائي الأميركي الإسرائيلي ضدّ محور المقاومة، وهنا أيضا نقول إنّ أميركا وقبل 6 أشهر من انتخاباتها وفي ظلّ الظروف الدولية المعقدة وبائياً ومالياً واقتصادياً وعسكرياً بالنسبة لها ليست في وارد فتح جبهة في الشرق الأوسط وهي التي تتحضّر للمواجهة الأخطر في الشرق الأقصى الذي قد يفرض عليها حرباً مع الصين قبل ان تستكمل انزلاقها إلى بحرها.

وعليه نصل إلى استنتاج أول بن الحرب التي ترى فيها «إسرائيل» علاجاً للخطر الإيراني والصاروخي من حزب الله هي حرب ليست في متناول يدها ويبقى لديها أن تنفذ عمليات عسكرية استعراضية إعلامية في سورية ليست لها أي قيمة عملانية او استراتيجية لتؤكد جدية مواكبتها للخطر المزعوم، رغم انّ جلّ ما تدعيه كاذب ومنافٍ للحقيقة.

أما الأخطر في مواجهة المقاومة وسورية ولبنان فهو ممارسة أميركا وإسرائيل الضغوط في إطار الحرب الاقتصادية الإجرامية التي تشن عليهم، ولذلك تضع أميركا «قانون قيصر» الإجرامي موضع التنفيذ لخنق سورية اقتصادياً، وتثار مسألة الحدود بين لبنان وسورية لخنق لبنان والمقاومة. هنا على لبنان بشكل خاص أن يتوجه إلى الميدان الاقتصادي المشرقي عبر سورية، ويعتمد خطة التكامل الاقتصادي من نواة أربع دول (لبنان سورية والعراق وإيران) لتتسع إلى عمق اقتصادي دولي يصل إلى الصين، فتتعطل بذلك خطة الإجرام الاقتصادي او الإرهاب الاقتصادي التي تمارسها عليه لإخضاعه.

أما التحدي الآخر والذي فيه ضمّ مزيد من الأراضي الفلسطينية في الضفة الغربية وغور الأردن فإنّ هذا الأمر يبدو لـ «إسرائيل» سهلاً ومتاحاً رغم «إشارات القلق» التي يبديها حيناً الجانب الأميركي متهما «إسرائيل» بالتسرع او بيانات الاستنكار الخجولة من هنا وهناك، ونعتقد ان ترامب الذي أعطى «إسرائيل» في رؤيته فوق ما تطلب لن يمنعها من هضم ما قدّمه لها، ولن تأبه «إسرائيل» لمواقف الرفض والاستنكار الإعلامي العربية والدولية لتتوقف عن عمليتها الإجرامية بضمّ الأراضي، لكنها حتماً ستنظر إلى ردود الفعل الأردنية والفلسطينية التي تؤثر عليها جدياً فيما لو اتخذت.

وعليه نرى أنّ وقف خطة «حكومة الرأسين» الإسرائيلية بصدد ضمّ الأراضي يتطلب موقفاً أردنياً فلسطيناً حازماً يؤذي «إسرائيل» كلّ على صعيده وفي نطاقه، فبإمكان الأردن لعب ورقة التنسيق الأمني وورقة التعاون الاقتصادي والمناطق الصناعية وحركة البضائع وأنبوب الغاز وغيرها من مسائل التبادل التجاري والسياحي والأمني مع «إسرائيل» وصولاً إلى وضع مصير اتفاقية وادي عربة على الطاولة، هنا تجد «إسرائيل» ان توسّعها في الأرض يؤدي إلى انحسار في المصالح وبالمقارنة ستضطر لاختيار المصالح فتتوقف.

أما الموقف الفلسطيني فيكفي أن يتمثل بأمرين اثنين: وقف التنسيق الأمني كلياً، ووقف تدابير القمع التي تمنع الشعب من إطلاق انتفاضته المباركة المتنظرة التي تهز الأرض في الضفة تحت أقدام المحتلّ، عندها نستطيع القول بأنّ هناك موقفاً جدياً يواجه العدوان الإسرائيلي ويوقف تنفيذ صفقة القرن فلسطينياً.

*أستاذ جامعي – خبير استراتيجي.

Coronavirus COVID-19: “Made in China” or “Made in America”?

Global Research, March 14, 2020

Trump contends that the coronavirus was “Made in China”.  And that China threatens America.

The president of the US wants Americans to believe that the coronavirus pandemic carries the “Made in China” label.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo refers to it as the “Wuhan coronavirus.” 
“The Big Lie” started on January 30th when the WHO Director General pressured by powerful US economic interests declared a global public health emergency with only 150 “confirmed cases” (by the WHO) outside China with only six cases in the USA. And it was called a pandemic. 
“Fake media” immediately went into high gear. China was held responsible for “spreading infection” Worldwide.
On the following day (January 31, 2020), Trump announced that he would deny entry to the US of both Chinese and foreign nationals “who have traveled in China in the last 14 days”. This immediately triggered a crisis in air travel,  transportation, US-China business relations as well as freight and shipping transactions.
While the “Made in China” coronavirus label served as a pretext, the unspoken objective was to bring the Chinese economy to its knees.
It was an act of “economic warfare”, which has contributed to undermining both China’s  economy as well as that of  most Western countries (allies of the US), leading to a wave of bankruptcies, not to mention unemployment, collapse of the tourist industry,  etc.
Moreover, Trump’s “Made in China” coronavirus label almost immediately as of early February triggered a campaign against ethnic Chinese throughout the Western World.
Stage 2.0: “Infections Transmitted by Europeans”? 
On March 11, a new phase was launched. The Trump administration imposed a 30-day ban on Europeans entering the United States through the suspension of air-travel with the EU (with the exception of Britain).
America is now waging its “economic  war” against Western Europe, while using COVID-19 as a justification.
European governments have been co-opted. In Italy a lockdown prevails, ordered by the Prime Minister, large cities in Northern Italy including Milano and Torino have literally closed down.
Confusion, Fear and intimidation prevail.
It’s “Damage Made in America”.
Late February: Financial manipulation characterizes stock market transactions Worldwide.
The stock value of airlines companies collapses overnight. Those who had  “foreknowledge” of Trump’s March 11 decision to ban transatlantic flights from EU countries made a bundle of money. It’s called “short-selling” in the derivative market among other speculative ops. Institutional speculators including hedge funds with “inside info” had already placed their bets.
More generally, a massive transfer of money wealth has occurred, among the largest in World history, leading to countless bankruptcies, not to mention the loss of lifelong savings engineered through the collapse of financial markets.
This process is ongoing. It would be naive to believe that these occurrences are spontaneous, based on market forces. They are deliberate. They are part of a carefully designed plan involving powerful financial interests.
COVID-19: “Made in China” or “Made in America”? 
And now a new bombshell has emerged: The White House rhetoric of accusing China of spreading the “Wuhan virus” Worldwide has been refuted by both Japanese and Chinese reports. Scientific analysis revealed by Larry Romanoff  suggests that the virus was “Made in America”:
“it appears that the virus did not originate in China and, according to reports in Japanese and other media, may have originated in the US.  …
In February, the Japanese Asahi news report (print and TV) claimed the coronavirus originated in the US, not in Chinaand that some (or many) of the 14,000 American deaths attributed to influenza may have in fact have resulted from the coronavirus.
And on March 12, in a statement to the US Congress (House Oversight Committee), CDC Director Robert Redfield unwittingly “spilled the beans”. He candidly admitted, yes, some cases diagnosed as seasonal flu could have been coronavirus.
When did this occur? In October, November? What is the chronology.  It is worth noting that Redfield’s statement is corroborated by both Japanese and Taiwanese virologists.  Two countries which are staunch allies of the USA.
CDC director Robert Redfield admitted some Americans who seemingly died from influenza were tested positive for novel in the posthumous diagnosis, during the House Oversight Committee Wednesday.



It is worth noting that the Taiwan virologist (referred to above)
“stated that the US has recently [?] had more than 200 “pulmonary fibrosis” cases that resulted in death due to patients’ inability to breathe, … He said he .. informed the US health authorities to consider seriously those deaths as resulting from the coronavirus, … [He] then stated the virus outbreak may have begun earlier than assumed, suggesting  “We must look to September of 2019”. (quoted in Larry Romanoff, op cit)
China’s Foreign Ministry has reacted to CDC Robert Redfield’s statements intimating that the virus could have originated in the US.
When Did “Patient Zero” Begin in the US?
@CDCDirector Dr. Robert Redfield: Some cases that were previously diagnosed as Flu in the US were actually . It is absolutely WRONG and INAPPROPRIATE to call this the Chinese coronavirus. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4860650/user-clip-diagnosed-flu-covid-19 



The World is at the Crossroads of the Most Serious Social and Economic Crisis in Modern History
People Worldwide are being misled. They are told: “It’s going to get worse”. In several countries, the economy has closed down. Supermarkets, shopping malls, offices, factories, schools, universities are at a standstill. People are confined to their homes. Fear and intimidation prevail.
In the meantime, coinciding with the coronavirus lockdown in Italy, 30,000 US troops have been dispatched to the EU, under US-NATO’s  “Defend Europe 2020” war games against Russia, in the largest military deployment since World War II. “Could the Defender become the Invader…?”
Let’s be clear: The coronavirus pandemic is not the “cause” of this unfolding economic and social crisis. It is the “pretext” for the implementation of a carefully designed “operation” (supported by media disinformation) which destabilizes national economies, impoverishes large sectors of the World population and literally undermines the lives of millions of people. What we are dealing with is “An Act of War”.

For further details see:

What Happens Next: The Potential Impacts of a Continued Freeze of US Trade with China
The geopolitics are complex. How will economic events unfold? We will essentially focus briefly on US-China relations.
Those who formulated America’s “undeclared economic war” against China, failed to envisage the potential backlash on the US economy.
It’s an “Economic Harakiri” i.e. “Suicide American Style”
In a matter of  months, if normal US-China trade relations and transportation are not resumed, the impacts on the national economies of Western countries could be devastating.
A large share of goods displayed in America’s shopping malls, including major brands are  “Made in China”.
“Made in China” is the backbone of retail trade in the USA which indelibly sustains household consumption in virtually all major commodity categories from clothing, footwear, hardware, electronics, toys, jewellery, household fixtures, medical supplies, medicine and prescription drugs,,  TV sets, cell phones, etc.
“Made in China” also dominates the production of a wide range of industrial inputs, advanced technology, machinery, building materials, automotive, parts and accessories, etc. not to mention the extensive sub-contracting of Chinese companies on behalf of US conglomerates.
While the US has a powerful and sophisticated financial apparatus (which has the ability to manipulate trade and stock markets Worldwide), America’s Real Economy is in a shambles.
Production does not take place in the USA. The producers have given up production.
The US trade deficit with China is instrumental in fuelling the profit driven consumer economy which relies on “Made in China” consumer goods. Meanwhile China holds a large part of the US public debt which they can readily convert into real assets overnight.
At this juncture of the coronavirus crisis, Beijing policy makers are fully aware that the US economy is fragile and heavily dependent on “Made in China”.  Moreover, China has overtaken the US in several high tech areas including 5G.
And with an internal market of 1.4 billion people, coupled with a global export market under the “Belt and Road” initiative, the Chinese economy will have the upper hand.

Related Articles

SAUDI CROWN PRINCE PLANS TO BECOME KING BEFORE NOVEMBER G20 SUMMIT

Mohammed bin Salman launched purge against his uncle and others to clear path to becoming king ahead of gathering in Riyadh

By David Hearst

Published date: 8 March 2020 

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman launched a purge against his chief royal rival, his uncle Prince Ahmed bin Abdelaziz, because he intends to become king before the G20 summit in Riyadh in November, sources briefed about the plans have told Middle East Eye.

Bin Salman, known as MBS, will not wait for his father King Salman to die because his father’s presence gives legitimacy to the son, and he wants to use the summit in November as the stage for his accession to the throne. 

Instead, MBS will force his father, who suffers from dementia but is in otherwise good health, to abdicate, the sources said. 

This will finish the job started when MBS ousted his elder cousin Prince Mohammed bin Nayef from the position of crown prince, the sources said.

“He wants to be sure while his father is there, he becomes the king,” one source said. Over the weekend pictures were released of King Salman greeting ambassadors, to disprove rumours sparked by the purge that the king had died. Sources at the King Faisal Hospital dedicated to the care of members of the royal family also dispelled those rumours.

Before his arrest on Friday, Prince Ahmed, the king’s younger full brother, was given one last chance, after years of public opposition, to come aboard the MBS project, and he refused, the sources said.

“There was pressure on Ahmed to give his full support to MBS. He met with the king, and Salman and others in the court used polite words to encourage him to back his son,” a second source said.

“Ahmed made it clear he would not support this project. He did not give his word. Ahmed told the king he himself was not keen to become king but would look to others to come forward.”

Summons from the king

Meanwhile, more details emerged about the circumstances of Ahmed’s arrest.

According to the sources, Ahmed was not planning a coup before his arrest on Friday morning, as was claimed in one briefing given to Reuters, primarily because the prince had no power to make such a move. 

“Prince Ahmed would have openly objected to his nephew’s accession, as a member of the Allegiance Council, if the king dies and the question of accession to the throne comes formally before it,” the source said.

“He would have clearly said no. But there was no attempted coup.”

The Allegiance Council, or Bayaa, is the body which still nominally has to approve MBS’s accession to the throne.

What is the Beya?

The source said Ahmed had just returned from a falconry hunting trip abroad and had given a reception for his close circle on Thursday night.

Ahmed was passed a message that the king wanted to see him on Friday morning. This was about another arrested prince, Faisal bin Abdelrahman, whose case Ahmed had raised with Salman some weeks ago.

On Friday morning, Prince Ahmed went to the royal palace with his security detail. He was arrested the moment he entered the king’s compound.

“He did not see the king. It was total betrayal,” the source said. According to him, a second member of the Allegiance Council was also arrested in the purge.

Trump concerns

Asked why this purge was launched now, the sources cited external and internal reasons.

They said MBS was becoming concerned about the possibility that Donald Trump would not secure a second term of office as US president. 

All the presidential candidates remaining in the Democratic race are declared critics of the crown prince and had openly condemned him for allegedly ordering the murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in 2018.

Trump and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have consistently refused to hold the crown prince accountable for the murder of Khashoggi and blocked calls for a criminal investigation by the FBI or the UN. 

In his last interview on the subject published in June last year, Trump said the Khashoggi murder “really didn’t come up” in the discussions he held with MBS.

Trump said that Iran had killed more people, and he pointed to Saudi spending on US weapons and other goods.

“They spend $400bn to $450bn over a period of time, all money, all jobs, buying equipment,” Trump told NBC News. 

“And by the way, if they don’t do business with us, you know what they do? They’ll do business with the Russians or with the Chinese.”

Secondly, the sources claimed that the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, Mohammed bin Zayed, known as MBZ, who has mentored MBS and introduced him to the Trump clan before he became president, was also in on the scheme.

Hamed al Mazroui, a well-known blogger with links to MBZ, whose tweets were among the first to break the news of the purge in the Ritz Carlton in November 2017 and the 2017 start to the siege of Qatar by Saudi Arabia and others, tweeted two words in Arabic before the latest arrests were widely known. They translate as “Check mate”.

“MbZ is instrumental in each move his protege makes. The more mistakes MBS makes and the greater the instability he causes, the greater the leverage bin Zayed has over the affairs of Saudi,” the source said.

Oil fears

Internally, MBS’s reforms are not going well. 

The two latest hitches to his reform plan are the rapid fall in the price of oil, to below the level at which the state budget needs for its income, and his increasing unpopularity in the Muslim world, months before the annual Hajj is due to start.Saudis plan crude oil output increase, begin price war: Report

Held back by curbs on oil output negotiated by Opec, Saudi Arabia’s economy expanded just 0.3 percent in 2019, down from 2.4 percent a year earlier and short of the government’s forecast of 0.4 percent.

MBS’s economic woes deepened on Sunday, when the Saudi stock market dived by 8.3 percent, the lowest closing since November 2017, when he launched the first round of purges.

Shares in Saudi Aramco dropped below their IPO price of 32 riyals ($8.50) for the first time, losing 9.1 percent to 30 riyals.

‘Delicate generational succession’

Controversy has also stalked MBS’s decision to effectively close the borders of the kingdom to most visitors and all Umrah pilgrims, because of the coronavirus epidemic.

Critics have noted that the crown prince allowed a big concert, entitled “Persian Night,” to go ahead as part of the Tanturah Winter festival on 5 March.

All these factors, sources say, convinced MBS to strike now against the last remaining hurdles in the way of his accession to the throne.

“This purge is different from the first one in 2017. Then, MBS was at the height of his popularity as a young and bold reformer. He sold the purge as an anti-corruption campaign, and it was popular even with journalists like Khashoggi. This purge comes after a series of scandals. It’s as if MBS is trying to evade one scandal by moving on to an even bigger one,” another high placed Saudi critic said.

Justifying the arrests, Ali Shihabi, a Saudi commentator in Washington and a loyal supporter of the regime, appeared to confirm in his tweets that this was about a generational succession.

He wrote: “On Saudi: what people must appreciate is that the Royal family has had to go through a very delicate generational succession (that had been a cloud hanging over the country for over a decade given the large number of princes who were technically eligible to succeed)…

” … and that no formula existed to sort that issue out in [a] fashion that could please everybody. What has happened since King Salman’s succession is that he made his choice clear and that inevitably created a lot of disenfranchised royals some who were naturally displeased…”

This article is available in French on Middle East Eye French edition.

Related Articles

Political Maneuver or Economic Move: What Caused the Oil Price Collapse?

Sputnik

10.03.2020

On 9 March, oil prices plunged by over 30 percent after OPEC member states failed to agree on production cuts. Analysts are now seeking to take stock of the situation, determine what factors caused the crash, and forecast the impact of the downswing on the global economy.

A three-year pact between OPEC and Russia ended on Friday after Moscow refused to support an additional 1.5 million barrels per day cut to oil production to cope with the outbreak of coronavirus. OPEC, led by key swing producer Saudi Arabia,  responded by removing all limits on its own production, leading oil prices to plummet.

The Shale Sector

Goran Radosavljevic, Secretary General of the National Petroleum Committee of Serbia, argued that Russia’s move essentially means that Moscow “no longer wants to subsidize US shale oil production”.

“That’s what was happening de facto during the last several years, when we witnessed the United States pumping more and more oil, reaching its maximum capacity due to oil market stabilization and the decrease of oil production in OPEC+”, he explained.

Dr Huang Xiaoyong, Director of the Center for International Energy Security Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, also mentioned the situation in the shale sector as one of the possible reasons for the current collapse of oil prices (with other possible factors being the effect of the ongoing coronavirus outbreak and a possible conflict of interests between Russia and Saudi Arabia).

“Saudi Arabia announced that they’re investing $100 billion in the launch of projects related to shale oil and gas extraction. The United States not only controls a significant share of that market, but (shale) also has high oil extraction expenses. Therefore, lower oil prices might contribute to the US being ‘pushed out’ of the market”, he suggested.

Deja Vu

Energy analyst Jeloca Putnikovic  argued that a similar situation already occurred during the past decade, when “Saudi Arabia was responsible for oil becoming cheaper”.

“As you may recall, Saudi Arabia and the United States made a deal in a bid to halt Russia’s economic growth via crude oil prices – back then, the price of oil fell to nearly $30 per barrel”, she claimed, noting that Russia and other major oil producing countries eventually agreed to coordinate on output levels with the “Saudi cartel”, in order to maintain oil prices at a level that would be acceptable to all.

Putnikovic argued that the decision made by Saudi Arabia to ramp up oil production seems to be a political rather than economic move given that Riyadh previously spoke of $80 per barrel as an acceptable price.

The MISSING Six Million BARRELS

Augusto Tandazo, an oil industry analyst from Ecuador, posed the following question in order to try and explain the current state of affairs at the oil market: if the global demand for crude oil is 100 million barrels per day, and the non-OPEC countries produce 64 million barrels per day while OPEC countries officially account for 30 million barrels per day, where do the “missing” six million barrels per day come from?

According to Tandazo, there’s a “hidden excess supply of oil from certain states, such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq, that is aligned with the developed countries”.

“The oil price is being manipulated and controlled by the developed countries. They present themselves as fearless defenders of the free market, but they manipulate the price via excessive supply”, he postulated.

Future Prospects

And Rafael Quiroz, a professor at the Central University of Venezuela and an oil industry expert, warned that we may witness an even bigger oil price tumble, “especially if Saudi Arabia keeps its word and opens its taps even more”.

“This would lead to excessive supply of oil that would be greater that the global demand for energy resources, and therefore would lead to an immediate and devastating collapse of oil prices”, Quiroz said.

He also dismissed earlier claims made by US President Donald Trump, who blamed the current state of affairs on disagreements between Russia and Saudi Arabia, with Prof. Quiroz arguing that Trump simply regards OPEC as an enemy of the free market and open economy, and therefore tries to meddle in the organization’s affairs.

© REUTERS / BRYAN R SMITHUS Stock Market Closes With Record 2,000-Plus Loss Amid Coronavirus Panic

On 9 March, oil prices fell by over 30 percent after OPEC member states failed to agree on production cuts amid the ongoing coronavirus outbreak.

Earlier, the organization and its non-member allies, known collectively as OPEC+, convened in Vienna to discuss a potential cut of another 1.5 million barrels per day in addition to their existing pact to reduce oil production.

The views and opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

Iran Will Emerge Victorious from Biological Warfare: IRGC Chief

Source

March 5, 2020

Iran is currently engaged in biological warfare and will definitely win the war, Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Major General Hossein Salami said.

“Today, we are involved in biological warfare, but the country is resisting,” Major General Salami said at a military event in Iran’s southeastern city of Kerman on Thursday.

He underlined that the Islamic Republic will never lose a war because it relies upon the power of people and has learned that the Revolution needs to move forward by changing and improving behavioral patterns.

“The enemy is still focusing on economic pressure and psychological operation (against Iran) and uses every opportunity to toughen the conditions for our people. The enemy is seeking to shape the regional developments in its own favor,” the IRGC commander further warned.

Salami also stressed the need to get strong to overcome the difficult situation and defeat the enemies.

In remarks last month, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei stressed the need to build up the country’s military power to prevent a war and counter threats.

Being weak will encourage the enemy to take action against Iran, the Leader warned, adding, “In order for a war not to break out and for threats to finish, one must get strong.”

 Tasnim News Agency

Don’t Hold Your Breath for ‘World War III’: World War IV Has Already Begun

February 27, 2020

A. B. Abrams on Today’s Great Power for The Saker Blog


“A. B. Abrams is the author of the book ‘Power and Primacy: A History of Western Intervention in the Asia-Pacific.’ His second book covering the history of the United States’ conflict with North Korea is scheduled for publication in 2020.

He is proficient in Chinese, Korean and other East Asian languages, has published widely on defence and politics related subjects under various pseudonyms, and holds two related Masters degrees from the University of London.”


The world today finds itself in a period of renewed great power conflict, pitting the Western Bloc led by the United States against four ‘Great Power adversaries’ – as they are referred to by Western defence planners – namely China, Russia, North Korea and Iran. This conflict has over the past 15 years escalated to encompass the military, economic and information spheres with global consequences – and appears to be coming to a head as signs of peaking tensions appear in multiple fields from military deployments and arms races to harsh economic wars and a harsher still information war.

While the term ‘World War III’ has been common since the 1940s, referring to the possibility of a global great power war on a greater scale than the first and second world wars, the Cold War between the Western and Soviet Blocs was at its height as total, as global and as heated as the prior conflicts. As weapons technology has evolved, the viability of a direct shooting war has diminished considerably – forcing major powers to seek alternative means to engineer their adversaries’ capitulation and assert their own dominance. This has been reflected in how the Cold War, and the current phase of global conflict some refer to as ‘Cold War 2’ have been distinct from the first two world wars despite the final objectives of the parties involved sharing many similarities. I would thus suggest redefining what a ‘world war’ is and acknowledging that this current phase of global conflict is every part as intense as the great power ‘hot wars’ waged in the first half of the 20th century.

Had the intercontinental range ballistic missile and the miniaturised nuclear warhead been invented twenty years earlier, the Allied Powers may have needed to rely more heavily on economic and information warfare to contain and eventually neutralise Nazi Germany. The Second World War would have been very different in nature to reflect the technologies of the time. When viewed from this paradigm, the Cold War can be seen as a ‘Third World War’ – a total conflict more vast, comprehensive and international than its predecessors stretched out over more than 40 years. The current conflict, or ‘World War IV,’ is ongoing. An assessment of prior ‘great power wars,’ and the unique nature of the current conflict, can provide some valuable insight into how warfare is evolving and the likely determinants of its victors.

As of 2020 it is clear that great power conflict has become almost as heated as it can short of an all-out hot war – with the Western Bloc applying maximum pressure on the information, military and economic fronts to undermine not only smaller adversaries such as Venezuela and Syria and medium sized ones such as North Korea and Iran, but also China and Russia. When exactly this phase of conflict began – sometime after the Cold War’s end – remains uncertain.

The interval between the third and fourth ‘world wars’ was considerably longer than that between the second and the third. This was due to a number of factors – primarily that there was no immediate and obvious adversary for the victorious Western Bloc to target once the Soviet Union had been vanquished. Post-Soviet Russia was a shade of a shadow of its former self. Under the administration of Boris Yeltsin the country’s economy contracted an astonishing 45% in just five years from 1992 (1) leading to millions of deaths and a plummet in living standards. Over 500,000 women and young girls of the former USSR were trafficked to the West and the Middle East – often as sex slaves (2), drug addiction increased by 900 percent, the suicide rate doubled, HIV became a nationwide epidemic (3) corruption was rampant, and the country’s defence sector saw its major weapons programs critical to maintaining parity with the West delayed or terminated due to deep budget cuts (4). The possibility of a further partition of the state, as attested to multiple times by high level officials, was very real along the lines of the Yugoslav model (5).

Beyond Russia, China’s Communist Party in the Cold War’s aftermath went to considerable lengths to avoid tensions with the Western world – including a very cautious exercise of their veto power at the United Nations which facilitated Western led military action against Iraq (6). The country was integrating itself into the Western centred global economy and continuing to emphasis the peaceful nature of its economic rise and understate its growing strength. Western scholarship at the time continued to report with near certainty that internal change, a shift towards a Western style political system and the collapse of party rule was inevitable. The subsequent infiltration and westernisation was expected to neuter China as a challenger to Western primacy – as it has other Western client states across the world. China’s ability to wage a conventional war against even Taiwan was in serious doubt at the time, and though its military made considerable strides with the support of a growing defence budget and massive transfers of Soviet technologies from cash strapped successor states, it was very far from a near peer power.

North Korea did come under considerable military pressure for failing to follow what was widely referred to as the ‘tide of history’ in the West at the time – collapse and westernisation of the former Communist world. Widely portrayed in the early 1990s as ‘another Iraq’ (7), Western media initially appeared to be going to considerable lengths to prepare the public for a military campaign to end the Korean War and impose a new government north of the 38th parallel (8). Significant military assets were shifted to Northeast Asia specifically to target the country during the 1990s, and the Bill Clinton administration came close to launching military action on multiple occasions – most notably in June 1994. Ultimately a combination of resolve, a formidable missile deterrent, a limited but ambiguous nuclear capability, and perhaps most importantly Western certainty that the state would inevitably collapse on its own under sustained economic and military pressure, deferred military options at least temporarily.

The fourth of the states that the United States today considers a ‘greater power adversary,’ Iran too was going to considerable lengths to avoid antagonism with the Western Bloc in the 1990s – and appeared more preoccupied with security threats on its northern border from Taliban controlled Afghanistan. With a fraction of the military power neighbouring Iraq had previously held, the presence of an ‘Iranian threat’ provided a key pretext for a Western military presence in the Persian Gulf after the Soviets, the United Arab Republic and now Iraq had all been quashed. With the new government in Russia put under pressure to terminate plans to transfer advanced armaments to Iran (9), the country’s airspace was until the mid 2000s frequently penetrated by American aircraft, often for hours at a time, likely without the knowledge of the Iranians themselves. This combined with a meagre economic outlook made Iran seem a negligible threat.

While the Cold War ended some time between 1985 and 1991 – bringing the ‘third world war’ to a close – the range of dates at which one could state that the ‘fourth world war’ began and the West again devoted itself to great power conflict is much wider. Some would put the date in the Summer of 2006 – when Israel suffered the first military defeat in its history at the hands of the Lebanese militia Hezbollah. Using North Korean tunnel and bunker networks, command structures, weapons and training (10), and bolstered by Iranian funding and equipment, the shock of the militia’s victory, though underplayed in Western media, reverberated among informed circles across the world.

Others would place the date two years later in 2008 during the Beijing Summer Olympics, when Georgia with the full support of the West waged a brief war against Russia – and Moscow despite harsh warnings from Washington and European capitals refused to back down on its position. Post-Yeltsin Russia’s relations with the Western Bloc had appeared relatively friendly on the surface, with President George W. Bush observing in 2001 regarding President Vladimir Putin that he “was able to get a sense of his soul,” and predicting “the beginning of a very constructive relationship.” Nevertheless, signs of tension had begun to grow from Moscow’s opposition to the Iraq War at the UN Security Council to President Putin’s famous ‘Munich Speech’ in February 2007 – in which he sharply criticised American violations of international law and its “almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations.”

It could also be questioned whether, in light of what we know about Western support for separatist insurgents in Russia itself during the 1990s, the war against the country ever ended – or whether hostilities would only cease with a more total capitulation and partition and with the presence of Western soldiers on Russian soil as per the Yugoslav precedent. As President Putin stated in 2014 regarding continuing Western hostilities against Russia in the 1990s: “The support of separatism in Russia from abroad, including the informational, political and financial, through intelligence services, was absolutely obvious. There is no doubt that they would have loved to see the Yugoslavia scenario of collapse and dismemberment for us with all the tragic consequences it would have for the peoples of Russia” (11). Regarding Western efforts to destabilise Russia during the 1990s, CIA National Council on Intelligence Deputy Director Graham E. Fuller, a key architect in the creation of the Mujahedeen to fight Afghanistan and later the USSR, stated regarding the CIA’s strategy in the Caucasus in the immediate post-Cold War years: “The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvellously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power” (12). The U.S. Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare’s director, Yossef Bodansky, himself also detailed the extent of the CIA’s strategy to destabilize Central Asia by using “Islamist Jihad in the Caucasus as a way to deprive Russia of a viable pipeline route through spiralling violence and terrorism” – primarily by encouraging Western aligned Muslim states to continue to provide support for militant groups (13).

Much like the Cold War before it, and to a lesser extent the Second World War, great powers slid into a new phase of conflict rather that it being declared in a single spontaneous moment. Did the Cold War begin with the Berlin Blockade, the Western firebombing of Korea or when the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki – which accelerated the move into a nuclear arms race. Equally, multiple dates were given for the opening of the Second World War – the German invasion of Poland in 1939, the beginning of the Sino-Japanese war two years prior, the Japanese Empire’s attack on Pearl Harbour and conquest of Southeast Asia which marked the first major expansion beyond Europe and North Africa in 1941, or some other date entirely. The slide into a new world war was if anything even slower than its predecessors.

The shift towards an increasingly intense great power conflict has been marked by a number of major incidents. In the European theatre one of the earliest was the Bush administration’s withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty in 2002 and subsequent deployment of missile defences and expansion of NATO’s military presence in the former Soviet sphere of influence, which was widely perceived in Russia as an attempt to neutralise its nuclear deterrent and place the Western Bloc in a position to coerce Moscow militarily (14). This threatened to seriously upset the status quo of mutual vulnerability, and played a key role in sparking a major arms race under which Russia would develop multiple classes of hypersonic weapon. Their unveiling in 2018 would in turn lead the United States to prioritise funding to develop more capable interceptor missiles, a new generation of missile defences based on lasers, and hypersonic ballistic and cruise missiles of its own (15).

Another leading catalyst of the move towards great power confrontation was the Barak Obama administration’s ‘Pivot to Asia’ initiative, under which the bulk of America’s military might and considerable assets from the rest of the Western world would be devoted to maintaining Western military primacy in the Western Pacific. This was paired with both economic and information warfare efforts, the latter which increasingly demonised China and North Korea across the region and beyond and actively sought to spread pro-Western and anti-government narratives among their populations through a wide range of sophisticated means (16). These programs were successors to those sponsored by Western intelligence agencies to ideologically disenchant the populations of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union with their own political systems and paint Western powers as benevolent and democratising saviours (17). Economic warfare also played a major role, with efforts centred around the ‘Trans-Pacific Partnership’ trade deal – or ‘Economic NATO’ as several analysts referred to it – to isolate China from regional economies and ensure the region remained firmly in the Western sphere of influence (18). The military aspect of the Pivot to Asia would reawaken long dormant territorial disputes, and ultimately lead to high military tensions between the United States and China which in turn fuelled the beginning of an arms race. This arms race has more recently led to the American withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, which paves the way for deployment of American long-range missiles across the Western Pacific – all with China and North Korea firmly in their crosshairs (19).

It is arguably in the Middle East, however, where the new phase of global conflict has seen its most direct clashes so far. The nine-year conflict in Syria, although far less destructive or brutal, provides ‘World War IV’ with something of an analogue to the Korean War in the Cold War. The conflict has united the Western Bloc and a wide range of allies, from Turkey and Israel to the Gulf States and even Japan (which funds the jihadist-linked White Helmets) (20), in an effort to overthrow an independent government with close and longstanding defence ties to Russia, North Korea, Iran and China. The conflict has seen North Korean, Russian, Hezbollah and Iranian special forces (21) among other assets deployed on the ground in support of Syrian counterinsurgency efforts, with all of these parties providing considerable material support (the Koreans have built and fully staffed at least three hospitals as part of large medical aid packages and continue to be a major supplier of arms and training) (22). China too, particularly concerned by the presence of jihadist militants of Chinese origin in Syria, has played some role in the conflict – the exact details of which remain uncertain with much reported but unconfirmed (23).

Syria’s insurgency involving a range of jihadist groups, at times united only by their intent to end the secular Syrian government, have received widespread support from the Western Bloc and their aforementioned allies. This has involved both material support, which according to State Secretary Hillary Clinton included turning a blind eye to Gulf countries’ considerable assistance to the Islamic State terror group (24), and active deployments of special forces from a wide range of countries, from Belgium and Saudi Arabia to Israel and the U.S. The U.S., European powers, Turkey and Israel have at times directly attacked Syrian units in the field – while Russian reports indicate that close Western coordination with jihadist groups has been used to facilitate a number of successful attacks on Russian positions (25). The conflict in Syria arguably represents a microcosm of the macrocosm which is a new world war – one which pits the Western Bloc and those which support the Western-led order, both directly and through local proxies, against three of its four ‘great power adversaries’ in the field.

‘World War IV’ is unlikely to come to an end for the foreseeable future, and its final outcome remains difficult to predict. Much like in the Cold War, the Western Bloc retains considerable advantages – today most notably in the field of information war which allows it to extensively shape perceptions of the vast majority of the world’s population. This has included the demonization of Western adversaries, the whitewashing of Western crimes both domestically and internationally, and portraying westernisation and increased Western influence as a solution to people’s frustrations from corruption to economic stagnation. This has been a key facilitator of the pro-Western protests engulfing states from Sudan and Algeria to Ukraine and Thailand. Economically too, only China among the Western Bloc’s major adversaries has posed a serious threat to Western primacy. Indeed, it remains highly questionable whether the other three could survive economically under Western pressure without Chinese trade and economic support.

Russia has made a considerable economic recovery since the 1990s, but remains a shadow of its former self in the Soviet era. The country’s leadership has succeeded in reforming the military, foreign ministry and intelligence services, but the economy, legal system and other parts of the state remain in serious need of improvement which, over 20 years after Yeltsin’s departure, cannot come soon enough. Even in the field of defence, the struggling economy has imposed serious limitations – and in fields such as aviation and armoured warfare the country is only beginning to slowly go beyond modernising Soviet era weapons designs and begin developing new 21st century systems (26). On the positive side, the country does remain a leader in many high end technologies mostly pertaining to the military and to space exploration, while Western economic sanctions have undermined the positions of Europhiles both among the elite and within the government and boosted many sectors of domestic production to substitute Western products (27).

In the majority of fields, the ‘Eastern Bloc’ have been pressed onto the defensive and forced to prevent losses rather than make actual gains. While preserving Venezuelan sovereignty, denying Crimea to NATO and preventing Syria’s fall have been major victories – they are successes in denying the West further expansion of its own sphere of influence rather than reversing prior Western gains or threatening key sources of Western power. Pursuing regime change in Venezuela and Ukraine and starting wars in the Donbasss and in Syria have cost the Western Bloc relatively little – the Ukrainians and client states in the Gulf and Turkey have paid the brunt of costs for the war efforts. Material equipment used by Western backed forces in both wars, ironically, has largely consisted of Warsaw Pact weaponry built to resist Western expansionism – which after the Cold War fell into NATO hands and is now being channelled to Western proxies. Libyan weaponry, too, was transferred to Western backed militants in Syria in considerable quantities after the country’s fall in 2011 – again minimising the costs to the Western Bloc of sponsoring the jihadist insurgency (28). The damage done and costs incurred by the Syrians, Hezbollah, Russia and others are thus far greater than those incurred by the Western powers to cause destruction and begin conflicts.

Syria has been devastated, suffering from issues from a return of polio to depleted uranium contamination from Western airstrikes and a new generation who have grown up in territories under jihadist control with little formal education. The war is a victory only in that the West failed to remove the government in Damascus from power – but Western gains from starting and fuelling the conflict have still far outweighed their losses. In the meantime, through a successful campaign centred around information warfare, the Western sphere of influence has only grown – with further expansion of NATO and the overthrow of governments in resource rich states friendly to Russia and China such as Libya, Sudan and Bolivia. Commandeering the government of poor but strategically located Ukraine was also a major gain, with states such as Algeria and Kazakhstan looking to be next in the Western Bloc’s crosshairs. Thus while Syria was saved, though only in part, much more was simultaneously lost. The damage done to Hong Kong by pro-Western militants, ‘thugs for democracy’ as the locals have taken to calling them, who have recently turned to bombing hospitals and burning down medical facilities (29), is similarly far greater than the costs to the Western powers of nurturing such an insurgency. Similar offensives to topple those which remain outside the Western sphere of influence from within continue to place pressure on Russian and Chinese aligned governments and on neutral states seen not to be sufficiently pro-Western.

While the Western Bloc appears to be in a position of considerable strength, largely by virtue of its dominance of information space, which has allowed it to remain on the offensive, a sudden turning point in which its power suddenly diminishes could be in sight. From teen drug abuse (30) to staggering debt levels (31) and the deterioration of party politics and popular media, to name but a few of many examples, the West appears at far greater risk today of collapse from within than it did during the Cold War. A notable sign of this is the resurgence of both far right and far left anti-establishment movements across much of the Western world. Despite massive benefits from privileged access to third world resource bases, from France’s extractions from Francophone West Africa (32) to the petrodollar system propping up American currency (33), Western economies with few exceptions are very far from healthy. A glimpse of this was given in 2007-2008, and little has been done to amend the key economic issues which facilitated the previous crisis in the twelve years since (34). The West’s ability to compete in the field of high end consumer technologies, particularly with rising and more efficient East Asian economies, increasingly appears limited. From semiconductors to electric cars to smartphones to 5G, the leaders are almost all East Asian economies which have continued to undermine Western economic primacy and expose the gross inefficiencies of Western economies. The result has been less favourable balances of payments in the Western world, a growing reliance on political clout to facilitate exports (35), and increasing political unrest as living standards are placed under growing pressure. The Yellow Vests and the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are all symptoms of this. With very real prospects of another economic crash in the coming decade, in the style of 2008 but likely much worse, Western economies are expected to bear the brunt of the damage. Their ability to survive remains in serious question. Effects of a crash on North Korea, Iran, Russia and even China will be far less severe. While the previous crash hit Russia particularly hard (36), an economic turnaround from 2014 and the insulation provided by Western sanctions leave it far less vulnerable to the fallout from a Western economic crisis.

Ultimately China appears to be setting itself up for an ‘Eastern Bloc’ victory – a coup de grace which could see Western gains over the past several decades reversed and the power of the West itself diminished to an extent unprecedented in centuries. While the United States reluctantly outsourced much of its high end consumer technologies to East Asian allies during the Cold War – namely Japan, South Korea and Taiwan – China is going for the jugular of the Western world’s economy with its ‘Made in China 2025’ initiative, which will see some critical remaining fields of Western technological primacy shift to East Asian hands. The Coronavirus, bombings in Hong Kong, the trade war, and the wide range of tools in the Western arsenal for destabilisation can at best slightly delay this – but cannot prevent it. In a globalised capitalist economy the most efficient producers win – and East Asia and China in particular, with its Confucian values, stable and efficient political systems and world leading education (37), are thus almost certain to take over the high end of the world economy.

Much as the key to Western victory in the Cold War was successful information warfare efforts and isolation of the Soviet economy from the majority of the world economy, the key to determining the victor of ‘World War IV’ is likely lie in whether or not Beijing succeeds in its attempt to gain dominance of high end technologies critical to sustaining Western economies today. This is far from the only determinant of victory. Efforts to undermine the effective subsidies to Western economies from Central and West Africa, the Arab Gulf states and elsewhere in the third world, and to ensure continued military parity – to deter NATO from knocking over the table if they lose the game of economic warfare – are among the other fields of critical importance. Based on China’s prior successes, and those of other East Asian economies, the likelihood that it will meet its development goals is high – to the detriment of Western interests. The result will be an end to world order centred on Western might – the status quo for the past several hundred years – and emergence in its place of a multipolar order under which Russia, Asia (Central, East, South and Southeast) and Africa will see far greater prominence and prosperity.

(1) Menshikov, S., ‘Russian Capitalism Today,’ Monthly Review, vol. 51, no. 3, 1999 (pp. 82–86).

(2) Yulia V. Tverdova, ‘Human Trafficking in Russia and Other Post-Soviet States,’ Human Rights Review, December 11, 2016.

(3) Klein, Naomi, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, London, Penguin, 2008 (Chapter 11: ‘Russia Choses the Pinochet Option: Bonfire of a Young Democracy’).

(4) ‘The Death of the MiG 1.44 Program; How the Collapse of the Soviet Union Derailed Moscow’s Fifth Generation Fighter Development,’ Military Watch Magazine, September 16, 2018.  ‘Russia’s Sukhoi Unveils Images from Cancelled Next Generation Fighter Program,’ Military Watch Magazine, December 17, 2019.

(5) Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly, President of Russia, Kremlin, December 4, 2014.

Bechev, Dimitar, Rival Power: Russia’s Influence in Southeast Europe, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 2017 (Chapter 1).

(6) Kristof, Nicholas D., ‘WAR IN THE GULF: China; Beijing Backs Away From Full Support of the War,’ New York Times, February 1, 1991.

(7) ‘Thaw in the Koreas?,’ Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, vol. 48, no. 3, April 1992 (p. 16).

(8) ‘Time to End the Korean War,’ The Atlantic, February 1997.

(9) Axe, David, ‘Iran Desperately Wants This Fighter Plane,’ The National Interest, January 4, 2020.

(10) ‘Hezbollah a North Korea-Type Guerrilla Force,’ Intelligence Online, No. 529, August 25–September 7, 2006.  “North Koreans Assisted Hezbollah with Tunnel Construction,” Terrorism Focus, The Jamestown Foundation, vol. III, issue 30, August 1, 2006.

Dilegge, Dave and Bunker, Robert J., and Keshavarz, Alma, Iranian and Hezbollah Hybrid Warfare Activities: A Small Wars Journal Anthology, Amazon Media, 2016 (p. 261).

‘Bulsae-3 in South Lebanon: How Hezbollah Upgraded its Anti-Armour Capabilities with North Korean Assistance,’ Military Watch Magazine, September 3, 2019.

(11) Kremlin, President of Russia, Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly, December 4, 2014.

(12) Congressional Record, V. 151, PT. 17, U.S. Congress, October 7 to 26, 2005.

(13) ‘American political scientist: Western Intelligence used Azerbaijan to export terrorism into Russia,’ Panorama, May 30, 2015.

(14) Kremlin, President of Russia, Plenary session of St Petersburg International Economic Forum, June 17, 2016.

(15) Gregg, Aaron, ‘Military Industrial Complex Finds a Growth Market in Hypersonic Weapons,’ Washington Post, December 21, 2018.

(16) Mullen, Mike and Nunn, Sam and Mount, Adam, A Sharper Choice on North Korea: Engaging China for a Stable Northeast Asia, Council on Foreign Relations, Independent Task Force Report No. 74, September 2016.

Cartalucci, Tony, ‘Twitter Targets Hong Kong in US-backed Regime Change Operation,’ Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, October 15, 2019.

Park, Kyung-Ae, ‘Regime Change in North Korea?: Economic Reform and Political Opportunity Structures,’ North Korean Review, vol. 5, no. 1, Spring 2009 (p. 23-45).

(17) ‘Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the C.I.A.,’ New York Times, December 26, 1977.

(18) Wu, S., ‘Why the TPP is an “economic NATO,”’ Huffington Post, October 19, 2015.

(19) Ait, Abraham, ‘US Withdrawal From the INF Treaty Isn’t About Russia,’ The Diplomat, October 25, 2018.

(20) al-Jablawi, Hosam, ‘The White Helmets Struggle Without US Funding,’ Atlantic Council, June 11, 2018.

(21) ‘North Korean Special Forces in Syria; A Look at Pyongyang’s Assistance to Damascus’ Counterinsurgency Operations,’ Military Watch Magazine, June 10, 2018.

(22) ‘DPRK Ambassador affirms his country’s readiness to support health sector in Syria,’ Syrian Arab News Agency, July 25, 2016.

(23) Pauley, Logan and Marks, Jesse, ‘Is China Increasing Its Military Presence in Syria?,’ The Diplomat, August 20, 2018.

Hemenway, Dan, ‘Chinese strategic engagement with Assad’s Syria,’ Atlantic Council, December 21, 2018.

(24) ‘We finally know what Hillary Clinton knew all along – U.S. allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding Isis,’ The Independent, October 14, 2016.

(25) ‘Inquiry Into Death of Russian Lt. Gen. Asapov Shows Data Leaks to Daesh –      Source,’ Sputnik, September 26, 2017.

‘Drones used by Syrian terrorists “require advanced training” – Russian MoD in response to US,’ Sputnik, January 9, 2018.

(26) ‘Five Next Generation Russian Combat Jets We Will See in the 2020s: From MiG-41 Hypersonic Interceptors to PAK DA Stealth Bombers,’ Military Watch Magazine, January 1, 2019.

(27) Twigg, Judy, ‘Russia Is Winning the Sanctions Game,’ National Interest, March 14, 2019.

(28) Hersh, Seymour, ‘The Red Line and the Rat Line,’ London Review of Books, vol. 36, no. 8, April 2014

Angelovski, Ivan and Patrucic, Miranda and Marzouk, Lawrence, ‘Revealed: the £1bn of weapons flowing from Europe to Middle East,’ The Guardian, July 27, 2016.

Chivers, C. J. and Schmitt, Eric and Mazzetti, Mark, ‘In Turnaround, Syria Rebels Get Libya Weapons,’ New York Times, June 21, 2013.

McCarthy, Andrew C., ‘Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Debacle: Arming Jihadists in Libya . . . and Syria,’ National Review, August 2, 2016.

(29)  ‘Militants Bomb Hospital, Torch Quarantine Center as Hong Kong Braces for Virus Outbreak,’ Military Watch Magazine, January 27, 2020.

(30) ‘Class A drug use “at record levels due to young people”,’ BBC News, September 20, 2019.

(31) Buchholz, Katharina, ‘Industrialized Nations Have Biggest Foreign Debt,’ Statista, February 7, 2019.

(32) ‘France’s Colonial Tax Still Enforced for Africa. “Bleeding Africa and Feeding

France,”’ Centre for Research of Globalization, January 14, 2015.

Bart Williams, Mallence, ‘The Utilization of Western NGOs for the Theft of Africa’s Vast Resources,’ TedxBerlin, January 26, 2015

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfnruW7yERA).

(33) Wong, Andrea, ‘The Untold Story Behind Saudi Arabia’s 41-Year U.S. Debt Secret,’ Bloomberg, May 31, 2016.

Spiro, David E., The Hidden Hand of American Hegemony: Petrodollar Recycling and International Markets, New York, Cornell University Press, 1999.

(34) ‘Banks have not learnt lessons of 2008 crisis, says Gordon Brown,’ Financial Times, October 31, 2017.

‘A decade after the financial meltdown, its underlying problems haven’t been fixed,’ The Guardian, August 6, 2017.

(35)  ‘Fearing U.S. Sanctions Over Su-35 Purchase: What is Behind Indonesia’s Interest in New F-16V Fighters,’ Military Watch Magazine, November 6, 2019.

Rogan, Tom, ‘The very political reason Qatar buys different fighter aircraft from Britain, France, and the US,’ Washington Examiner, February 25, 2020.

Krishnan, Rakesh, ‘Countering CAATSA: How India can avoid American arm twisting,’ Business Today, March 6, 2019.

(36) Gaddy, Clifford G. and Ickes, Barry W., ‘Russia after the Global Financial Crisis,’ Eurasian Geography and Economics, vol. 51, no. 3, 2010 (pp. 281-311).

(37) Hobbs, Tawnell D., ‘U.S. Students Fail to Make Gains Against International Peers,’ The Wall Street Journal, December 3, 2019.

Turner, Camiilla, ‘Chinese students are two years ahead of their white British peers by age 16, report finds,’ The Telegraph, July 30, 2019.

«كورونا» صناعة أميركيّة وافتتاح جيل جديد من أجيال الحروب الستة

 سماهر الخطيب

ليست صدفة ظهور هذا الفيروس القاتل في ظروف استعرت فيها الحرب التجارية بين الولايات المتحدة الأميركيّة والصين العملاق الناهض والمهدّد بالتنافس الشركاتي والتقني والتكنولوجي والسيبراني الفضائي على مستوى العالم أجمع. فكما أعلنت حالة الطوارئ لمواجهة ذاك الفيروس فكذلك أعلنت الولايات المتحدة حالة الطوارئ والجهوزيّة لمواجهة ذاك العملاق الصينيّ المنافس لها..

وفي العودة إلى ما قبل ظهور الفيروس بشهور قليلة وربما أعوام سنجد ما قامت به الولايات المتحدة اتجاه الصين من سياسات وتوجهات بدءاً من قضية الإيغور المسلمين في إقليم تشينغ يانغ وما حاولت القيام به من تدخّلات حقوقية بحجة حماية الأقلية المسلمة في هذا الإقليم، وصولاً إلى تظاهرات هونغ كونغ ودعمها أميركيّاً للتمرّد ضدّ نظام وضعته الصين تحت مسمّى دولة واحدة في نظامين، مروراً بتسليح تايوان ودعمها ما يشكّل تهديداً للصين وتجاوزاً للسيادة الصينيّة والتي تعتبر تايوان جزءاً من سيادتها، ولم تكن الحرب التجاريّة ببعيدة عن تلك الأحداث والتي أعلنها الرئيس الأميركيّ دونالد ترامب فور تسلّمه زمام الإدارة مع فرضه الرسوم الجمركيّة على البضائع الصينيّة.. ليأتي فيروس كورونا ضمن سلسلة المواجهة الأميركيّة الصينيّة ولستُ هنا أبتدع ما يحاك من خيال وليست نظرية المؤامرة هي الموجّه وليس ما يتمّ تناقله من روايات حول مصدر الفيروس ومردّها إلى نوعية الطعام الذي يتناوله الشعب الصيني منذ مئات السنين دون إفراز ذلك الفيروس القاتل، فقائمة طعامهم ضمن ثقافتهم الممتدّة آلاف السنين..

إنما مع تطور العالم وما رافقه من تطور تقني وعلمي تطورت معه الحروب بأجيالها والتي صنّفها الخبراء العسكريون في أجيال عدّة من الحروب، وبالرّغم من اختلاف المعايير التكتيكية والعسكريّة، وكذلك المفاهيم النظرية التي تستخدم في التعريف أو التحليل، إنما ميّز معظمهم بين ستة أجيال، وهي:

حروب الجيل الأول

وهي حروب تقليديّة عرفتها الحقبة الممتدّة بين العامين 1648 و1860، وفق الخبير العسكري والكاتب الأميركيّ «ويليام ليند» وتدور رحى هذه الحروب بين جيشين نظاميين في ميدان محدد وعلى أرض واحدة، بحيث تكون المواجهات مباشرة بين خصمين أو أكثر وتُستعمل فيها الأسلحة والذخائر والتكتيات التقليديّة على أنواعها. وهذا الجيل من الحروب يتّسم ببروز مقوّمات الفروسيّة والشجاعة والإقدام على مستوى القادة والأفراد. وأفضل ما ذّكر عن استراتيجيتها هو ما كتبه الصيني سن تزو في «فن الحرب» فهذه الحروب لم تنحصر في الفترة التي أسلفنا ذكرها وفق «ليند»، بل عرفتها البشرية مبكراً استُخدم خلالها عدد كبير من العمليات العسكرية، كالمناورة والالتفاف لتطويق الخصم وضربه في أجنحته للقضاء عليه وتدميره، واستمرّت هذه الحروب حتى فترة ما قبل الحرب العالمية الثانية.

حروب الجيل الثاني

وهي شبيهة إلى حد ما بحروب الجيل الأول، وتُعرف بحرب العصابات أو الحرب الثورية، لكون رحاها تدور بين جيش نظاميّ تقليديّ ومجموعات قليلة العدد نسبياً تقاتل لتحقيق هدف واحد. وانتشرت هذه الحروب عقب انتهاء الحرب العالمية الثانية في كثير من دول العالم.

والخلاف عن الجيل الأول من الحروب يكمن في التطور الذي حصل في الحركة وتكتيكات المناورة وتقنيات الأسلحة وطريقة إدارة استخدام الدبابات والنيران والطيران بين الأطراف المتحاربة، الأمر الذي جعلها تتمتع بخاصية أكثر دقّة من ناحية إحداث أكبر قدر من الخسائر لدى الطرفين، وتعتمد على الأسلحة الخفيفة والمتوسطة تبعاً لديناميكيّة الحركة واستمرارية المناورة فيها.

بالإضافة إلى أنها تتمتع بقيادة أحادية تجمع القيادة العسكرية والسياسة معاً، وتعتمد على مساندة الإعلام بشكلٍ رئيسي، لكسب التأييد وحيازة الرأي العام والتأثير فيه.

كما تتميّز «حرب العصابات» باستراتيجيتها الخاصة، إذ تنشأ في الصراع المستمر والطويل مما يحتّم اتّباع أسلوب المفاجأة والمباغتة في القتال ضد الجيوش النظاميّة، واعتماد الضربات الموجعة للعدو في معارك ومواجهات صغيرة ومتعددة، تضعف قدرته وتجعله يتراجع عن أهدافه تحت وطأة الضربات المتلاحقة من قبل خصم يظهر ويختفي وفق الكرّ والفر، فنجده يقاتل وفق استراتيجيةٍ يفرض فيها وجوده وشروطه، كما أنه يحدّد مكان وزمان المواجهة بما يضمن له النجاح.

حروب الجيل الثالث

وتطوّر هذا الجيل من الحروب على يد الألمان خلال الحرب العالمية الثانية باعتمادهم المرونة والسرعة في الهجوم، فضلاً عن المفاجأة والحرب خلف خطوط العدو، وذلك وفق الخبير الأميركيّ «وليام ليند». إلا أنّ معظم زملاءه العسكريين يقولون بأنها انطلقت من نظرية سياسية عسكرية ظهرت في الولايات المتحدة الأميركيّة عقب انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتيّ السابق، وتحديداً عقب أحداث الحادي عشر من أيلول عام 2000 وما نجم عنها من تفجير برجي التجارة في نيويورك، وتسمّى النظرية الأميركيّة بـ»الرّدع بالشّك» فأصبحت تعرف بالحروب «الوقائية» أو «الاستباقية» وهي تعني «الضربة الاستباقية»، وشنّ الحرب ضدّ كل ما من شأنه أن يهدّد الأمن القومي الأميركيّ أو السلم العالمي، وتعتبر الحرب الأميركيّة على العراق عام 2003 نموذجاً عنها، بعد أن اتخذت الولايات المتحدة من أحداث 11 أيلول سبباً للوقاية من «الإرهاب».

حروب الجيل الرابع

وهي امتداد للحروب الوقائيّة، وهي بدعةٌ أميركيّة صرفة، وتسمّى بـ»الحرب اللامتماثلة»، وفق ما اتفق عليه الخبراء العسكريون، إذ تُستخدم فيها وسائل الإعلام الجديد والتقليدي، وكذلك منظمات المجتمع المدني والمعارضة، ويستخدم فيه أيضاً النفوذ الأميركيّ في أيّ بلد عبر العمليّات الاستخباريّة، والشركات الأمنيّة الخاصة، وذلك لخدمة المصالح الأميركيّة، وتنفيذاً لسياساتها الاستراتيجية.

وفي تفاصيل نشوء هذا النوع من الحروب هو أحداث 11 أيلول، حيث وجد الجيش الأميركيّ نفسه في مواجهة تنظيمات محترفة عسكرياً ومدرّبة جيداً منتشرة حول العالم، فتوجهت القوات الأميركيّة نحو استراتيجية جديدة لمواجهة «اللا دولة» والتي تمتلك إمكانات ممتازة تنشّط خلاياها في كل مكان فبات لزاماً وفق الاستراتجية العسكرية الأميركيّة ابتكار نموذج جديد لمواجهتها وإضعافها أمام الرأي العام، وإرغامها على الانسحاب من التدخل في مناطق نفوذها..

وكان البروفسور الأميركيّ «ماكس مايوراينغ» أول من تحدّث عن هذه الحرب في محاضرة علنية في معهد دراسات الأمن القومي في «إسرائيل» بتاريخ 13 آب 2012، واختصر تعريفها بالنقاط الآتية: «هي الحرب بالإكراه، وإفشال الدولة، وزعزعة استقرارها، ثم فرض واقع جديد يراعي مصالح الدولة الأميركيّة»، معتمداً على شخصية هاري بوتر الشهيرة وما أوردته أحداث القصة من بروز شخصية شريرة هو «لورد فولدامورت» هو الخصم الشرير الرهيب الذي لا يجرؤ أحد على النطق باسمه وهو ما أراد تطبيقه في هذا الجيل من الحروب عبر ابتكار أشخاص أشرار داخل نطاق الدولة يمكن الاعتماد عليهم لتمرير سياستهم وتنفيذ مخططاتهم وربما كانت فكرة «داعش» الإرهابية إحدى تلك النماذج الأميركيّة.. وتطرق مايوراينغ في محاضرته إلى «هيوغو شافيز» الذي تحدّث عن حروب الجيل الرابع منذ سنوات عدة حين أمر ضابط الجيش في فنزويلا أن «يتعلموا الجيل الرابع من الحروب غير المتماثلة، وأن يطوروا عقيدة للتعامل معها». وأكد البروفيسور الأميركيّ حينها انخراطهم في هذا النوع من الحروب، ومما قاله في تلك المحاضرة، بأنّه بـ»الاعتماد على طابور خامس سيستيقظ عدوّك ميّتاً» وتابع قائلاً: «لم نعد نرسل قوات نظامية عبر الحدود، على الأقل أغلب الأحوال… والقوات العسكرية ليست نظامية، ليست كلها رجال، فيها نساء، وليسوا كلهم بالغين، بل فيهم حتى أطفال.. الهدف هو الإنهاك والتآكل ببطء.. والهدف هو التحكم أو الوصول إلى نقطة التأثير في عدوك.. نستخدم إقليماً غير محكوم بشكل كافٍ ونؤثر على أفراده للتمرّد على دولتهم..».

حروب الجيل الخامس

وهي هجينة مع ما سُمّي بالحروب «غير المتماثلة» وامتداد لها، يعتمد هذا النوع المتطوّر من الحروب في استراتيجيته، على خلق تناقضات بين السلطة والمجتمع في نطاق الدولة الواحدة، عبر استغلال الوسائل كافة، يستخدم فيها العنف غير المسلح، وتعتمد على جماعات عقائديّة مسلحة، وعصابات تهريب منظمة، وتنظيمات صغيرة مدرّبة من أجل صنع حروب داخلية تتنوّع حسب الغاية منها بين اقتصادية وسياسية واجتماعية بهدف استنزاف مؤسسات الدولة المستهدفة ووضعها في مواجهة صراعات داخلية، بالتوازي مع التهديدات الخارجية العنيفة. ويقول أحد المحللين إنّ «الجيل الخامس يعتمد في استراتيجيته على احتلال العقول لا الأرض، وبعد احتلال العقول يتكفّل المحتل بالباقي». وهنا نذكر مقولة للرئيس الراحل حافظ الأسد حينما قال «الأرض إذا احتلت يمكننا استرجاعها أما الإرادة إذا احتلت من الصعب استرجاعها»، وهذا ما تعتمده حروب الجيل الخامس باحتلالها الإرادة والفكر قبل الأرض..

أما من ناحية الأسلحة المستخدمة في هذه الحروب فتستخدم التقنيات الحديثة، كالصواريخ المضادة للدروع، والطائرات الذكية «بدون طيّار» وغيرها الكثير من الأسلحة المتطورة، وبما أنها تعتمد على استغلال جماعات عقائدية تكون في كيان الدولة الواحدة بالتالي تعتمد على العمليات الانتحارية، والأعمال الإرهابية والتطرف، ونصب الكمائن، واستخدام القوة غير المسلحة، والتي يكون فيها العدو فاعلاً من دون أن يظهر بشكل مباشر كتقنيات الإرهاب الإلكتروني، والغزو السيبراني، واستحداث حالة من الفوضى في مواقع الصراع بين أطراف محلية، وتقسيم الشعب الواحد إلى شعوب عبر إثارة النعرات واجتزاء الانتماءات وتفكيك الهوية الواحدة وتحريكها وفق الأهداف السياسية والمصلحية المرجوّة للدولة الأخرى راعية هذه الجماعات ضدّ دولتهم الواحدة.. وما يسمّى بـ»الربيع العربي» هو أحد تطبيقات هذا الجيل من الحروب الهجينة. كما يرى الخبراء أنّ «إغراق المناطق المستهدفة بالمخدرات هو أحد الأسلحة الفعالة لحروب الجيل الخامس».

كما يرى محللون عسكريون بأنّ «حروب الجيل الخامس تستخدم التقنيات الحديثة بهدف إيجاد حكومة في الظل، كما أنّها تتعامل مع كيانات صغيرة متعددة، وممنهجة تعمل على هدم التعليم في الجامعات، وإشاعة الفوضى، وارتكاب أفعال إجرامية للتشكيك في قدرة الدولة على السيطرة الأمنية، وتُسـتغل هذه التشكيلات الإجرامية في فبركة الأخبار وتبديل الحقائق وترويع المواطنين». وما يحدث في البلدان العربية من مشرقها حتى مغربها وانتقال العدوى إلى دول أميركا اللاتينية ترجمة فعلية لهذا النوع من الحروب..

حروب الجيل السادس

المقصود بهذا النوع من الحروب وفق الخبراء الاستراتيجيين والعسكريين هو «الحرب التي تُدار عن بُعد» عبر استخدام أسلحة ذكية تدخل في صلبها شبكات الإنترنت عبر التجنيد الكامل للمجتمع المستهدف، وتتنوع وسائلها لتشمل استخدام وسائل تجسس جديدة تعتمد على الطيور والحيوانات والأسماك والتي لا يقتصر دورها على التجسس فقط إنما يذهب أبعد من ذلك إلى إلحاق الضرر عن بعد كـ»التفجير عن بعد» وتتبادل الاتهامات ما بين الولايات المتحدة الأميركيّة وروسيا حول مبتكر هذا النوع من الحروب ففي حين يعتقد بعض الخبراء بأن روسيا أول مَن أطلق هذه التسمية وفق ما قاله الجنرال الروسي «فلاديمير سليبتشينك»، حين قال للعالم أجمع «إنّ الحروب التقليدية قد عفا عليها الزمن، وأنّ كل الحروب بعد ذلك ستدار بأنظمة ذكية، وستحصد نتائج ذكية أيضاً». تذهب روسيا إلى رأي منافٍ بحيث ترجعه إلى وكالة «داريا» التابعة لـ»البنتاغون»..

وتستخدم في هذا الجيل من الحروب، الصواريخ القابلة للتوجيه عن بُعد، والقنبلة الذكية المجهّزة للتوجيه الذاتي، وطائرة بدون طيار الصغيرة الحجم لأغراض التجسس على المحادثات بين الأشخاص، والألغام التي يتم تفعيلها أو تعطيلها عن طريق الأقمار الصناعية، وجمع المعلومات الاستخباراتية واستغلال النظام العالمي لسواتل الملاحة (نظام تحديد المواقع العالمي)، وكل ما يمكن استهدافه عن طريق الكمبيوتر أو الأقمار الصناعية.

أسلحة القتل النظيف

كذلك تستخدم أسلحة القتل النظيف، وهي عبارة عن تركيز أمواج راديوية بترددات خاصة وبطاقة عالية جداً إلى أعلى من طبقات الأوزون، بحيث يتم تسخين طبقات الغلاف الجوي بشكل مكثف وتعمل على جعلها كوسادة مطاطية تخزن الطاقة بشكل كبير، وتعمل على ردّة فعل بإطلاق موجات مغناطيسية تخترق الحي والميت نحو منطقة معينة وإطلاق هذه الطاقة وتحريرها من خلال الغلاف الجوي أو الأرض، وتعمل هذه التقنية على إثارة العواصف الماطرة والثلوج العنيفة والفيضانات والجفاف، كما أنها تساعد في كشف بواطن الأرض.

ويضاف إليها نوع جديد من الأسلحة يسمّى بـ»أسلحة الكيمتريل» وهو عبارة عن مركبات كيماوية يمكن نشرها على ارتفاعات جوية محددة لاستحداث ظواهر جوية مستهدفة وتختلف هذه الكيماويات طبقاً للأهداف، فمثلاً عندما يكون الهدف هو «الاستمطار» أي جلب الأمطار يتم استخدام خليط من أيوديد الفضة على بيركلورات البوتاسيم ليتم رشها مباشرة فوق السحب في ثقل وزنها ولا يستطيع الهواء حملها فتسقط أمطاراً، كما تستخدم هذه التقنية مع تغيير المركبات الكيماوية فتؤدي إلى الجفاف والمجاعات والأمراض والأعاصير والزلازل.

وتعتمد أيضاً سلاح «الصوت الصامت» وهي مجموعة من الأسلحة تتمثل في السيطرة الشاملة على العقل باستخدام التقنيات مثل أدوات العرض HD لإرسال هذه التأثيرات لكل بيت وكل أسرة وكل الشعوب المراد السيطرة عليها ضمن حزمة من التقنيات الجديدة والمبتكرة لإحكام السيطرة على العقل.

منظومة الجنّ الفضائيّ

أما أهم ما ابتكرته من أسلحة هذا الجيل فهو «منظومة الجنّ الفضائي» وأطلق هذه التسمية أحد صحافيي الواشنطن بوست منذ أعوام مضت، لأنها اعتمدت على تقنيات عالية التطور تشبه الخيال المحض، فيما أطلق عليها البعض «القرصنة البيولوجيّة». وتشمل هذه المنظومة أقماراً صناعية صغيرة تقدّر بحوالي نصف مليون قمر صناعي في مدارات حول الأرض، بعيداً عن المدارات الاعتيادية متعدّدة الأهداف كالمساعدة في مسح خريطة النشاطات المغناطيسية للعقل والجسم البشري ودراسة إمكانية التحكم في الأفراد بما يعرف شرائح التحكم البشرية، وكذلك التعاون مع سلاح هارب في مزيد من التحكم في الظواهر والكوارث الطبيعية المصنعة، أيضاً تساعد على استهداف الأفراد بموجات مغناطيسية، كذلك التجسس حول العالم وغيرها من مشاريع القرصنة الحديثة بأنواعها المختلفة..

الشعاع الأزرق

وأخيراً استخدام ما سمّي بـ»الشعاع الأزرق» حين تمكنت الأقمار الصناعية من صنع انعكاسات ضوئية على الأرض تشبه كائنات حقيقية مع دمج الريبوتات النانوية مع مادة الكيمتريل الحديثة، وتتحرك تلك الكائنات في عيون من رأوها تحت شمس الظهيرة، وأكدوا أنهم يتعرّضون لغزو كائنات فضائية حقيقية، ولم تظهر حقيقة الأمر إلا بعد أشهر حين كشفتها معلومات استخباراتيّة أميركيّة.

مقارنة عبر الأجيال

وليس إعلان الرئيس الأميركيّ دونالد ترامب بعسكرة الفضاء، وتحديد ميزانية خاصة لمواجهة التفوق الصيني والروسي في الفضاء ببعيدة عن هذا الجيل من الحروب، والذي يتميز بغياب مركز الثقل، وفق الخبراء، ففي الحروب السابقة يبرز الصراع بين كيانات ذات هيكلية مؤسسية سواء أكانت جيوشاً منظمة أم جماعات متمرّدة إلا أنها تتمتع بهيكلية هرمية تسلسلية وروح معنوية وإمدادات لوجستية ودعم سياسي وشعبي وما تحويه من مبررات قتالية سواء أكانت قانونية أو حقوقية أو حتى أخلاقية. وتنتهي تلك الحروب بتدمير مركز الثقل وبالتالي تدمير المؤسسة بكاملها أو جزئياً مع الاعتراف بالهزيمة، وهو ما كان سائداً في الحربين العالميتين وكذلك حروب الخليج وغيرها من الحروب التي عنونت بحروب الجيل الأول والثاني والثالث. ناهيك عن أنّ مجال تلك الحروب كان البر والبحر معاً، لتتطوّر في جيلها الثالث مع التطور الاقتصادي والتكنولوجي في عصر الثورة الصناعية، ما أدّى إلى تطوّر أسلحة الدفاع الجوي والطيران وكذلك الغواصات وبدأ معها ضمّ المجال الجوي والفضاء الإلكتروني والمساحات تحت سطح البحار، إلى نطاق الحروب. لتنتقل في ما بعد حروب الجيل الرابع وما تلاها إلى مدى أبعد من الأرض نحو الإرادة، فشملت بنطاقها المجال السياسي والاقتصادي والثقافي والسيبراني والحضاري، فأضحت الحرب صراع إرادات سياسية، اقتصادية، سيرانية، ثقافية وحضارية وليست مجرد صراع مسلح.

الحرب غير المقيّدة

وبالتالي اتسم الجيل السادس من الحروب بسمة «الحرب غير المقيدة»، يجتمع فيها جميع أنواع الحروب الاقتصادية والسيبرانية والمعلوماتية والنووية والبيئية والجريمة المنظمة والحرب الهجينة والعصابات المدرّبة التي يمكن شنّها حتى في حالة السلم وعدم وجود صراعات عسكرية معلنة، وفيروس «كورونا» ليس ببعيد عن هذا الجيل من الحروب البيولوجية والذي كشفت براءات الاختراع الأميركيّة تسجيله في عام 2018 كبراءة اختراع تحت رقم 10130701، ناهيك عن تدخل شركات الأدوية العملاقة لجني مليارات الدولارات سنوياً عبر ابتكار الفيروسات كالسرطان والإيدز وغيرها من أساليب الحروب البيولوجية والتي تعتمد كل شيء في سبيل تحقيق الغاية المرجوّة. وكيف الحال إذا كانت الغاية الأميركيّة القضاء على العملاق الصيني بلا أيّ تردّد ومهما كانت النتائج ولو كان عدد الضحايا بالملايين فهي مَن أطلقت قنبلتين ذريتين على هيروشيما وناكازاكي.. ولا ننسى التطرّق إلى الثقافة الأميركيّة التي غزت العالم بالوجبات وبالأفلام التي ليست ببعيدة عمّا تطبّقه من سياسات فليس فيلم «نهاية العالم» ببعيد عما يحصل اليوم حين قامت تلك الطبيبة «الإسرائيلية» بإيجاد عُقار ينقذ البشرية من فيروس هتك العالم أجمع، ما يعني أن «إسرائيل» بنت لمواجهته جدار الفصل العنصري، لحماية كيانها من انتشاره، وفق أحداث الفيلم..

وبما أن العالم منقسم إلى عالم الشمال وعالم الجنوب، أو بلدان العالم المتقدم والعالم الثالث، كذلك أجيال الحروب منقسمة. فبينما نحن في الجيل الرابع من الحروب تبعاً للتراجع التقني والعلمي الذي يطغى علينا في حين باتت الحروب بين تلك الدول المتقدمة تقوم على الجيل الخامس والسادس وأحياناً متداخلة بين هذين الجيلين. يبقى علينا تحديد ميزانية خاصة للبحث العلمي وإدراك ما فاتنا من تقدّم عوضاً عن وضع الميزانية في شراء أسلحة باتت تقليدية المستفيد الوحيد منها تلك المجمّعات الصناعية العسكرية..

مقالات متعلقة

German Politician: “Ami Go Home!”… The US is waging bloody economic wars against the entire world

By InfoBrics

Global Research, December 26, 2019

InfoBrics

Oskar Lafontaine

Oskar Lafontaine is a German politician, candidate for Chancellor in the German federal election of 1990, Chairman of the Social Democratic Party from 1995 to 1999, Minister of Finance from 1998 to 1999, leader of The Left in Saarland since 2010.

The United States of America is waging bloody economic wars against the entire world, and now against us Germans. The German government is talking interference with our sovereignty. What a fallacy! We have never been a sovereign state. After the end of the World War II, it is the Americans who have been handling issues of war and peace in Germany.

In 1963, Charles de Gaulle said:

“Having allies… is a matter of course for us in the historical era in which we find ourselves. But to have your own free choice… is also a categorical imperative, because alliances have no absolute virtue, no matter what feelings they are based on. And if you give up control over yourself, you run the risk of never regaining it.”

Later, Francois Mitterrand would add:

“You can’t hand the solution over to others when life or death is at stake.”

American military bases in Germany imperil us instead of protecting. The United States is pushing us to a war with its aggressive policy of encircling Russia and China, with allocating huge amounts of $738 billion for military purposes, by means of withdrawing from the INF Treaty and placing short-range missiles next to the Russian borders. It is in our interest to liberate the German soil from US military bases.The Real New World Order. Bankers Taking over the World

“Ami go home!” the students chanted in 1968, when the United States killed millions of people in Vietnam, using its military bases in Germany. “Ami go home!” the Germans urged when the United States, under the guise of lying about Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction, unleashed the war in Iraq using its military facilities in Germany – a war that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. “Ami go home!” – this appeal should become the motto of German politics today, when the greatest military power in the world is obviously violating international law and terrorizing all of the world.

This has been taken from Oscar Lafontaine’s Facebook and distributed by the German NachdenkSeiten run by another “heavyweight” of German politics – Albrecht Müller, a long-term ally of German Chancellor Willy Brandt, Bundestag member from 1987 to 1994.

“People like Oscar Lafontaine,” Albrecht Müller writes in his commentary, “able to get across their ideas, are a must-have in politics. The demand [on the US to leave Germany] is by no means radical. It’s appropriate. Many Germans believe so, but not those who shape today’s politics in Berlin. The German establishment and representatives of the major news outlets are either associated with the United States and dependent on them, or serve the interests of the military establishment. There are also people who simply lack courage and consider the ‘Ami go home’ demand unduly radical.

What else should happen? Sanctions have been imposed against us Germans. The weaponization process is at our expense. We are involved in maneuvers next to the Russian borders. Convoys with military equipment block our railways. What is finally going to make the cup run over?”

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Wikimedia CommonsThe original source of this article is InfoBricsCopyright © InfoBricsInfoBrics, 2019

القتلة الاقتصاديون!….| د. بسام أبو عبد الله

د. بسام أبو عبد الله

اختياري لعنوان مقالي اليوم مقصود مقصود، لكن ليس بهدف القول بأن كل من يعمل في الشأن الاقتصادي هو مجرم وقاتل كما قد يعتقد البعض، معاذ الله، لأنه في هذا القطاع هناك شرفاء كثر كما غيره من القطاعات،

ولكن أنا أعرف ويعرف الكثيرون أن هناك في القطاعات الاقتصادية من هم أكثر من قتلة، لا بل مجرمون مستعدون لتدمير بلدانهم وشعوبهم من أجل أنانيتهم، أرباحهم الفاحشة على حساب الفقراء والمساكين، وهناك من هو قولاً واحداً، إن أحب ذلك أو لم يحب، متآمر على بلده وشعبه، ويلعب بقوت الناس ما يعتبر تهديداً للأمن القومي للبلاد، وحساب أمثال هؤلاء يجب أن يكون عسيراً.

قبل شهر من الآن كان سعر صرف الليرة السورية مقابل الدولار قد وصل إلى 650 ليرة سورية، ومنذ ذلك الوقت وحتى الآن فقدت الليرة نحو 46 بالمئة من قيمتها ليصل سعر الصرف إلى حدود الألف ليرة سورية، وهو أمر ليس له سبب اقتصادي أبداً حسب رأي المختصين الذين سألناهم، وقبل يومين عاود سعر صرف الليرة ليهبط إلى 850 ل.س مقابل الدولار، ولا أدري حتى ساعة نشر مقالي كم سيهبط أو يصعد، وخاصة أن التبدلات أصبحت تحدث بالساعات وليست بالأيام، وكأن ما يحدث قضاء وقدر، لا إمكانية لوقفه، وخاصة أن الحالة تحولت إلى قضية خطرة للغاية، أثرت في الأسواق فتوقف بيع المواد، وارتفعت الأسعار بشكل جنوني من دون أي ضابط، وحصلت الفوضى الاقتصادية التي تشبه إلى حدّ كبير الفوضى التي كان الإرهابيون يعملون على إحداثها بعد كل تفجير، أو عملية إرهابية، إذ كان يرافقها إعلام معادٍ، ليزيد التأثير النفسي، ويؤدي إلى انهيار المعنويات، وإضعاف الثقة بالدولة، ودفع الناس دفعاً نحو الخوف واللجوء إلى حلولهم الخاصة، الأمر الذي يدفع الأمور نحو الفوضى التي تمس حياة الناس وقوت يومهم، وثباتهم وصمودهم.

سؤال مشروع يطرحه كل مواطن سوري على نفسه، وعلى المعنيين والمختصين، ماذا حدث بعد زيادة الرواتب الأخيرة شيء غريب عجيب؟ وكأن هناك من ينتظرنا حتى يفرغ الفرحة البسيطة التي شعر بها المواطنون السوريون إثر هذه الزيادة، وكأن هناك من يقصفنا فوراً، حتى لا نرتاح ولو للحظة، وكأن هناك طابوراً خامساً وسادساً يدار من غرفة عمليات مركزية تعطيه التعليمات فوراً، لأنه ليس معقولاً ما يحدث ويتطور بسرعة لإحداث الفوضى الاقتصادية، وهو ما يريده ويعمل عليه أعداؤنا وخصومنا، ويبقى سؤالي مشروعاً: الأعداء والخصوم معروفون في الخارج، ولكن ماذا عمن هم في الداخل! لا تقولوا لي: الوضع في لبنان! وغيره الكثير من الأسباب المبررة والمفهومة، والتي يمكن أن نعددها جميعاً، إلا أن أحداً لا يستطيع حتى الآن أن يقول لي: ماذا عن حيتان الفساد والاحتيال المالي، وذوي الارتباط الخارجي، الذين لم يعودوا يخجلون، ولا يوجد لديهم أدنى ارتباط وشعور بالوطن وشعبه وجيشه!
تذكروا أيها السادة أن في هذه اللحظة هناك من يستشهد في إدلب من جنودنا وضباطنا، وهناك من يقاتل بشرف وإباء وكرامة، دفاعاً عن سيادة سورية واستقلالها وعزتها، كي نعيش جميعاً رافعي الرأس، ولولا هؤلاء الأبطال لكنتم أيها الفاسدون الجشعون في مكان آخر، أفلا تشعرون وتحسون أن هناك وطناً لابد من دعمه، وشعباً بطلاً لابد من الوقوف إلى جانبه، وليس ابتزازه كالإرهابيين.

في عام 2004 نشر الخبير الاقتصادي الأميركي جون بيركنز كتاباً شهيراً بعنوان: «اعترافات قاتل اقتصادي» وترجم الكتاب لثلاثين لغة في العالم من ضمنها اللغة العربية تحت عنوان «الاغتيال الاقتصادي للأمم»، ويكشف بيركنز أن القتلة الاقتصاديين هم رجال محترفون يتقاضون أجراً عالياً مقابل قيامهم بخداع دول العالم، وابتزازها عبر التقارير المالية المحتالة، والانتخابات المزورة والرشاوى والجنس وجرائم القتل بهدف إقراضها، ثم العمل على إفلاسها لتصبح أهدافاً سهلة حين يطلب منها خدمات مثل القواعد العسكرية، التصويت في الأمم المتحدة، بيع ثرواتها بأسعار لا تحقق المصالح الوطنية، وهؤلاء يعتمدون على الرشوة باليد الأولى، والمسدس باليد الأخرى في حال عدم التعاون، وأرجو أن ننتبه إلى كلمة «رشوة» التي استخدمها بيركنز، وهؤلاء هم الأخطر لأنهم قابلون للبيع والشراء، أي إنهم مستعدون للخيانة.

ما من شك أن لمن يتابع التاريخ الأميركي فسوف يجد أن بيركنز كان ينفذ سياسة أسس لها وزير الدفاع الأميركي السابق روبرت ماكنمارا الذي سقط في حرب فيتنام، وأدرك أن القوة العسكرية ليست ذات جدوى، وأن القصف الجوي لن ينتج لأميركا شيئاً فانقلب باتجاه آخر، ليترأس البنك الدولي عام 1968، وليظل فيه حتى عام 1981 ليرسم من هناك سياسة أخرى اسمها «التطويع الاقتصادي» أي العمل على خنق الدول المنافسة لأميركا، وفي عهد رونالد ريغان انتقلت أميركا إلى سياسة اسمها «الإنهاك الاقتصادي» وهي السياسة التي أسس لها ماكنمارا نفسه من خلال كتاب نشره بعنوان: «مائة بلد وملياران من البشر.. أبعاد التنمية» ونشره عام 1973، وطبقت هذه السياسات ضد الاتحاد السوفييتي، الذي لم يسقط عسكرياً إنما اقتصادياً، وكذلك في دول أوروبا الشرقية.

في عهد الرئيس دونالد ترامب عادت أميركا إلى الأسس التي وضعها ماكنمارا بعد إخفاق سياسات المحافظين الجدد في الغزو العسكري أيام جورج بوش الابن، من خلال سياسات فرض العقوبات الاقتصادية وتطويرها باتجاه ما سموه «العقوبات الذكية» وهذا ما نجده الآن تجاه سورية، إيران، فنزويلا، كوريا الديمقراطية، كوبا، روسيا، الصين… إلخ.

ما أود إيصاله بوضوح شديد أن الحرب الاقتصادية هي أخطر أنواع الحروب، وأن مواجهتها لابد أن تتمتع بالصرامة والشدة، وفي الوقت نفسه المرونة والذكاء والتعاطي الاستباقي قبل وقوع الأزمات، والأهم ملاحقة القتلة الاقتصاديين الداخليين، الذين يجلس بعضهم في أبراج عاجية، ويتاجرون علينا بالوطنية والإخلاص، ولكنهم يرتشون ويفسدون، ويتاجرون بكل شيء من دون أدنى إحساس بالمسؤولية، وهؤلاء القتلة ليسوا بعض التجار ورجال الأعمال فقط، بل شركاؤهم الموجودون في أكثر من مكان وموقع، ومحاربة هؤلاء تحتاج إلى «هيئة أركان اقتصادية» تقود على مدار الساعة كل تفصيل وتدقق وتحلل التطورات كلها، لأن قناعتي ما زالت راسخة بأن الشعب والجيش والقائد الذي يهزم أعتى مؤامرة في التاريخ، قادر على التعامل والتعاطي بحزم مع القتلة الاقتصاديين ومن وراءهم، وكونوا واثقين بذلك.

الوطن 

فيديوات متعلقة

مواضيع متعلقة

A History of U.S. Economic Warfare, from WWII to the Present

A Conversation with Michael Hudson

Global Research, November 18, 2019

On the Global Research News Hour we do our best to cover a wide spectrum of topics from the environmental crisis to economic and geopolitical analysis to debunking war pre-text narratives.

We welcome listener support to maintain and improve the quality of our regular broadcasts. Please consider a donation. Go to Global Research’s main donation page and tag your gift ‘GRNH.’

“Michael Hudson is the best economist in the world. Indeed, I could almost say that he is the only economist in the world. …If you have not heard of Michael Hudson it merely shows the power of the Matrix. Hudson should have won several Nobel prizes in economics, but he will never get one.” – Paul Craig Roberts (February, 2016) [1] .

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

While many people understandably look to military force as the factor that maintains an empire’s grip on the territories in its domain, there are some seemingly more subtle ways in which power can be sustained.

Throughout the post World War II period a number of former colonies established independence, yet thanks to financial instruments, these seemingly autonomous districts would find themselves serving the interests of far away economies at the expense of their own citizens.

Key tools by which the United States in particular came to dominate the post-war world was through the Bretton Woods institutions, namely the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).[2]

In the last two decades and particularly since the stock market crisis of 2008, the pre-eminent global super-power is in crisis, with collapse on the horizon. This coinciding with the rise of China which is becoming an influential player threatening the autonomy of the U.S. superstate. [3]

To provide a primer on the historical trajectory that has taken the world to the current set of economic relations and options for alternative economic modes, the Global Research News Hour is privileged to benefit form the expertise and understanding of pre-eminent financial economist Michael Hudson.

Having built up his understanding based not only on his academic research, but on years of experience as a Wall Street analyst and as a balance of payments economist for both Chase Manhattan Bank and Arthur Andersen, he is among the most highly respected economic thinkers in the world. In his 1972 book  Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire, he became the first writer in the world to explain the impact of America’s departure from the gold-standard, and the use of U.S. Treasury bonds in foreign central bank reserves to finance U.S, military adventures in Vietnam and elsewhere.  [4]

In an exclusive, wide-ranging interview, recorded in the summer of 2019 while visiting Winnipeg, Canada, Professor Hudson explains how the Bretton Woods institutions came to be an instrument of the U.S. empire, the similarities and differences behind the paths to Chinese and US economic prosperity, the virtual impossibility of electing a genuine reformer to the White House, the case of Canada, and more.

A transcript of this interview can be found here.

This program includes an excerpt from a talk given at the University of Manitoba as part of the  14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy (WAPE).

(video credit Paul S Graham)

Michael Hudson is a prominent U.S. critical economist and President of The Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends (ISLET). A Wall Street Financial Analyst and Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, Dr. Hudson has acted as an economic adviser to governments worldwide, including Iceland, China, Latvia and Canada.

Dr. Hudson’s books include Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Destroy the Global Economy (2015), J Is for Junk Economics – A Guide to Reality in an Age of Deception (2017), and his seminal work – Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (1972), a critique of how the United States exploited foreign economies through the IMF and World Bank. His website is www.michael-hudson.com

(Global Research News Hour Episode 277)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

The Global Research News Hour now airs Fridays at 6pm PST, 8pm CST and 9pm EST on Alternative Current Radio (alternativecurrentradio.com)

Community Radio Stations carrying the Global Research News Hour:

CHLY 101.7fm in Nanaimo, B.C – Thursdays at 1pm PT

Port Perry Radio in Port Perry, Ontario –1  Thursdays at 1pm ET

Burnaby Radio Station CJSF out of Simon Fraser University. 90.1FM to most of Greater Vancouver, from Langley to Point Grey and from the North Shore to the US Border.

It is also available on 93.9 FM cable in the communities of SFU, Burnaby, New Westminister, Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Surrey and Delta, in British Columbia, Canada. – Tune in  at its new time – Wednesdays at 4pm PT.

Radio station CFUV 101.9FM based at the University of Victoria airs the Global Research News Hour every Sunday from 7 to 8am PT.

CORTES COMMUNITY RADIO CKTZ  89.5 out of Manson’s Landing, B.C airs the show Tuesday mornings at 10am Pacific time.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 6am pacific time.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 10am.

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday Morning from 8:00 to 9:00am. Find more details at www.caperradio.ca

RIOT RADIO, the visual radio station based out of Durham College in Oshawa, Ontario has begun airing the Global Research News Hour on an occasional basis. Tune in at dcstudentsinc.ca/services/riot-radio/

Radio Fanshawe: Fanshawe’s 106.9 The X (CIXX-FM) out of London, Ontario airs the Global Research News Hour Sundays at 6am with an encore at 3pm.

Los Angeles, California based Thepowerofvoices.com airs the Global Research News Hour every Monday from 6-7pm Pacific time.

Notes:

  1. https://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/03/why-michael-hudson-is-the-worlds-best-economist/
  2. Michael Hudson (2003), p. 31, ‘Superimperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire’, 2nd ed., published by Pluto Press
  3. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-new-global-economy-rise-of-china-decline-of-the-united-states/5426933
  4. https://www.famouseconomists.net/michael-hudson

السقوط الكبير للاقتصاد على طريقة الحريريّة السياسية؟

 

أكتوبر 4, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

ما يحدث في لبنان حالياً أكبر من أزمة اقتصادية عابرة، يمكن للنظام السياسي إيجاد حلول لها بالكثير من الدَّيْن، فالمزيد من الاقتراض يشبهُ في لبنان والبلدان التي على شاكلته، كبالعِ سُمّ مُحلّى ومفعوله القاتل بطيءٌ وتدريجيٌ وحاسم.

لذلك لا بدّ من الإشارة إلى تراجع نظرية التحشيد الطائفي والمذهبي والشعارات الوطنية والإقليمية أمام صعود الجوع وتفلّت جياعه بشكل غير مسبوق لم تعرفه بلاد الأرز منذ تشكّل دولتها في 1948. بما يعني اضمحلال نظرية جذب الناس باستحضار القدّيسين والأولياء والأئمة والأخطار الخارجية، فهؤلاء لا يتحمّلون عيارات فساد على النموذج اللبناني، أيّ الفساد السياسي والاقتصادي قاعدة الحكم الأساسية، فيما النزاهة استثناء طفيف.

لماذا يتفلّت الشارع؟

الاضطرابات التي شملت العاصمة ومدناً وقرى في الشمال والجنوب والبقاع هي عيّنة بسيطة للمقبل من الأحداث. فالتراجع الاقتصاديّ مستمرّ بمعدلات بطالة كارثية وتضخم قاتل، وسط غياب مرتفع جداً لخدمات الكهرباء والمياه العذبة ورفع النفايات المنتشرة في زوايا لبنان الذي يفترض أنه بلد سياحي.

هذه الاضطرابات لا تزال بسيطة وغريزية تعكس انسداداً كاملاً للآفاق أمام الشباب اللبناني الذي تضاعفت مصائبه الداخلية بالانقطاع شبه الكامل لإمكانية العمل في الخارج. فالخليج متوقف عن استقباله بنسب عالية جداً وكذلك أوروبا وكندا والولايات المتحدة الأميركية. ويُضاف التضييق المصرفي الكبير بقرار مقاطعة أميركي على حركة التحويلات، ما استتبع تراجعاً في تحويلات المغتربين اللبنانيين إلى ذويهم في الداخل بمعدلات عالية جداً.

كما أنّ الدعم الإقليمي للقوى السياسية في الداخل اللبناني مقطوع بدوره وينعكس تضييقاً على الدوائر الشعبيّة المستفيدة منه، ومجمل الحركة الاقتصادية في البلاد راكدة بيعاً وشراء، وإلا كيف نستوعب إقدام رئيس الحكومة سعد الحريري على إقفال تلفزيون المستقبل الخاصة والمعبّرة عن سياسة حزبه المستقبل واتجاهاته الإقليمية والدولية، ربطاً بما للإعلام من قدرات على التحشيد.

إنّ مجمل هذه العناصر المذكورة المرتبطة بفساد سياسي من النظام الطائفي الحاكم للبلاد ووكلائه في الإدارة والقضاء نهبت الاقتصاد اللبناني بقسمَيْه الخاص والعام مبدّدين الأملاك البحرية والعامة وعابثين بالجمارك والمرافئ والمعابر والمطارات والصفقات، فارضين عشرات آلاف الوظائف لأنصارهم في القطاع العام من دون أدنى حاجة إليهم مكرّسين الموالين اليهم قيادات في مواقعهم ما أدّى الى تعطيل الأعمال السليمة وتصاعد مفهوم الرشى من السريّة إلى العلنية من دون أيّ حياء أو مساءلة قانونيّة، حتى أنها أصبحت ضريبة إضافية يدفعها صاحب الحاجة من دون مساءلة أيضاً، ولم يعُد التشهير بسياسيّي لبنان في الإعلام ووسائل الاتصال الجماهيري يكفي لإيقاف فسادهم، لأنهم يعرفون أنّ بضعة أيام فقط على رواج الاتهامات كافية لكي ينساها الناس بغياب أدوات المتابعة الحزبية والجماهيرية.

هناك ملاحظة لا يجوز إغفالها وتتعلّق بإصرار قسم من الطبقة السياسية الحاكمة في لبنان على إغلاق الحدود مع سورية ومنع التعامل الاقتصادي معها مع الاكتفاء بمرور اجتماعي بسيط، وذلك تلبية لأوامر ارتباطاتها الدولية الأميركية والعربية من السعودية الذين أرادوا إسقاط نظامها السياسي. وهذا تسبّب إلى جانب فساد الحكام السياسيين بضرب قطاع الخدمات اللبناني وإضعاف السياحة ما أصاب نصف اللبنانيين تقريباً.

كيف وصل الوضع إلى هذا المستوى الإفقاري؟

تميّزت مرحلة المارونية السياسية العام 1948 وحتى بداية التسعينيات بولاء للغرب والخليج إنما على قاعدة فساد متدنّ وإنتاج إداري عالي المستوى، واهتمام مركّز على قطاع الخدمات والسياحة، وكانت الحدود السورية رئة الاقتصاد اللبناني، على الرغم من تبعيّة لبنان السياسيّة لدول لا تزال تعادي سورية حتى الآن.

هذا النمط السياسي المتدبّر انقلب رأساً على عقب مع وصول المرحوم رفيق الحريري الى رئاسة حكومة لبنان مدعوماً من ثلاثية أميركية سوريّة وسعودية، فحمل معه نمطاً شبه مستسلم يوالي فيه هذه التغطيات الداعمة بشكل مفتوح.

مقابل هذه التغطية انتزع الحريري ميزة إدارة الاقتصاد اللبناني بنظرية الإنماء بالدَّيْن على قطاعات غير منتجة وفي بلدٍ لا إنتاج فيه، وحين حذّره اقتصاديون موالون له من مخاطر هذه النظرية أجابهم بأنّ»السلام المقبل مع «إسرائيل» بإمكانه إعادة الازدهار إلى لبنان وتسديد كامل الديون».

لم يكتفِ «الشهيد» بهذه الحدود، ففتح أموال الدولة لإرضاء المحاور الشيعية والدرزية والمسيحية وإلحاقها بمشروعه، حتى أنه استعمل النفوذ الغربي لجذب القيادات الكنسيّة على شاكلة الكاردينال الراحل صفير.

هذا ما ضاعف من حجم الدين العام الى جانب استشراء حركة فساد أكملت على ما تبقى من أموال اللبنانيين، وواصل ورثته تطبيق طريقته السياسية الاقتصادية إنما مع شيء إضافي وهو التذرّع باندلاع الأزمة السورية، لإقفال العلاقات الاقتصادية مع دمشق والسماح لبعض أنواع الإرهاب باستخدام الشمال والمخيّمات مراكز لشحن الإرهابيين فكرياً ونقلهم لوجيستياً الى سورية. فكيف يمكن لبلد في حالة حرب داخلية مخيفة مثل سورية ان يؤمّن الكهرباء 24 ساعة يومياً، بانياً عبر شركات إيرانية شبكة كهربائية كاملة ويعمل على بناء أخرى فيما لبنان ينتج الكهرباء من استئجار بواخر تركية بمليارات الدولارات؟

وكيف تستطيع شركة سيمنس الألمانية بناء شبكة كهرباء في العراق بعام واحد ولبنان رفض عروضها مواصلاً استئجار البواخر؟

هذه هي الحريريّة السياسيّة من الأب الشهيد الى الابن المتّهم اليوم بإهداء راقصة جنوب أفريقية 16 مليون دولار دفعة واحدة.

يبدو أنّ البلاد تمرّ بمرحلة أفول الحريرية السياسية سياسياً واقتصادياً، لكن البديل فيها يحتاج لوقت كافٍ للتشكل. وكلّ الخشية أن لا تكون هذه المرحلة الانتقالية مرحلة اضطرابات شعبية عنيفة ومروّعة قد تستفيد منها فئات خارجية لإعادة الاقتتال الطائفي الى البلاد. فاحذروا أيّها السياسيون من مقبل الأيام، وذلك بالالتزام بسياسات تغيير جذرية تتطلب أولاً ما لا يمكن ان تفعلوه، وهو رحيلكم وتخلّيكم عن السلطة لمصلحة لبنان الجديد.

G7: An Obsolete, Useless Talking Shop

Image result for G7: An Obsolete, Useless Talking Shop
Finian Cunningham
August 23, 2019

The Group of Seven (G7) self-declared advanced nations meet this weekend in France for their 45th annual summit. US President Donald Trump caused a stir ahead of the gathering in Biarritz when he remarked that Russia should be included in the format, thereby making it a G8 summit.

“Russia should be at the negotiating table,” said Trump, in a rare moment of lucidity.

His view of including Moscow appears to be shared by France’s President Emmanuel Macron who hosted Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in southern France earlier this week, only days before the G7 summit.

Of course, Russia should be at the table to discuss resolving global economic problems. Not just Russia, but China, India and a few others as well.

Since the G7 club was created in 1975 during the Gerald Ford administration the world has undergone transformative changes from the days when the US, (West) Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Canada and Japan were deemed then to be the most powerful national economies.

Today, China is second to the US in terms of its economic size. The top 10 national economies have various ranking iterations, depending on which yardstick is used to compare.

In nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) measurement, the top 10 nations, according to the International Monetary Fund, are: US, China, Japan, Germany, India, France, Britain, Italy, Brazil, Canada. In this ranking, Russia is 12th listed after South Korea.

But if national economies are rated by Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), which takes currency exchange factors into consideration, then the top 10 national economies are: China, US, India, Japan, Germany, Russia, Indonesia, Brazil, Britain, France.

In other words the present G7 line-up is an arbitrary listing. Indeed, its exclusivity is something of an anachronism in today’s world. It’s a throwback to a bygone era when Western nations were more dominant (save for Japan’s inclusion in the original club). The contours of the world have become more multilateral and multipolar. The exclusion of China from the G7 is perhaps the most glaring anomaly.

In a tacit admission of the changed global reality that’s why there is the larger format of the G20 (formed in 1999) which in addition to the G7 includes China, India, Russia, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and others.

The so-called BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) is another sign of changed times, as are numerous other economic fora such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Eurasian Economic Union (EEA), and the Latin American bloc Mercosur.

Given that the G7 is supposed to be a forum for coordinating macroeconomic policies to enhance global economic growth, one would think that the logical requirement would therefore be for inclusion of more nations in order to more effectively address the ostensible purpose.

As it stands, the limited G7 club is a rather clapped-out vehicle. It’s a bit like a broken down auto with flat tires, a blown gasket and crankshaft missing. Does anyone seriously think that Italy in its present political meltdown is in a position to boost the world economy?

It’s also incongruous that the biggest member of the club, the United States, has no interest in coordinating policy with anyone else. President Trump’s trade war with China, the Europeans and the rest of the world is more akin to the 1930s practice of go-it-alone mercantilism and predatory capitalism. We know how disastrous that turned out with global depression and world war.

Trump’s reckless gung-ho “America First” policy (and to hell with everyone else) is casting a dark cloud on the world economy from China’s output slumping and Germany’s exports plummeting. Ironically, “business genius” Trump seems to be dimly realizing that the inevitable repercussions are rebounding like a boomerang with harmful impact on the US economy. Yet he says he’s not letting up on his America First drive to the abyss.

So, sure, if there were a genuine commitment to improve global economic outlook and uplift the wellbeing of ordinary people around the world then the leading nations should be working together in a collegiate planned fashion, and with as much outreach to others as possible.

Thus, without doubt, the leaders of China, Russia, India and others should be in attendance at the summit in France this weekend. Then it would supposedly turn into a forum not unlike the G20. Which makes the point: why is the G7 even continuing to exist?

There is an analogy with the US-led NATO military alliance. That organization was formed in a very different geopolitical world compared with the present. Why does NATO continue to exist? It’s putative security function is redundant.

So too it could be argued is the United Nations Security Council redundant with its five permanent members of US, Russia, China, France and Britain. Surely that forum should be overhauled too reflect a contemporary multipolar world. In short, the world, like history changes, and so too should mechanisms of governance.

Arguably, however, the G7 is not an economic forum, despite its public image. It’s an arbitrary political clique aimed at reinforcing a presumed Western dominance. A sign of this caprice was when the Russian Federation was admitted to the G7 in 1997 which was then renamed the G8. The admission of former President Boris Yeltsin was permitted because he was feckless towards Western strategic demands. Russia remained a G8 member for 17 years until the Ukraine conflict erupted and President Vladimir Putin was accused of “invading” that country and “annexing” Crimea. Those Western allegations are easily countered with evidence of NATO subversion of the elected government in Kiev in order to prize the former Soviet republic away from Moscow’s orbit.

Russia’s exclusion from the G8, which then reverted back to the G7, has been a political punishment to bolster a propaganda narrative for undermining and isolating Russia internationally. This is again why the G7 is no longer a viable forum for its stated purpose of advancing the global economy. It’s a useless talking shop in an utterly changed world.

See Also

US Waging Wars on Multiple Fronts: Cold Wars, Hot Wars, Economic Wars, Propaganda Wars …

Supported by both hawkish wings of its war party, the US is waging hot wars, cold wars, economic wars, financial wars, trade wars, anti-social justice wars, anti-human rights wars, anti-democracy wars, propaganda wars, sanctions wars, tariffs wars, protest wars, homeland wars, and environmental wars on multiple fronts worldwide — ordinary people everywhere the losers.

During decades of Cold War years, the US got along with Soviet Russia, even if uneasily at times. Nixon went to China. Relations today with both countries and many others are more dismal and dangerous than any previous time in the post-WW II period.

New wars could erupt without warning. The threat of possible nuclear war is ominously real by accident or design.

The land of opportunity I remember as a youth is now consumed by its hubris, arrogance, rage to colonize planet earth, control its resources and exploit it people.

New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Society years I grew up in were replaced by neoliberal harshness, endless wars on humanity at home and abroad, a growing wealth disparity exceeding the robber baron years, along with mass unemployment and underemployment, growing homelessness, hunger, and poverty, as well as a ruling class dismissive of the public welfare.

Current US leadership is militantly hawkish and anti-populist, led by a racist geopolitical/economic know-nothing/reality TV president.

Dark forces run things, headquartered on Wall Street and in corporate boardrooms, the rule of law replaced by police state governance, a free and open society by mass surveillance and growing totalitarianism.

Challenging authority disruptively with collective activism when vitally needed is absent.

The US reached peak power, prominence, influence, and leadership on the world stage following WW II, the only major nation left unscathed by its ravages.

Its preemptive war of aggression on nonbelligerent North Korea, a nation threatening no one, started its downward trajectory.

Today it’s a nation in decline while China, Russia and other countries are rising. It spends countless trillions of dollars for militarism and warmaking against invented enemies. No real ones exist.

Its preeminence as a military super-power was overtaken by Russia, China heading toward becoming the world’s leading economic power one day, multi-world polarity replacing unipolarity the US favors to dominate other nations.

Its rage for maintaining a global empire of bases as platforms for endless wars of aggression came at the expense of eroding social justice on the chopping block for elimination altogether.

The myth of American exceptionalism, the indispensable state, an illusory moral superiority, and military supremacy persist despite hard evidence debunking these notions.

Democracy in America is fiction, not fact, a system of governance its ruling class abhors, tolerating it nowhere, nations like Venezuela targeted to replace it with fascist rule.

The US is plagued by the same dynamic that doomed all other empires in history.

It’s an increasingly repressive/secretive/intrusive warrior state, spreading death, destruction and human misery worldwide.

It exploits ordinary people to serve privileged interests — a pariah state/declining power because of its unwillingness to change.

Its war machine never rests. Its criminal class is bipartisan. Its governance meets the definition of fascism — wrapped in the American flag.

It’s a corporate/political partnership over the rights and welfare of ordinary people, exploiting them for power and profits — at home and abroad.

It’s way too late for scattered reforms. The American way is too debauched to fix.

Nothing short of revolutionary change can work. Yet there’s not a hint of it in prospect because of a know-nothing populace distracted and controlled by bread, circuses, and the power of state-approved/media disseminated propaganda.

A decade ago, the late Doug Dowd said “(t)he world now stands on a cliff’s edge.”

He envisioned “four related groups of horrors: existing and likely wars, a fragile world economy, pervasive and deepening corruption, and the earth dangerously near the ‘tipping point’ of environmental disaster.”

It’s not a pretty picture, things worse now than years earlier.

A permanent state of war exists with no prospect for peace in our time — while freedom in the US and West erode toward disappearing altogether the way things are heading.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

 

Saudi Arabia’s ‘Strategic Plan’ To Take Turkey Down

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has drawn up a plan to target Erdogan’s government following Khashoggi’s murder

By David Hearst, Ragip Soylu – Middle East Eye

Saudi Arabia has begun implementing a “strategic plan” to confront the Turkish government, after Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman decided he was being “too patient” with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the wake of journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.

The plan is detailed in a confidential report based on open- and closed-source intelligence prepared by the kingdom’s ally, the United Arab Emirates.

The intelligence report is one of a monthly series written by the Emirates Policy Centre, a think tank with close links to the Emirati government and security services.

Entitled “Monthly Report on Saudi Arabia, Issue 24, May 2019”, the report is of limited circulation and intended for the top Emirati leadership. It does not appear on the think tank’s website. A copy has been obtained by Middle East Eye.

It reveals that in Riyadh in May, orders were given to implement the strategic plan to confront the Turkish government.

The aim of the plan was to use

“all possible tools to pressure Erdogan’s government, weaken him, and keep him busy with domestic issues in the hope that he will be brought down by the opposition, or occupy him with confronting crisis after crisis, and push him to slip up and make mistakes which the media would surely pick up on”.

Middle East Eye contacted the Emirates Policy Centre for comment, with no reply by the time of publication.

Restricting influence

Riyadh’s aim is to restrict Erdogan and Turkey’s regional influence.

“The kingdom would start to target the Turkish economy and press towards the gradual termination of Saudi investment in Turkey, the gradual decrease of Saudi tourists visiting Turkey while creating alternative destinations for them, decreasing Saudi import of Turkish goods, and most importantly minimizing Turkish regional role in Islamic matters,” the report says.

According to the report, Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler, took the decision to confront Turkey following the assassination of Khashoggi by a team of Saudi agents in their country’s Istanbul consulate.

The murder of the Saudi journalist, a Middle East Eye and Washington Post columnist, created international outrage, in large part due to Turkey’s insistence on Riyadh providing accountability and transparency over the affair.

“President Erdogan … went too far in his campaign smearing the kingdom, especially the person of the crown prince, using in the most reprehensible manner the case of Khashoggi,” the reports says.

In the document, the Emirates Policy Centre claims Turkey did not provide “specific and honest” information to assist the Saudi investigation into the killing, but instead leaked “disinformation” to the media “all aimed at distorting the image of the kingdom and attempting to destroy the reputation of the crown prince”.

Riyadh had concluded that Erdogan failed in his attempt to politicize and internationalize the case and now was the time to mount the fightback, the report says.

Both the CIA and leading members of the US Congress have accepted the Turkish intelligence assessment of Khashoggi’s murder.

The CIA also concluded that Mohammed bin Salman almost certainly signed off on the operation, an assessment based on its own intelligence as well.

“The accepted position is that there is no way this happened without him being aware or involved,” said a US official familiar with the CIA’s conclusions, the Washington Post reported.

Since then, a report by United Nations human rights investigator Agnes Callamard detailed the difficulties the Turkish authorities had in investigating the murder and gaining access to the consulate building and the home of the consul-general.

Callamard concluded independently that the crown prince ordered Khashoggi’s murder.

The pressure begins

Last week came the first public sign of the campaign detailed in the Emirati document coming to life.

Saudi authorities blocked 80 Turkish trucks transporting textile products and chemicals from entering the kingdom through its Duba port.

Three hundred containers carrying fruit and vegetables from Turkey had also been held in Jeddah’s port, according to a Turkish official who spoke to MEE on condition of anonymity.

The number of Saudi tourists visiting Turkey decreased 15 percent [from 276,000 to 234,000] in the first six months of 2019, according to official data released by the Turkish tourism ministry.

Saudi Arabia has approximately $2bn worth of direct investment in Turkey, according to the Turkish foreign ministry data from 2018.

That year, Turkish exports to Saudi Arabia were valued at around $2.64bn, while imports from the kingdom stood at $2.32bn.

Behind the scenes, other signals have been sent to Ankara.

The Emirati report says “in a sign that the Saudi leadership has severed its relationship with … Erdogan and started treating him as an enemy”, King Salman approved “without hesitation” a recommendation from an advisory committee not to send an official invitation to attend a high-profile Organization of Islamic Cooperation summit in Mecca.

The Turkish president’s name was added to the list of those excluded from the summit, alongside Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and the Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

Eventually, King Salman decided to allow the Qatari emir to attend the event in Mecca, though Erdogan’s invitation was not forthcoming.

The Turkish government is aware of the Saudi crown prince’s attempts to sever relations and is trying to combat them through keeping direct communications with his father, King Salman.

A senior Turkish official, speaking anonymously, said the existence of a Saudi strategy to punish Turkey over its stance on the Khashoggi case wasn’t surprising.

“We are aware of what they are doing. It is almost public, to the extent that you could see their activities on Saudi-backed social media and Saudi state media,” the official told MEE, noting that they had openly called for a boycott.

“Tourist arrivals are decreasing, while we are having problems related to Turkish exports. We are closely following the situation.”

The Turkish official said, however, that Ankara does not believe that Saudi citizens are altering their stance on Turkey, despite the government in Riyadh’s efforts.

“Istanbul, for example, is still full of Saudi tourists. Saudi officials should check the BBC’s poll on Erdogan’s popularity in the Middle East. Then they will realize that they are failing,” the official said.

Erdogan phoned the king on Thursday, raising the problem of Turkish exports being held at Saudi ports.

Another Turkish official, also speaking anonymously, said Erdogan’s phone call with the Saudi king was cordial and focused on regional developments, such as Syria and the Palestine question.

The official, who was informed about the call, said the king was lucid and supportive of Turkish concerns with regard to Syria.

In the same call, Erdogan invited King Salman and his family, including the crown prince, to Turkey.

Source

Related

An Attack on Iran Would be an Attack on Russia

Moscow is proposing a diametrically opposed vision to Western sanctions, threats and economic war, one that is drawing it ever closer to Tehran

Global Research, August 06, 2019R

Russia is meticulously advancing Eurasian chessboard moves that should be observed in conjunction, as Moscow proposes to the Global South an approach diametrically opposed to Western sanctions, threats and economic war. Here are three recent examples.

Ten days ago, via a document officially approved by the United Nations, the Russian Foreign Ministry advanced a new concept of collective security for the Persian Gulf.

Moscow stresses that “practical work on launching the process of creating a security system in the Persian Gulf” should start with “bilateral and multilateral consultations between interested parties, including countries both within the region and outside of it,” as well as organizations such as the UN Security Council, League of Arab States, Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Gulf Cooperation Council.

The next step should be an international conference on security and cooperation in the Persian Gulf, followed by the establishment of a dedicated organization – certainly not something resembling the incompetent Arab League.

The Russian initiative should be interpreted as a sort of counterpart of, and mostly a complement to, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is finally blossoming as a security, economic and political body. The inevitable conclusion is that major SCO stakeholders – Russia, China, India, Pakistan and, in the near future, Iran and Turkey – will be major influencers on regional stability.

The Pentagon will not be amused.

Drill, baby, drill

When the commander of the Iranian Navy, Hossein Khanzadi, recently visited St Petersburg for the celebration of Russia’s Navy Day, the General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces and the Russian Defense Ministry signed an unprecedented memorandum of understanding.

Khanzadi was keen to stress the memorandum “may be considered a turning point in relations of Tehran and Moscow along the defense trajectory.”

A direct upshot is that Moscow and Tehran, before March 2020, will enact a joint naval exercise in – of all places – the Strait of Hormuz. As Khanzadi told the IRNA news agency:

“The exercise may be held in the northern part of the Indian Ocean, which flows into the Gulf of Oman, the Strait of Hormuz and also the Persian Gulf.”

The US Navy, which plans an “international coalition” to ensure “freedom of navigation” in the Strait of Hormuz – something Iran has always historically guaranteed – won’t be amused. Neither will Britain, which is pushing for a European-led coalition even as Brexit looms.

Khanzadi also noted that Tehran and Moscow are deeply involved in how to strengthen defense cooperation in the Caspian Sea. Joint drills already took place in the Caspian in the past, but never in the Persian Gulf.

Exercise together

Russia’s Eastern Military District will be part of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (ASEAN) anti-terrorist exercise in Thailand and China early next month. According to the Eastern Military District, the training is part of “preparations for a practical phase of an ASEAN anti-terrorist exercise in China.” This means, among other things, that Russian troops will be using Chinese military hardware.

Exercises include joint tactical groups attempting to free hostages from inside official buildings; search for and disposal of explosives; and indoor and outdoor radiation, chemical and biological reconnaissance.

This should be interpreted as a direct interaction between SCO practices and ASEAN, complementing the deepening trade interaction between the Eurasia Economic Union and ASEAN.

These three developments illustrate how Russia is involved in a large spectrum from the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf to Southeast Asia.

But the key element remains the Russia-Iran alliance, which must be interpreted as a key node of the massive, 21st century Eurasia integration project.

What Russian National Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev said at the recent, historic trilateral alongside White House national security adviser John Bolton and Israeli National Security Council Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat in Jerusalem should be unmistakable:

“Iran has always been and remains our ally and partner, with which we are consistently developing relations both on a bilateral basis and within multilateral formats.”

This lays to rest endless, baseless speculation that Moscow is “betraying” Tehran on multiple fronts, from the all-out economic war unleashed by the Donald Trump administration to the resolution of the Syrian tragedy.

To Nur-Sultan

And that leads to the continuation of the Astana process on Syria. Moscow, Tehran and Ankara will hold a new trilateral in Nur-Sultan, the Kazakh capital, possibly on the hugely significant date of September 11, according to diplomatic sources.

What’s really important about this new phase of the Astana process, though, is the establishment of the Syrian Constitutional Committee. This had been agreed way back in January 2018 in Sochi: a committee – including representatives of the government, opposition and civil society – capable of working out Syria’s new constitution, with each group holding one-third of the seats.

The only possible viable solution to the tragedy that is Syria’s nasty, rolling proxy war will be found by Russia, Iran and Turkey. That includes the Russia-Iran alliance. And it includes and expands Russia’s vision of Persian Gulf security, while hinting at an expanded SCO in Southwest Asia, acting as a pan-Asian peacemaking mechanism and serious counterpart to NATO.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on Asia Times.

Featured image is from en.kremlin.ru

US-led War of Terror Against Syria, Attrition Terrorism Phase

SN

July 22, 2019

phosphate train attack

US/EU supported terrorists attacked phosphate train in Homs, latest crime in terrorist attrition. Credit: SANA

The US-led war of terror against Syria continues its most recent attacks via attrition terrorism, the brutal form of slow genocide against the Syrian citizenry. Yesterday, NATO countries beloved ‘armed moderates’ attacked a phosphate freight train in eastern Homs.

The phosphate freight train in the eastern Homs countryside was attacked 21 July by a sabotage terrorist, which led to the towing of the locomotive, the passenger car, the calibration truck, the phosphate tanks, the fire in the locomotive, the train crew were injured and the necessary treatment and treatment provided. The Ministry of Transport said in a statement received by SANA copy that terrorists infiltrated the site of the railway between the positions of the gap and insight and planted an explosive device on the train line next to the phosphate mines in the region of Khnevis in the eastern Homs. The ministry indicated that its technical workshops have begun work to remove the damage caused by the terrorist attack, repair the railway and resume transport operations.

As the sons and daughters of Syrians — the Syrian Arab Army — continue to make military gains to cleanse every inch of the Republic from foreign-owned savages, attrition terrorism has seen a massive spike, in recent weeks.

In less than one month, oil and gas pipelines have been sabotaged around the country:

  • 22 June, undersea pipelines from tankers to the Baniyas Refinery were cut. Though Syrian engineers and technicians were able to quickly make repairs, oil pollution traveled 26km. It is noteworthy that MSM, UN, and ecology activists were all mute over this near disaster, but that NATO-media came to life to cheer the English royal thugs piracy against an Iranian tanker that was suspected of carrying crude to the SAR (warmongering media now screeching that the EU is screeching about a Brit tanker boarded by the government of Iran, in compliance with international law). Empire media also remains mute over the economic terrorism euphemistically called ‘sanctions‘ imposed against the Syrian people.
  • 14 July, NATO and Gulfie armed savages engaged in attrition terrorism, sabotaging the al Shaer Gas pipeline in Homs, which was almost immediately repaired.

Though the warmonger media of NATO countries have ignored the recent spike in attrition terrorism against Syria’s essential infrastructure, they have continued to pimp out emotional war porn, breaching Nuremberg Principle VI, crimes against humanity: On 11 July, Channel 4 ran a report that could fit into an insanity screenwriting genre.

AFP again is demanding its readers engage in Hollywood suspension of disbelief; while ignoring the atrocities against Syria, today it shamelessly runs another photo, one of an ongoing series of miracles in the lives of the stethoscope-less, CPR-less, spinal precautions-less death squad fake paramedics.

Here we have yet another photo of man ‘rescued from the rubble.’ As with every other similar photograph, this man has no crushing injuries — which would be expected if a bombed building fell on him. He is fully ambulatory and is able to move all extremities. He has nicely painted the shade of Helmets Gray Rubble, and his hair was coiffed before having been painted.

Another miraculous Zombie Man rescue. No crushing injuries. Fully ambulatory.
This absurdity — or another in ongoing miracles — is not quite as ludicrous as other Helmets Productions, shown here.

Attrition terrorism is not limited to the wanton, criminal destruction of essential infrastructure. Attrition terrorism includes ‘brain drain’ assassinations; in the early days, when all of al Qaeda in Syria was FSA, these ‘moderates’ murdered professors, physicians, and heads of hospitals, while NATO media remained silent. Attrition terrorism includes trying to destroy joy, as was attempted with the terror bombing of the Damascus Fair in 2017, and more recently, in the mortar attacks on Aleppo, as the city celebrates its rebuilding, creation of a mini-renaissance.

syria

Syria’s President, Dr. Bashar al Assad, #EveryInch

Related:

From January, Syria to Provide Crimea with Phosphate & Other Goods

Related Videos

Related News

%d bloggers like this: