The situation between China-India and with India-Pakistan is now into an extremely sensitive zone as there is a report for the first time from the Indian army, though through a retired Brigadier, that ‘Indian army fully geared to fight full-fledged war in eastern Ladakh even in winters’, in Times of India on September 16, 20201 , (Retd) Brig Hemant Mahajan has said that the ‘altitudes in Ladakh range from high to super high altitude and there is a lot of snowfall-up to 40 feet after November , coupled with this temperature dipping down to minus 30 to 40 degrees Celsius. But despite this the most encouraging part for India is that the Indian soldiers have a experience of winter warfare’. In this scenario a news has arrived which may seem to be only a spark but might turn out to be fire, in this already volatile situation, as it is learnt that one Indian soldier has been killed and two were injured as Pakistan troops opened fire at Kashmir border. The report from SputnikNews 2 on September 16, 2020, tells that, ‘India continues to face a two-front threat on its border, with tensions intensifying with China on the Line of Actual Control and with Pakistan at the Line of Control in contested Jammu and Kashmir. This year has seen the highest number of Pakistani ceasefire violations in 17 years, India alleges, claiming there have been 3,186 such incidents. An Indian army soldier was killed and two others were injured after Pakistani troops fired upon Indian forces along the Line of Control (LoC) in the Rajouri district of Jammu and Kashmir’.
In what may be called as a part of psych warfare, China has started to play Punjabi songs by putting up loud-speakers at Ladakh borders, which of course it had done during the 1962-war with India too. The Hindustan Times on September 17, 2020 report says, ‘While the Indian Army was not amused by Chinese military tactics, the military commanders rolled up in mirth after PLA troops on Finger 4 ( in Ladakh) starting belting out Punjabi numbers, and also chaste Hindi statements, to soften up the adversary into lowering their guard on the fiercely contested mountainous spur. If the north bank of Pangong Tso ( in Ladakh) was jiving to Punjabi songs on PLA loudspeakers, a battery of loudspeakers were deployed by the Red Army at their Moldo Garrison in Chushul sector to remind the Indian troops of, what they claim, is the folly of their political masters. On the southern banks of Pangong Tso, the Chinese loudspeakers told Indian troops in chaste Hindi about the futility of being deployed at these heights in winter season on the whims and fancies of Indian politicians back in Delhi. The whole idea of PLA is to pull down the morale of Indian troops and create dissatisfaction among the soldiers that they do not always get hot steaming meals and logistics. A snowy winter also lies ahead’. The Indian army surely would not be cowed down by such tactics but the Chinese effort to kindle the Khalistan sentiment amongst the Sikhs inside the Indian army may not be ruled-out.
It would be alarming to know that now there is a growing trend in the incidents of firing between the Indian and Chinese sides as Times of India 4 on September 16, 2020 has informed that India and China had at least three firing incidents in the last 20 days over the ongoing territorial dispute. The first happened on August 29/30, 2020 at Pangong Tso, the second on September 7, 2020 at Mukhpuri, and the third happened on September 8, 2020 in which 100 rounds of fire ‘each’ 5 were exchanged . India too, as a way to meet the Chinese have started to put into for the long winters ahead as WIONews.Com 6 on September 16, 2020 has reported that ‘Meanwhile, the Indian army is (also) ready with its operational logistics readiness for a prolonged standoff as winters set in. The Indian army has already stocked special fuel and lubricants for tanks and armoured personnel carriers, including spares for their maintenance’. Interestingly, if not that predictably this action from India has come after the Jaishankar-Wang Yi’ joint-statement’ 7 was drawn after Moscow talks on September 10, 2020.
While troops are being amassed by both India and China, the Chinese foreign ministry has accused India to have violated agreements made to maintain tranquility on the borders, which is nothing but an effort by China to again engage in a blame-game against India. The Hindustan Times on September 16, 2020 8 , has reported that ‘China claimed on Wednesday that it has been honouring agreements signed with India and is committed to maintaining peace in border areas, a day after defence minister Rajnath Singh said Beijing is not respecting the customary alignment of the boundary. Responding to Singh’s statement, the Chinese foreign ministry again blamed New Delhi for the tensions, saying it is India which has breached agreements made to maintain tranquility along the disputed boundary.“For the Chinese side, we have been honouring the agreements signed between China and India. We are committed to peace and stability in the border area,” foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said when asked to comment on Singh’s statement. “We are committed to our sovereignty and territorial integrity. But China is not to blame for the current situation. It is the Indian side that has breached the agreements, first trespassed the territory first and fired shots to threaten the safety of the Chinese border troops first,” Wang said at the regular ministry briefing. India’s external affairs ministry spokesperson Anurag Srivastava clearly (also) spelt out (that) the Indian government’s position on the disengagement process earlier, saying the LAC “must be strictly respected and observed as this is the basis for peace and tranquility in the border areas.”’. This posturing shows that China is just hunting for any other excuse to stay-put in Ladakh.
In this fast pace developing situations, one aspect which also deserves equal importance is the result of the virtual-meeting of national security advisors at SCO, Moscow where Pakistan Moeed Yusuf showed up a Pakistan map which included Kashmir, Junagarh etc, much to the consternation of Indian counterpart Ajit Doval 9 who chose to walk out of the meeting, as the move according to India was a blatant violation of the SCO charter. Russia, the host and chair, had tried hard to persuade Pakistan not to rake the issue but Pakistan went ahead with it. Here one question begs an answer. Did did any other nation also boycott in support of India?. The answer is no. At least Russia could have done it as India had always been with Russia in the last half a century. Why? For the simple fact that Russia now perceives India to be in complete proximity with US and Russia, perhaps, also had an immediate reason for it as India only almost a fortnight back had decided to pull-out of Kavkaz 2020 10 military exercises organised in Russia as China and Pakistan were to take part in it.
For the winter war ‘closing-in’ India is also into in its full preparatory gear, as The Hindustan Times on September 16, 2020 11 reports that India Borders Road Organisation ‘has decided to allowed Srinagar-Zoji La-Kargil Leh axis to be closed only for 45 days from past average 95 days due to snow this year and will strengthen all the bridges on Darbuk-Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) road to bear the load of tank plus truck trailer by next month. the Indian Army is rushing in supplies with the BRO ensuring that 17,580 feet high Chang La pass and 17,582 feet Khardung La on route to contested Pangong Tso is kept snow free throughout the year’ . Moreover, India has also increased the number of Bofors guns in Ladakh come from Zeenews.India.com 12 . The Russian media sources Sputniknews 13 has reported that ‘ India ramps up stockpiles in Ladakh region for the long haul to address Chinese threat’ on September 16, 2020. China from its end, through its state affiliated media outlet The Global Times on September 16, 2020 14 , has told that India is also engaged in a psychological warfare ‘ by claiming that its army is preparing for winters, ( but) neither the transportation nor the supplies of the Indian army in the glacier-covered region is as good as India claims.’
India and China are thus equally poised on a razors edge, with Pakistan to the side of China. India is surely looking beyond November 2020 when US presidential elections are over as then US would be in a better position to help India, but what merits an attention here, according to The DailyMail.co.uk, on September 16, 2020 15 that ‘China’s THIRD aircraft carrier is pictured under construction in Shanghai’s ‘warship factory’ – a 1,000ft titan which threatens the US Navy’s supremacy in the South China Sea. (This ) comes as China looks to assert its dominance in the South China Sea where the US has sailed its warships and conducted drills with allies ( India , Japan, Australia, Taiwan etc) recently in a show of strength against Beijing’s claims on the disputed waters . The 1,000 ft vessel is expected to be completed by the end of the year, and local media claim it will be armed with a new type of electromagnetic catapult capable of launching heavy fighter jets and unmanned drones’.
The world is certainly heading for a major-showdown and this time India is likely to be a part of it.
The writer is a former Uttar Pradesh State Information Commissioner. He writes on international issues.
References:
1-https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-army-fully-geared-to-fight-full-fledged-war-in-eastern-ladakh-even-in-winters-says-retired-brigadier/articleshow/78146441.cms
2-https://sputniknews.com/world/202009161080471528-indian-soldier-killed-two-injured-after-pakistani-troops-open-fire-on-kashmir-border/
3-https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/pla-bombards-indian-soldiers-with-propaganda-via-loudspeakers-tells-them-to-blame-modi/story-9JIbg3SU5T6F2WNBpefIiO.html
4-https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/three-firing-incidents-between-india-china-in-last-20-days-in-eastern-ladakh/articleshow/78144831.cms#:~:text=NEW%20DELHI%3A%20Having%2
0gone%2045,over%20the%20ongoing%20territorial%20dispute.
5-https://indianexpress.com/article/india/before-russia-pact-indian-chinese-troops-fired-100-200-rounds-on-pangong-north-bank-6597650/
6-https://www.wionews.com/india-news/after-moscow-talks-indian-army-prepares-for-long-winter-in-ladakh-327908
7-https://www.thehindu.com/news/resources/joint-press-statement-meeting-of-external-affairs-minister-s-jaishankar-with-his-chinese-counterpart-wang-yi/article32577890.ece
8-https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/china-again-engages-in-blame-game-against-india-on-border-tensions/story-QqZ1c8rAT3ZCUZeFIPsY7N.html
9-https://www.asianage.com/india/politics/160920/new-pakistan-map-ajit-doval-walks-out-of-sco-meet.html
10-https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-decides-to-pull-out-of-kavkaz-2020-military-exercise-on-russia-due-to-chinese-participation/article32475212.ece
11-https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/road-to-daulet-beg-oldi-will-allow-tank-movement-by-oct-15-as-army-prepares-for-ladakh-winter/story-2DMzLy5y1rZCyWvLWAd6tO.html
12-https://zeenews.india.com/video/india/number-of-bofors-guns-increased-in-ladakh-2310265.html
13-https://sputniknews.com/india/202009161080473670-india-ramps-up-stockpiles-in-ladakh-region-for-the-long-haul-to-address-chinese-threat-sources-say/
14-https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1201124.shtml
15-https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8739675/Chinas-aircraft-carrier-pictured-construction-Shanghais-warship-factory.html
September 17. Central Criminal Court, London.
The extradition trial of Julian Assange at the Old Bailey struck similar notes to the previous day’s proceedings: the documentary work and practise of WikiLeaks, the method of redactions, and the legacy of exposing war crimes. In the afternoon, the legal teams returned to well combed themes: testimony on the politicised nature of the Assange prosecution, and the dangers posed by the extra-territorial application of the Extradition Act of 1917 to publishing.
Assange the discerning publisher (for the defence) or reckless discloser (for the prosecution) were recurrent features. This time, it was John Sloboda, co-founder of the British NGO, Iraq Body Count, who took the stand. IBC had its origins in a noble sentiment: to give “dignity to the memory of those killed.” To know how loved ones perished sates a “fundamental human need”, and aids “processes of truth, justice, and reconciliation.” The outfit “maintains the world’s largest public database of violent civilian deaths since the 2003 invasion, as well as a separate running total which includes combatants.”
Central to Sloboda’s testimony was the importance of the Iraq War Logs, released in October 2010. As IBC puts it, the logs did not constitute the first release of US military data on Iraqi casualties but were pioneering, making it “possible to examine such data and to compare and combine it with other sources in a way that adds appreciably to public knowledge.” The compilation of 400,000 Significant Activity reports put together by the US Army comprised, in Sloboda’s words, “the single largest contribution to public knowledge about civilian casualties in Iraq.” They were, he told the court, “a very meticulous record of military patrols in streets in every area of Iraq, noting and documenting what they saw.” Some 15,000 previously unknown civilian deaths were duly identified.
In terms of collaboration, IBC approached WikiLeaks in the aftermath of publishing the Afghan War Diary. An invitation from Assange to join a media consortium including The Guardian, Der Spiegel and The New York Times followed. “It was impressed on us from our early encounters with Julian Assange that the aim was a very stringent redaction of documents to ensure that no information damaging to individuals was present.”
The redaction of the logs was part of a “painstaking process” that took “weeks”. Given the physical impossibility of manually redacting 400,000 documents in timely fashion, “The call was out to find a method that would be effective and would not take forever.” Sloboda made mention of a computer program developed by a colleague, one that would remove names from the documents. “It was a process of writing the software, testing it on logs, finding bugs, and running it again until the process was completed.”
The publication release was delayed, as the software in question “was not ready by the original planned publication date”. Modifications were also affected in terms of how thoroughly redaction might take place of “different categories of information”: the removal of architectural features (mosques, for instance), or expertise or professions of individuals.
Pressure was placed on WikiLeaks by the other media partners to publish. Their contribution to the redaction process had been sparse and manual: a mere sampling. Assange held firm against such impatience: redactions had to take place systematically; “the entire database,” recalled Sloboda, was “to be released together.” If anything, the final product was one of overcautious sifting, one overly pruned to prevent any dangers.
For all that, Sloboda insisted in his witness statement that a decade on, the Iraq War Logs “remain the only source of information regarding many thousands of violent civilian deaths in Iraq between 2004 and 2009.” The position of IBC was simple: “civilian casualty data should always be made public.” In doing so, no harm hard occurred to a single individual, despite repeated assertions by the US government to the contrary, not least because of the thorough redaction process. “It could well be argued, therefore, that by making this information public, [Chelsea] Manning and Assange were carrying out a duty on behalf of the victims and the public at large that the US government was failing to carry out.”
Joel Smith QC for the prosecution duly probed Sloboda on his experience in the field of classifying or declassifying documents, and whether he had earned his stripes dealing with corroborating sources in an oppressive regime. Such questioning had a simple purpose: to anathemise the civilian or journalist publisher of documents best left to agents and thumbing bureaucrats. Had Sloboda and staff at the IBC been appropriately vetted? “We paid a visit to the offices of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and were asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement with the then director Iain Overton. I don’t remember any vetting process.”
Sloboda, in his written submission, conceded that the previous publications by WikiLeaks, in particular the Afghan War Diary, came with its host of challenges, a “steep learning curve for all of those concerned.” To Smith’s questioning, he revealed that “there was a sense there needed to be a better process in the next round”, the redaction process having not quite been up to scratch.
Another line of the prosecution’s inquiry was the accuracy of the redaction. Was there human agency at any time in reviewing the war logs to avoid any “jigsaw risk” enabling the identification of individuals? Checking did take place, answered Sloboda, “but no human could go through them all.”
Smith, as with other prosecutors, persevered with the Assange as ruthless motif, this time asking if Sloboda was aware of comments allegedly made at the Frontline Club for journalists. The transcript of the event supposedly has the publisher claiming that WikiLeaks nursed no obligation to protect sources in leaked documents except in cases of unjust reprisal. “Today is the first time that I have read the transcript.” Sloboda could “remember nothing like that in our conversations about the Iraq logs.”
The possibility that Iraqi lives were probably put at risk was aired, with Smith reading a witness statement from assistant US attorney Kellen S. Dwyer that the Iraq War Logs had named local Iraqis who had been informants for the US military. (Dwyer’s competence might be gauged by the “cut and paste” mistake he made in revealing that Assange had been charged under seal.) To this unprovable assertion or assessment (qualifying risk and harm), Sloboda expressed surprise; if the reference was to “the heavily redacted logs published in October 2010, this is the first time I have heard of it.”
Human rights attorney and historian Carey Shenkman followed to testify via videolink. Shenkman, a keen student of the historical and often invidious use of the Espionage Act, was in the employ of the late and formidable Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Shenkman’s written testimony is withering of the statute now being used with such relish against Assange.
Much said by Shenkman would be familiar to those even mildly acquainted with that period of executive overreach. It arose from “one of the most politically repressive” times in US history, a nasty product of the Woodrow Wilson administration’s fondness of targeting dissidents. “During World War I, federal prosecutors considered the mere circulation of anti-war materials a violation of the law. Nearly 2,500 individuals were prosecuted under the Act on account of their dissenting opposition to US entry into the war.” Among them were such notables as William “Big Bill” Haywood of the International Workers of the World, film producer Robert Goldstein and, with much disgrace, Eugene Debs, presidential candidate for the Socialist Party.
The word “espionage”, he explained to Judge Vanessa Baraitser, was a misnomer. “Although the law allowed for the prosecution of spies, the conduct it prescribed went well beyond spying.” The Act became the primary “tool for what President Wilson dubbed his administration’s ‘firm hand of stern repression’ against opposition to US participation in the war.”
As Shenkman noted in his statement to the court, the Act targeted spying for foreign enemies in wartime and was intended to address “such matters as US control of arm shipments and its ports”. But it also “reflected the government’s desire to control information and public opinion regarding the war effort.”
Its broadness lies in how it criminalises information: not merely “national security information” but all material falling under the umbrella of “national defence” information. Shenkman has previously argued that public interest defences focused on the positive outcomes of disclosures be given to whistleblowers and hacktivists. But for the First Amendment advocate, the Espionage Act remains fiendishly controversial when it comes to the press, the reason, he testified, why there was never “an indictment of a US publisher under the law for the publication of secrets. Accordingly, there has never been an extraterritorial indictment of a non-US publisher under the Act.”
The idea of prosecuting publishers involving grand juries had been flirted with in some cases, but never seen through. Shenkman offered a few highlights. The Chicago Tribune faced the possibility in 1942 when it published secrets after the Battle of Midway. The effort crumbled when the prosecutor in that case, William Mitchell, expressed doubts that the Espionage Act extended to newspapers. The Truman administration had also tentatively tested these waters, arresting three journalists and three government sources for conspiracy to violate the Act. No indictments followed, though it emerged that political pressure had been brought to bear on the Justice Department from “multiple factions within the Truman administration.” An uproar led to a jettisoning of the case and the imposition of small fines.
Previous examples are also noted in Shenkman’s court submission, including the threatened prosecutions of Seymour Hersh during the Ford administration, and James Bamford in 1981. Dick Cheney, future dark puppeteer of the George W. Bush administration, felt it would be “a public relations disaster” to target Hersh.
According to Shenkman, a chilling change in the winds took place during the Obama administration, if only briefly. Fox News journalist James Rosen had been named as an “aider, abettor, and co-conspirator” in a Justice Department case against Stephen Kim, a State Department employee. The effort stalled and Eric Holder’s remarks on resigning as Attorney General in 2014 spoke of deep regret that Rosen had ever been named. Journalists felt relief.
Then came the Assange indictment. “I never thought based on history we’d see an indictment that looked like this.” It was part of the Trump administration’s desire “to escalate prosecutions as well as ‘jailing journalists who publish classified information.’ The Espionage Act’s breath provides such a means.”
Prosecutor Claire Dobbin was blunter than her colleague, preoccupied with attacking Shenkman’s credibility for having worked with Ratner when representing Assange. Little time was spent on the substance of Shenkman’s submission; instead, the prosecution sought to convince the witness that the case against Assange would be best heard on US soil.
What mattered to Dobbin was taking the politics out of the prosecution. Surely, she put to Shenkman, he could still believe in 2015 that the US would bring charges against Assange. The less than subtle insinuation here is that a refusal to do so under the Obama administration was merely a lull rather than an abandonment of interest. “[O]ftentimes,” replied Shenkman, “these things are left to simmer, but ultimately, an indictment was not brought.” Had President Barack Obama and Attorney General Holder wished to pursue Assange, they would have surely shown a measure of eagerness to do so.
More could be said about the politicisation thesis: the singular use of the Espionage Act, the framing of the charges, and the timing of the indictment, all pointing to “a highly politicized prosecution.”
Prosecutorial tactics switched to hair splitting. What constituted the stealing of national security and national defence information? Would that be covered by the First Amendment? Depends, countered Shenkman, reminding Dobbin of the recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in United States v Moalin accepting the merit of Edward Snowden’s disclosures on unwarranted surveillance by the National Security Agency, despite deriving from an instance of theft.
There was a divergence of views on the issue of “hacking” as well. “Are you saying that hacking government databases is protected under the First Amendment?” shot Dobbin. Again, more clarity was needed, suggested Shenkman. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, for instance, makes no reference to the term. Nuance is required: “crack a password’ and “hack a computer” have “scary” connotations; in other instances there would be “ways the First Amendment could be relevant.”
Given such disagreement and lack of clarity of terms, Dobbin pushed Shenkman to agree that a US court would be the most appropriate body to determine the issue. “No,” came the emphatic answer. The way the indictment had been drafted was political. The prosecution had, effectively, dithered.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com
Since mid-August of this year, there has been an increase in the number of Iranian and Azerbaijani reports celebrating the continued warming of relations between these neighboring states. Of particular interest is the near-completion of a synchronized power grid between Iran, Azerbaijan, and Russia. Synchronization is a requirement for buying and selling electrical power and boosting strategic cooperation between these states. This sharing of electrical power systems has been a long-term project but should be operational within months.
Bilateral trade between Iran and Azerbaijan has steadily increased over the past several years. The following chart shows Azerbaijani imports from Iran. The projection for 2020 was just under $700M but moderated by the COVID-19 pandemic. “Iran’s trade with Azerbaijan totaled $422.68 million during January-October 2019 to register a 30.7% growth compared with the corresponding period of 2018.”
Bilateral cooperation between Iran and Azerbaijan goes beyond simple trade figures. Within a year of announcing the expansion of Iranian Khodro car manufacturing in Azerbaijan, an Azerbaijan version of the Iranian model, Dena, was on display targeting the Russian market.
Less than a year ago, “As many as six memoranda of understanding have been signed between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan in a bid to boost technological cooperation between the knowledge-based companies of the two sides.” This cooperation may be strategic for Azerbaijan, for it can learn from Iranian high-technology military manufacturing and cybersecurity expertise.
Spring of 2019 witnessed the opening of the latest north-south railway line linking Iran and Azerbaijan. “One of the very valuable instances of national and regional cooperation between the two countries is the finalization of the South-North Rail project, linking through to Astara, that we hope will further deepen our relations,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said in a meeting with Azerbaijan’s economic minister Shahin Mustafayev in Tehran on March 6, according to the president’s official website.”
Last year, talks began between Azerbaijan and Iran for establishing a joint industrial zone. This effort continues, but the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic has slowed its implementation. This follows similar Iranian-Georgian and Iranian-Armenian initiatives. In a rather challenging goal, the Iranian ambassador to Azerbaijan announced last year that a short term goal in trade turnover between Iran and Azerbaijan is $2B, with an eventual turnover of $5B. The article states, “Iran’s investment in Azerbaijan reached $3.1 billion. There are more than 700 companies with Iranian investments in various sectors in Azerbaijan. The functioning of the Intergovernmental Joint Commission gives a special impetus to the development of relations.” The article also notes, “Azerbaijan and Iran share common values, history and traditions that bound them.”
Just a few days ago, the Islamic Republic News Agency wrote in a September 14 piece entitled, Iran, Azerbaijan see prospects of bilateral ties as bright, growing, “We must strive to strengthen good, brotherly and friendly relations between the people and the government in line with the will of our leaders,” quoting Azerbaijan’s Minister of Transport, Communications and High Technologies of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ramin Guluzade. These announcements are bilateral and not wishful thinking by officials from either side. On September 15, Azernews announced that Azerbaijan, Iran to build new highway bridge over border river.
Relations between Iran and Azerbaijan are complicated because of multiple competing interests. In the short-term, Azerbaijan may be looking for an ally in its dispute with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. However, Iran has exercised even-handed restraint in this dispute and has cordial relations with Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Azerbaijani and Iranian ability to deepen cooperation is commendable considering lingering accusations about Azerbaijan being a staging ground for covert operations against and intelligence gathering on Iran. Iran is very aware of these activities and perhaps is engaged in reciprocal actions in Azerbaijan. One of several reasons why Azerbaijan does not have an embassy in Israel is due to Iranian objection.
The ultimate status of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is unknown. This agreement on the Iranian nuclear program was signed in mid-2015, between Iran and China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States, Germany, and the EU, easing international sanctions on Iran in exchange for a pullback in Iran’s efforts to enrich uranium. The United States unilaterally withdrew from this agreement in 2018. If there is a new US administration in January and a reinvigorated JCPOA, one would expect an abrupt expansion in Iranian-Azerbaijani trade. If not, Azerbaijani-Iranian relations should continue warming and expanding.
David Davidian Lecturer at the American University of Armenia. He has spent over a decade in technical intelligence analysis at major high technology firms. Yerevan, Armenia).
Originally published in World Geostrategic Insights.
SIGN UP FOR COUNTERCURRENTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
Paramilitary groups continued to pose by far the biggest threat to Colombia’s community leaders and human rights defenders last year, says a newly released report.
In its annual report, Somos Defensores (SD), a human rights organization, registered a drop in assassinations of social leaders from 155 in 2018 to 124 in 2019, but an increase in death threats that went from 583 in 2018 to 628 last year.
Whether the drop in assassinations maintains is uncertain, according to the SD, which registered an increase in killings in the second half of the year.
The figures show that during 2019 the assassinations against leaders in Colombia reduced compared to 2018. However, in the second half of 2019, a higher number of these acts of aggression were registered. Just counting the months of August, September, October and December there are a total of 56 cases, which indicates that only in those months 45% of the murders of the year were concentrated.
Of all the 844 registered acts of aggression, 47% were carried out by paramilitary groups that were supposed to have demobilized under former President Alvaro Uribe between 2003 and 2006, but have continued sowing terror ever since.
Most of the “unknown” perpetrators were identified as unidentifiable hooded men whose aggression mainly took place in areas where there are conflicts about land, particularly in the southern Cauca province.
Indigenous leaders are the main victims
Indigenous leaders continued to be the main victim of aggression, according to the SD.
Of the 835 registered victims, 271 played a leading role in their indigenous community.
Another 188 were common community leaders and 128 were human rights defenders.
Cauca, which is largely inhabited by indigenous peoples and home to multiple illegal armed groups, continued to be by far the most violent for social leader, albeit less than last year.
In the northwestern Antioquia province and the northeastern Arauca province, the violence saw explosive increases, according to the SD.
Constant failure of the administration
The ongoing violence against social leaders proves the constant failure of the administration of President Ivan Duque to effectively curb the violence since the far-right president took office in 2018.
Instead of implementing the peace process, and in particular the National Committee for Security Guarantees that seeks the development of public policy to dismantle the paramilitary structure, the president has proposed a series of actions, of which none had any effect.
Defense minister leaves evidence of orchestrating terrorism online
Colombia’s defense minister forgot to get rid of evidence proving he personally coordinated the Bogota Massacre in which police murdered seven people and injured at least 72 on Wednesday and Thursday.
Defense Minister Carlos Holmes Trujillo said on Wednesday evening he was in charge of the security forces while police were carrying out what Bogota Mayor Claudia Lopez called “an authentic massacre.”
Evidence of state terror campaign left on social media
Evidence that far-right President Ivan Duque‘s chief of staff Diego Molano, Vice-Interior Minister Daniel Palacios, Armed Forces commander Luis Navarro and acting National Police director General Gustavo Moreno were with Trujillo during the massacre was later found online.
The defense minister was called to Congress on Saturday, but that would be the least of his worries.
The government claim that he led what Lopez called “the most serious event that has happened in Bogota since the Palace of Justice siege” of 1985 would be enough to get him and the other top officials in court.
Until Sunday morning, nobody had even bothered to delete the evidence confirming Trujillo, Navarro and Moreno were leading the two-day state terrorism campaign while Molano presumably kept the president informed.
The Bogota massacre timeline
Trujillo and the acting National Police chief arrived at the military command post before 7:38PM when they published a tweet in which Trujillo announced “the legitimate use of state force” in response to unrest in that followed the brutal killing of an unarmed man in the capital early that morning.
The National Police on a national level has been instructed to take all necessary measures, not just to protect the lives and integrity of the citizens in the face of the violent events and violence that are taking place.
Acting National Police director Gustavo Moreno
The shooting started less than an hour later, according to human rights organization Corporacion Juridica, which said Thursday it received its first reports from throughout the capital from 8:30PM onward.
Five minutes later, Bogota’s mayor Tweeted she was on her way to the Bogota Police Department “to coordinate the actions of the unified command post” led by Trujillo and warning about police brutality.
Bogota Mayor Claudia Lopez
Lopez was not able to get in touch with the defense minister until 10:20PM, she tweeted, calling on civilians not to use violence and urging the police “to adhere to the legitimate exercise of their duties.”
At 10:28PM, the Defense Ministry tweeted images, saying “Trujillo leads the United Command Post together with the military leadership and the police” as if nothing was wrong.
One minute later, Trujillo published more photos, confirming the presence of the vice-minister of the interior and Duque’s chief of staff, pretending he was not leading a state terrorism campaign.
Throughout the evening “uniformed policemen, policemen hiding their uniforms or presumed members of the police in civilian clothes” had embarked on the massacre in at least four neighborhoods, Lopez said Friday.
Inspector General Fernando Carrillo received 90 minutes of video footage “where members of the Public Force are clearly shown shooting indiscriminately in different neighborhoods of the city,” according to Lopez.
By midnight, police had murdered seven people and 68 were injured by police bullets in Bogota alone, Lopez said Friday morning.
Trujillo published another video at 1:22AM on Thursday in which the defense minister said “at the United Command Post, led by the president of the republic, we made a national assessment.”
“With the participation of the mayor of Bogota,” he had decided to militarize Bogota, Trujillo said, urging to “stop stigmatizing the police.”
Defense Minister Carlos Holmes Trujillo
Lopez said Thursday she left the police station at 1:30AM.
At 3:19AM, from home and visibly distraught, Lopez confirmed people had been murdered and that 44 police stations had been destroyed both by citizens and police.
The mayor urged to “reestablish the evident lack of confidence and legitimacy of the police and the security bodies,” calling on the president for a “structural reform” to end abuse of power.
Lopez learns about Trujillo’s terror campaign
Lopez understood her authority as police commander was being undermined on Thursday morning and that the human cost was even bigger than she was aware of just a few hours before.
At 6AM, the defense ministry reiterated the reinforcement of troops in Bogota and announced a reward for information on the murders “at the request of the mayor,” and “reiterated its support in the district administration” of Lopez.
At a press conference with the defense minister at 6:30AM, the National Police’s vice-director announced dozens of arrests, without making any reference to the state terror campaign he and Trujillo would later apologize for.
Instead, the defense minister praised the police and claimed the government had a “zero tolerance policy” for cops breaking the law “or the ignorance of institutional regulations,” also omitting to mention the terror Trujillo and the National Police allegedly had unleashed in Bogota for the second time since November.
Instead, the defense minister began implying that “politicians” were behind the violence, implicitly shifting the blame to government critics.
At that point, the Inter-American Court for Human Rights stepped in, saying it “fiercely condemned the cases of police abuse and brutality.”
Now with international support and the knowledge she was being undermined, Lopez furiously announced the police had been shooting at people indiscriminately on orders that had not come from her police department.
I was at MEBOG from 8:45pm to 1:30am coordinating the District PMU. No one gave orders to use firearms, much less indiscriminately. But we have evidence from several places where this happened. We are reconstructing facts with victims and family members
In a press conference, Lopez claimed that “confidence in the security organisms isn’t strained, it is broken. And to reestablish it amendment, apologies, and the acknowledgement of facts” will be necessary.
Meanwhile, citizen reports of police terrorizing the city kept coming in and Lopez urged Inspector General Fernando Carrillo to carry out an investigation on who had ordered the police to indiscriminately open fire on unarmed civilians.
At the same time, President Ivan Duque spoke out, reiterating his supposed “zero tolerance policy” against the police brutality he was responsible for, but didn’t seem to know about.
Half an hour later, Inspector General Fernando Carrillo rejected any possibility that the notoriously ineffective military justice system could try the police crimes committed on Wednesday, opening the possibility of the defense minister, the interior minister, Duque’s chief of staff and the military command going to prison.
Ten minutes later, the Unites Nations’s Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Association, Clement Voule, said he was “closely following the situation in Colombia” and added that “the perpetrators of the excessive use of force must be punished.”
Powerful human rights organization Dejusticia called on the Supreme Court to initiate an investigation, claiming that the National Police led by Trujillo “not only threatens the right to protest, but represents a risk to the right to life, integrity, due process, and freedom of expression, among many others.”
The Supreme Court responded with a ruling in which it assumed the investigation into the murder of a student in November’s protests, removing the case from the notoriously ineffective military justice system.
Trujillo understands prison is looming
Trujillo has supported state terrorism since the 1990’s, but was now suddenly looking at the possibility of being taken to court on eight homicide charges.
The minister freaked out and called on “good Colombians,” i.e. those obedient to the government, for support and oppose the “death and vandalism of the instigators calling to disobey and destroy.”
Residents of cities across Colombia began taking to the street, but in rejection of Trujillo and the government.
Medellin Mayor Daniel Quintero called for the active, but non-violent resistance of abuse of force.
The commander of an anti-riot unit in Medellin told Colombia Reports that the mayor had given the order not to intervene and only defend property in cases of vandalism.
Petro called on his supporters throughout the country to “peacefully take the streets” and register any abuse of force.
Trujillo rushed back to his command post where he arrived before 8PM for another night of terror.
Duque’s boss, Former President Alvaro Uribe, called for a stage of siege but was told no alleged terrorist supporter was in charge of security in Colombia.
Instead, the opposition began reporting violent repression and began calling for the resignation of Trujillo, who had completely lost control unlike Bogota’s mayor, who was slowly retaking control over her police force.
At 10PM, the UN’s human rights office also raised its voice, claiming human rights leaders in Bogota and Villavicencio had been arrested while protests were reported throughout the country.
Duque, who had tried not to get involved in Trujillo’s alleged terrorism activities, took control as the terrorism plot was getting international attention and the president’s closest aides were on their way to prison.
Friday: Destruction of Duque
While reports on police repression were piling up, Petro stepped up the pressure at 11:30PM and called to “reestablish democracy in Bogota” and again at 0:30AM on Friday, claiming that only the resignation of the entire leadership of the National Police would allow to reestablish legitimacy.
Non-violence will now be very important now. The police leadership may no longer continue and Duque must understand this.
Opposition Senator Gustavo Petro
At 8AM, Petro claimed “the Duque regime no longer fits in a democracy,” called for intensified marches and accused Duque of trying to “stage a coup” against Bogota’s mayor.
They want a lethal body against protest that will remain in impunity because they know that the people will take to the streets.
Lopez, who reported eight injured residents due to police shootings, also had enough and openly questioned who her police force obeys. Her city council was mobilizing in the mayor’s support and all political forces began uniting in opposition of the president.
They disobeyed express and public instructions from the Mayor’s Office, so who do they obey? Justice, action and reform are urgently needed!
Trujillo broke and asked forgiveness for “any violation of the law” by the National Police at 10:22AM, announcing an internal investigation for the “alleged abuse of authority and homicide” in a desperate attempt to evade justice.
Lopez was not having any of it and said the president agreed to talk and see the bulk of evidence she had gathered of state terrorism which she would surrender to the Inspector General at 5PM.
The Colombian Commission of Jurists, which had been endorsed by the UN on Thursday, wasn’t having any of it either and demanded the Inspector General immediately remove the defense minister from his post while Duque was talking to Lopez.
To add insult to injury, opposition Senator Ivan Cepeda and 12 other NGO’s announced criminal charges against Trujillo and five police generals.
The take-down of Holmes and the National Police was now in full force, both legally and politically.
Having received 90 minutes of evidence of police terror from Lopez, the inspector general requested video footage that would prove alleged police abuse in at least seven other cities.
Moreno additionally had to provide Carrillo with an inventory of all the ammunition, firearms and explosives used on Wednesday and Thursday.
Duque desperately tried to seek scapegoats in an evening address to the country. The president announced the arrest of 140 people allegedly involved in vandalism, including “foreigners” who would be deported.
The president was roasted on social media and NGO’s and the opposition began preparing to bring the state terrorists who forgot to get rid of the evidence to justice.
Colombia kicks off human rights day with brutal police killing
President Ivan Duque hadn’t even announced he would be commemorating Colombia’s human rights day on Wednesday when Bogota police set the tone with the brutal killing of an unarmed man.
By the time Colombia’s citizens woke up for, their “happy human rights day” consisted of a video of the two Bogota policemen murdering the 46-year-old Javier Ordoñez, an attorney and father of two, that had hit the headlines.
Acting Bogota police commander Colonel Alexander Amaya said the cops had been suspended and he had ordered an investigation into why the cops had murdered an unarmed civilian.
Bogota Mayor Claudia Lopez announced she would provide judicial assistance for the victim’s family and a “structural reform that prevent and punishes police brutality.
Duque remained quiet. His appearance at the annual commemoration of human rights was already controversial as the president announced he would attend the event with his human rights adviser Nancy Patricia Gutierrez, who — of all things — is facing a criminal investigation for using terrorism to get into Congress in 2006.
The increasingly authoritarian Duque was already under severe criticism for using extreme violence to crack down on anti-government protests in November last year, because the president reportedly considered citizens exercising their constitutional right an act of insurgency.
According to the president, he would meet with “will participate in a conversation with young people about human rights, in order to hear their perspectives and reflections.”
Press will not be allowed to attend the event due to “biosafety protocols,”coincidentally preventing the pesky journalists asking inconvenient questions about the list of human rights violations that has been growing under Duque.
Widespread police brutality, the mass killing of human rights defenders and the use of the military to spy on journalists nearly forced the United Nations’ Human Rights Office to abandon Bogota last year.
Don Fitz’s new book Cuban Health Care: The Ongoing Revolution was going to press at Monthly Review in early spring, as the pandemic was ramping up, so he had just barely enough time to slip in a postscript teasingly titled, “How Che Guevara Taught Cuba to Confront COVID-19.” The postscript puts an exclamation mark on the medical history of Cuba that Fitz takes us through in the 240 compelling pages that come before. Based on that history, one would have expected Cuba to take early, decisive actions to stem the pandemic, and Fitz says that’s exactly what happened.
The government quickly converted school-uniform factories to manufacture medical masks. They sacrificed their crucial tourism industry in order to bar all non-resident travel. They locked down hotspots, ensuring that their residents were well provisioned and that medically vulnerable people were checked frequently. They did plenty of testing and contact tracing. Medical students walked through all neighborhoods regularly, checking in on residents. All of this, Fitz writes, was no more than what Cubans would have expected of their nation in a time of such danger. He adds, “The Cuban people would not tolerate the head of the country ignoring medical advice, spouting nonsensical statements, and determining policy based on what would be most profitable for corporations.” Indeed, their pandemic response is only the latest of countless ways in which the Cuban medical system has proven superior to the US system.
The medical system that Cuba’s revolutionaries inherited from the old regime—more like a non-system—was a mess. Millions of Cubans, disproportionately rural and Black, has no access to health care at all. In the 1960s, the government began building a national system of outpatient polyclinics (policlínicos integrales) designed, in Fitz’s words, to “unify preventive and curative medicine” in communities. Each polyclinic was staffed, at a minimum, with “a general practice physician, nurse, pediatrician, OB/GYN, and social workers.” The polyclinics provided a single point of entry for each patient. They were highly successful, Fitz says, because they were established not in isolation but in the context of other developments: Cuba’s famously successful literacy campaign, land reform, improved farm incomes, improved diets, pensions, improved water supplies, schools, and housing, along with others. Having status within the national system equal to that of the country’s major hospitals, polyclinics had a high degree of independence. In the mid-1970s, the polyclinics began doing health risk assessments, incorporated specialist care, and made house calls a major part of the system. A decade later, single doctor-nurse teams began establishing small neighborhood consultarios, each tied to a polyclinic.
Internationally, Cuba’s health professionals are most well-known for their numerous, extensive missions to provide medical care and training in underserved or war-torn regions. The international work began in 1962 with a mission to Algeria, followed by other African nations, but it really ramped up with Cuba’s involvement in the Angola war that began in 1975 and dragged on into the 1980s. Fitz provides a richly detailed story of Cuban troops’ support for the Angolans’ fight against U.S.- and apartheid South Africa-supported rebels backed by South African mercenaries. The number of Cuban fighters in Angola reached a peak of 36,000 in 1976. Between 1975 and 1991, Cuba also sent more than 43,000 aid workers; among them, the number of Cuban medical workers in the country at any given time was as high as 800. Fitz relates some fascinating personal stories of doctors who served in the country, some of them for years. Cuban medical missions remained in Angola until 1991.
The Angola mission is the most celebrated, but Cuba’s service to Africa was far more widespread. Fitz list two dozen of the continent’s countries who collectively hosted tens of thousands of Cuban aid missions, primarily medical. They spanned the continent and the alphabet, from Benin to Guinea-Bissau to Mali to Uganda to Zambia. In the 1970s and 1980s, Cuban doctors also went to serve the revolutions in Nicaragua and Grenada. In the wake of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine, the Cuban government flew in 25,000 victims, mostly children, for treatment. In all, 164,000 medical professionals have served in 154 countries. Cuba provided medical teams in the wake of Hurricane Mitch, which hit Central America in 1999, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and other disasters. They assembled a team to go to the US after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, but George W. Bush rejected the offer.
Fitz relates the Cuban medical system’s long struggle with HIV/AIDS. The disease had become serious on the island by 1986, but its cause still mysterious enough that the health system began sending AIDS patients to be quarantined in a network of sanitoria previously established for patients with highly infective diseases. Most of the quarantined were soldiers returning from Africa, so there was little notice within Cuba. The United States, always on the lookout for a club to beat Castro with, denounced Cuba for abusing the human rights of gay men. In fact, the majority of infected troops were heterosexual. The quarantine was lifted in 1989, once the disease became better understood. Cuba eventually made good progress on AIDS. The medical journal The Lancet declared Cuba’s AIDS program “among the most effective in the world.” But Cuba’s enemies continued to throw out the anti-gay trope, Fitz believes, “to distract attention from the fact that Cuba had implemented a program to combat HIV/AIDS that was better than most countries’, and, in particular, superior to US efforts.”
Fitz discusses how the collapse of the Soviet Union—which, combined with the continuing US embargo, ushered in the severe economic stresses of Cuba’s “Special Period” —placed an unprecedented burden on the superior health-care system the country had built up over three decades. The most serious health problems were a deeply inadequate food supply and shortages of drugs and medical equipment. Despite fiscal strains, writes Fitz, no hospitals were closed during the Special Period, and all regions, even in the countryside, had access to medical care. He also presents a table showing that infant mortality continued its longstanding, steady decrease through the hard years of the 1990s, and that since 2000, Cuba’s infant mortality rate has been significantly lower than that of the United States. Also in this period, the country’s huge increase in urban and small-scale food production was widely celebrated.
Over the past decade, Fitz has done much on-the-ground reporting on Cuba’s medical education system, led by its Latin American School of medicine (ELAM), and here he provides a detailed history of the system and its achievements, enlivened by extensive firsthand interviews with faculty and profiles of more than a dozen medical students.
A chapter comparing the US and Cuban medical systems features some eye-popping cost numbers: hospital stay, $1900 in US and $5 in Cuba; hernia surgery, $12,000 in US and $14 in Cuba; hip fracture, $14,000 in US and $72 in Cuba. In 2018, when the US was spending $8300 per person per year on medical care, Cuba was spending a little over $400. Fitz points out the reasons the US medical economy is so broken: insurance for profit, not health; overdiagnosis, overtreatment, over-prescribing of drugs, and overpricing; treatments that create problems requiring more treatment; the excessive salaries received by doctors and administrators; and excess profits going to owners and investors. The result: a health-care system that achieves worse performance than a highly effective one that costs 5 percent as much.
Finally, Fitz lists ten lessons to be drawn from the Cuban health-care experience, writing that “They form the basis of what I call the New Global Medicine.” Among those lessons are that health care need not be dependent on costly technology; doctors must live in the communities where they work; the medical system must be evolving and unique to each community; international medical aid must be adapted to the political climate of the host country; doctors must put healing above personal wealth; and “the new global medicine is a microcosm of how a few thousand revolutionaries can change the world.”
As the question of how to fix the US health care system resurges in the coming year, before the Covid-19 has yet passed and before new medical emergencies arise, Cuban Health Care: The Ongoing Revolution should be read as widely as possible—by lawmakers and their staffs, yes, but more importantly, by those of us who elect those lawmakers.
Stan Cox is a member of the editorial board of Green Social Thought , where this review was first published, and author of ‘The Green New Deal and Beyond’ (City Lights, 2020)
SIGN UP FOR COUNTERCURRENTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
Train of thought
To start with, here are some recent quotations that weigh heavily on the negative aspects of the US$ and its role as the global reserve currency, also known as the petrodollar.
One of the current global issues is refugees, in Europe and elsewhere:
These waves of migration – and the anti-immigrant backlash that has done so much to poison European politics – will not end while there are 37 million people displaced by these eight wars.
This will only happen when the wars themselves are brought to an end, as should have happened long ago, and the victims of the post-9/11 conflicts no longer believe that any country is better to live in than their own.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/09/15/americas-war-on-terror-is-the-true-cause-of-europes-refugee-crisis/
Patrick Cockburn focussed on Europe in the above article, but the same could well be used to describe all the provocations by the White House (present and past) in Latin America and Asia producing the same result: people who are escaping the mess made in their country by U.S.overt and covert operations creating a dangerous corrupt and violent political leadership. The result is the refugees seeking access to the U.S. to escape the same destruction of their home country.
This takes US military adventurism to its global level:
“…the truth that…the United States is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world and our society rests on keeping the poor poor and under the vicious thumbs of the rich.”
Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies – Critical and Lyrical Essays. Edward Curtin. Clarity Press, Atlanta, Georgia. 2020.
This global violence is created because it is one of the main means to attempt to control the resources and people of the world, to maintain a position of global hegemony as the racially superior “indispensable” nation. It highlights the divide between the so-called developed countries and the rest of the world, and the divide between the rich and the poor domestically in many countries. Power and money become symbiotic partners with the military.
For change to come, systemic change must occur, a change in the role of the profits to be made domestically with the US$ and a change in the role in its power to control foreign affairs through its many affiliated transnational institutions.
“The underlying profiteering, to which we draw attention throughout this book, must be addressed if any real change or progress is to be made.”
Understanding the War Industry. Christian Sorensen.
Clarity Press, Atlanta, Georgia. 2020.
But underlying the military strength of the U.S. and its control of the US$ along with those institutions is a position of weakness:
The petrodollar and a strong military has so far prevented the dollar from total destruction in the last 50 years.
The reasoning behind Greyerz’s position is the last century’s decline in the value of the dollar, now culminating in massive money printing to sustain the economy through the accumulation of massive unpayable debt.
Historical note
Throughout its history the U.S. has used the military and the manipulation of the US$ in order to control its access to resources. It becomes a circular symbiotic relationship between oil, the dollar and the military establishment (the latter inclusive of politics and corporations). Without any standard other than the necessary purchasing of goods on the international market with the US$, the military was and remains necessary to support its dominance.
That accounts for the military and financial support given to Saudi Arabia and Israel. All the covert and overt operations in all of Latin America in order to bust any successful social democratic movement are there to support the US$ and international corporations extracting the wealth of any given country. Libya was getting ready to create a gold backed African currency, and also having lots of oil resources, became a prime target for U.S. intervention on a falsely concocted “right to protect” argument, now thoroughly discredited. Iraq also wanted to leave the US$ system and was against U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East centered on Israel and oil. Syria, Iran, and Venezuela are current targets of the U.S. for the same factors.
In the meantime the U.S. had to find a way to finance it all – and it became simply a matter of the Federal Reserve (a private banking consortium in spite of its name) printing more and more dollars. It is more complex than that but the bottom line is the use of the printing press – or more correctly now the computer keyboard – to create more and more US$.
Current events and inflation
Most current events can be analyzed in a similar manner by looking at the US$ and the U.S. military and the growing disparities and poverty domestically in the U.S.
Without reviewing all those current events, it comes down to the position where the U.S. has incurred huge debts that cannot possibly be paid off through taxation or wealth creation at home. Russia and China have created and are expanding alternate systems to the U.S. institutions in order to bypass the necessity of using the US$ – many other nations are signing up to these systems, wanting to be part of the new Belt and Road Initiative across Eurasia.
The largest industrial factor in the U.S., the largest financial support in the U.S., comes from industries related to the military: Raytheon, McDonnell-Douglas-Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics and on through many “security” corporations up to and including Facebook, Google, Microsoft and other digital corporations.
Otherwise, the U.S.economy is on the brink of disaster – or more recently, is already heading into an era of inflation that will kill the value of the dollar as both a global and domestic currency.
Yes, currently the stock market is high, but all it signifies is how much richer the already rich are becoming. Yes, unemployment is technically low (about 8 per cent as of this writing) but without all the statistical manipulations of the Bureau of Labour Statistics the real unemployment rate comes out at or above 25 per cent. Most importantly, the U.S. has created out of thin air, at the stroke of a keyboard, another 3 to 4 trillion in debt. This is added on to an already enormous debt, and is in reality an extension of all the “quantitative easing” that the government pumped into its system in the 2007-08 economic crash.
The only support many of the U.S. banks and corporations have is that of the free flow of near zero interest rate dollars created by the Federal Reserve.
The US$ triad
The first leg of the global hegemon’s triad is the military. The U.S.’ wars will not end voluntarily through a U.S. political decision: too much of their funding for re-election comes from corporations associated with the military; too many are involved in the revolving door syndrome between the military and industry; and the military corporations are widespread throughout different regions in order to present themselves as benefactors for employment and prosperity (in spite of their deadly product) making politicians susceptible to election pressures propagandized by the corporation.
Neither will a change in government from Trump to Biden change anything with foreign policy and the ongoing forever wars. Biden and the Democrats are on the same side as the Republicans when foreign military actions are considered.
The second leg of the triad is oil. It is still the main influence on global energy trade, and while some of it is now traded outside the US$ system – in particular between Russia and China, and Iran and China – the majority is still traded in US$ with the Saudis being the main supporters. That will not change anytime soon as the military will continue to spread its violence more intensely and over more regions of the world as a response to Chinese financial initiatives.
The third leg of the triad is the US$, and it is the potential and increasingly more likely fatal flaw in the system.
In spite of its military, in spite of its near control of global financial institutions (World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Bank of International Settlements, Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications – SWIFT; allowing the power of the sanctions now being forced on the international scene), the US$ is dying from inflation. Most pundits expect that to accelerate in the near future to hyperinflation to a degree experienced in Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.
This is not to argue whether it will or not, but to indicate that the results of that are both bad and good, depending on which side of the world one is situated in.
Ramifications
This is where it gets tricky as no one can really foresee when and how quickly the US$ decline will occur. But it will occur as all previous fiat currencies in history have eventually collapsed or lost their global status and the U.S. debt is so large it can never be paid off. Nor can anyone foresee what the potential effects are other than a large change in global affairs and U.S. domestic affairs.
The best scenario of a collapsing dollar will be a combination of oil being priced in other currencies, traded between countries using agreed valuations of their own currencies. The impact on the military would be enormous.
While the military would not die immediately, it would not be long before several factors would severely weaken it: pay for the personnel; pay for necessary raw materials and the disruption of global supply lines; the limitations imposed by oil, of which the U.S. economy is the largest per capita user and the U.S. military is the largest institutional user in the world.
How can one bribe another government or opposition leader if the US$ is worthless? How can U.S. businesses conduct operations when they no longer have the financial power to pay for necessary personnel, supplies, and transportation, most of which are currently paid through U.S. credit/debit systems which would no longer be of significant worth? Would other governments remain loyal after the military loses its purchasing power for people and materials? Would Israel stay on board, or would they quickly jump over to the rising power of the Eurasian markets? Would the Euro collapse along with the US$ or would saner heads somehow begin stronger associations with Russia and China out of necessity if not ideology? Whither NATO? Would the U.S. literally go nuclear?
How it will end is pure speculation. The Federal Reserve will certainly have a few more tricks up its sleeves and many more trillions of dollars to type into the system while trying to sustain the US$. The world’s problems would not instantly be solved by this as there has been too much violence and damage perpetrated by the U.S. to allow a smooth reset. Other problems, many created or exacerbated by the U.S. military-industrial-political complex – religious conflict, racial conflict, climate change and pollution, the loss of political freedom – will take a long while to sort out if the human condition will allow it.
The desired end for those facing the U.S. as a violent global hegemon will be the collapse of the US$ and the resulting collapse of the U.S. military and its ability to function overseas.
Jim Miles is an independent writer
An exact replay of history is not likely, but while specific “failed” actors leave the stage, class forces survive to enact the same drama another day. In Joachim Fest’s fine biography of Adolf Hitler, aptly titled Hitler, we learn many things never before taught in our World History classes here. To delve into it now with the needed detail from this 700+ page masterpiece would be futile for me the columnist. There is just so much to digest and comprehend about this Austrian of little education and no professional calling who became the Fuhrer. Yet, throughout the book one cannot help but realize just how much the movers and shakers of our Amerikan empire copied tactics and outright propaganda from the Hitler gang. [In fact, the Nazis also copied the Anglo-American racists a great deal, particularly their eugenicist figures, including Sir Francis Galton and Ivy League-educated “gentlemen” anglo supremacists like Madison Grant.) (1)
The use of the term Fatherland to describe Germany rings so close to post 9/11 Amerika’s choice of Homeland as in Homeland Security. Ever since 9/11 and our subsequent invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, each time there is a major sporting event they spread out the giant American flag and trot out the honor guard to sing our national anthem. The real connivance is how they always show us American GIs dressed in camouflage, as if they just came from the battlefield. Check out the Nuremberg rallies and see the torchlight parades and honor guards with their brown or black shirts and swastikas throughout. This mania to salute soldiers who had no business being sent to the Middle East to invade, kill, be killed and occupy foreign lands is sadly congruent to what transpired with Germany’s attacks and occupations of most of Europe. Yet, throughout history this is exactly what empires have done. Why should ours be any different?
Hitler was a masterful genius, who had the good fortune, after much manipulation and scheming, to become Chancellor at perhaps the eleventh hour . Fest explains in his book how the nationalist coalition (which the Nazis were part of) could have formed a legal blockade to thwart Hitler’s plans. Yet, the fear of many from Germany’s right wing and centrist political parties , and even some left of center ones like the Social Democrats ( forerunner of today’s US Democratic party ) believed, as Hitler himself stated: ” One year of Bolshevism would destroy her ( Germany).” The interesting thing is how Hitler used phrases and ideals that many of our current right wing have ( copied ? ) been using: ” Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of racial and political life.” He promised to eliminate class struggle and to restore ‘ traditions of honor’. Sound familiar? Newly appointed Chancellor Adolf Hitler, soon after his ascension, travelled around Germany giving hundreds of ” Let’s get to work ” speeches to German labor. Sadly, as with the Nazi party in the early 1930s, working stiffs here in Florida, many with not a ‘ pot to piss in’ , voted for former Governor Rick Scott ( now, sadly, Senator Rick Scott) when he ran for re-election a few years ago with his slogan ” Let’s Get to Work”.
Why are we, as a nation, in such a sinking ship? Well, the propaganda has been nearly as masterful as that of Goebbels and his crew. We are a nation , as the late Gore Vidal aptly labeled us, at Perpetual War. We spend over 50% of our federal tax revenues on the military. We invaded Iraq in 2003 so as to ‘ fight them there so they don’t come here’. Remember that? Now it is ISIL or ISIS, who , like the original mujahedeen that became Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda, Amerika financed and nurtured so as to fight one of our enemies. This writer has many acquaintances who consider themselves ‘right wing’. They sing that same song : “We’re Fighting them there so they don’t come here”. Will it ever end? We have states so broke and overloaded with needs that they now want to become legal bookmakers on sports betting. Why do you think Colorado and Washington originally allowed recreational marijuana, because they are so progressive minded? Come on, it is to raise tax revenues, and look how many other states are following suit. Of course, this writer, who believes in the use of marijuana, would rather see that then legal bookmaking or the stupid lotteries, which attract mostly low income folks who could use that money for more important needs.
So, we have a nation filled with our citizens working dead end jobs for lousy pay, living in corporate owned and operated rental housing . Of course if they are lucky, they could find a home to rent from some independent predator landlord who bought it on the cheap when it was foreclosed or sold under financial desperation. Finally, here is how the movers and shakers of this Military Industrial Empire are even shrewder than the Nazi gang. What they did, successfully too, was create and maintain a ‘Two Party, One Party ‘ system. They made sure that the two parties , as is the case in the UK, seem to be at each other’s throats… and they are on some issues. We know the Democrats will trumpet a woman’s right to choose, and gay rights, and even a more liberal immigration policy. Yet, when it comes to the meat and potato issues that the empire feeds off of, like heavy military spending, bases worldwide, WMDs to the hilt, free reign for big banks, big oil, big Pharma and all BIG BUSINESS, there is little or no difference between the two parties. Look how the Neocon led Democratic Party minions agreed with President Trump over his Cruise Missile attack deep within Syria. Look how they all ‘ drank the Kool- Aid on blaming Assad and the Russians for that ( so called ? ) chemical attack. Herr Goebbels would be so proud of that sort of propaganda as this empire eats away at our nation’s soul. If all those working stiffs out there do not finally ‘ Get it ‘ and see through the illusions and propaganda… ” Sig Heil!!!”
Philip A Farruggio is a contributing editor for The Greanville Post. He is also frequently posted on Global Research, Nation of Change, Countercurrents.org, and Off Guardian sites. He is the son and grandson of Brooklyn NYC longshoremen and a graduate of Brooklyn College, class of 1974. Since the 2000 election debacle Philip has written over 400 columns on the Military Industrial Empire and other facets of life in an upside down America. He is also host of the ‘ It’s the Empire… Stupid ‘ radio show, co produced by Chuck Gregory. Philip can be reached at paf1222@bellsouth.net.
The Afghan-Taliban and the US sponsored Ashraf Ghani government seem to be heading towards a deadlock, as very soon US, after its disastrous war with Afghan-Taliban , is slated to move out in 14-months, after its agreement with the Afghan-Taliban on February 29, 2020 1 , thus, leaving it in-between Ashraf Ghani and Afghan-Taliban to decide their future for themselves. India has been backing non Taliban governments in Afghanistan in the last two decades. However, the two factions i.e. Afghan Taliban and Ashraf Ghani, could not decide over the swapping of prisoners, and finally, after many turns and twists Ashraf Ghani relented to set free the 400 Taliban prisoners on August 14, 2020 2, comes the report from France24.com, (the move) which was considered as the final hurdle before the long-delayed peace-talks between the two warring sides could make to a start. According to the same report, ’the prisoners include some 44 insurgents of particular concern to the US and other countries for their role in high-profile attacks. Ghani warned that their release was a “danger” to the world’. After the prisoners deal the talks started at Doha, the capital of Qatar.
For the future of Afghanistan and with the world looking precariously at it, what therefore would be the core issues to be ironed-out between the two rivals are ought to be of great importance. An elaborate article on it came in TheConversation.Com on September 8, 2020 3, which throws light about the stakes involved. The article suggests that the talks have a rocky-road to success, as there hasn’t been any consensus whether Afghan-Taliban would snap their ties with Al-Qaida in the post-US-free Afghanistan and that the country would not become the safe haven for fighters after the final withdrawal of US ‘apart from differences on women’s rights, the challenge will be whether any agreement on a lasting ceasefire can be reached until political progress is made’, particularly, when US president Donald Trump is bent upon to force the agreement before his November 2020 elections. ‘It’s likely the negotiators will agree on all these broad principles – except the idea of Afghanistan as a republic. That’s because the Taliban still presents itself as an Islamic emirate forced into exile by the US invasion’ in 2001. ‘In 2020, little is known about the specifics of what the Taliban wants the future Afghan state to look like. However, the group does appear to want an inclusive, Islamic political system in which Shariah laws are enforced’ and this is where Ashraf-Ghani finds himself reluctant to give-in. There are also a three women member delegates involved in talks at Doha 4.
What however has blown the lid is the confidential-report by NATO which says that now Taliban are no more to be the rag-tag army, but on the contrary, will be full of prospects of their own financial power, hence, will not be at the mercy of US or Europe at all. An extremely important article published in RadioFreeEuropeRadioLiberty on September 16, 2020 5 has given an extensive coverage as to what all are the disclosures from inside the NATO report tell . The opening paragraph is all by itself setting the pitch for the times to come for Afghan-Taliban.
‘The Taliban’s burgeoning financial might could make the militant group immune to pressure from the international community as it negotiates a role in postwar Afghanistan, according to a confidential report commissioned by NATO and obtained by RFERL. The Taliban “has achieved, or is close to achieving, financial and military independence,” a scenario that could allow the group to renege on key commitments it has made under a U.S.-brokered peace plan aimed at ending the war, the report warns. The Taliban has expanded its financial power in recent years through increased profits from mining and exports, the report says, estimating that the group earned a staggering $1.6 billion in its last financial year (ending in March 2020). “That financial independence enables the Afghan Taliban to self-fund its insurgency without the need for support from governments or citizens of other countries,” says the report. “Unless global action is taken, the Taliban will remain a hugely wealthy organization, with a self-sustaining funding stream and outside support from regional countries,” it warns. The report was completed before the start of formal peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government that began in the Gulf state of Qatar on September 12. The article in more than 2000 words has appeared to make the world realise that perhaps a very dangerous scenario is what ‘awaits to happen’ as this time it would be the self-sufficient and self-reliant Afghan-Taliban in control of their own destiny and future.
It is learnt that both the factions have hit the stumbling block as a consensus on the implementation of Shariah, on the lines of the ‘first-four-rightful Caliphs’ or for the republic i.e. rule through democracy, has to be decided, as after all Afghan-Taliban who had raged a war for the sake of Shariah are not expected to relent on what may be called as the most essential question to them. Hence, Afghan-Taliban withdrawing on their cardinal principal does not seem to be a likely scenario. But, then the idea of going-ahead with the establishment of Islamic Emirate is also what the world is scourged about too. The on-going Qatar dialogue is the plan A, as Afghan-Taliban have made it clear that forming ‘the government’ had never been their goal but for the establishment of Islamic Emirate, and the plan B would then be an open-field i.e. a war between Afghan-Taliban and Ashraf Ghani in which Afghan-Taliban would be bludgeoning to topple the Ashraf-Ghani government. It has also come to be known that Afghan-Taliban have almost reached the outskirts of the Afghanistan capital Kabul which means almost the whole of Afghanistan is now under their control.
Ironically, the NATO report has also given a message to the Arab nations, who are all-out now to embrace Israel, that the new Afghanistan would not be a ‘remote-controlled devise’ of the outside forces, whether they be US, European nations or the Gulf-states as well as Pakistan. Afghan-Taliban have already started to expertise into extracting ‘minerals’ and putting them to export which has made them earn a living for themselves, unlike what the non-Afghan-Taliban governments had engaged into; opium harvesting and trading! Russia is already in the backdrop of Afghan-Taliban as it supported their struggle against US 6 and now China too has come forward to invest in Afghanistan in exchange of peace 7 . China will also help Afghan-Taliban extract Afghanistan minerals too apart from building the infrastructure.
It is here where India has also chipped-in as India’s concern is Kashmir. India’s external affairs minister Jaishankar attended the inaugural session of the ‘Doha talks’ on September 15, 2020, in a clear signal to have shed reluctance and engage with the emerging new dispensation in Afghanistan. ‘(While ) addressing, Jaishankar advocated for a ceasefire between warring parties in Afghanistan and sought commitment from both Afghan government and the Taliban representative that Afghan soil would not be used for anti-India activities’, towards which, on Feb 29, 2020, the peace deal-which is available in PDF form 8 , had already made clear that Afghanistan land will not be used against any other country. Afghan-Taliban are against Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) which are against Pakistan 9 , hence, even if there may be compromise between Ashraf-Ghani or an emergence of a unity-government at the most, there is a likelihood that TTP and Afghan-Taliban are to be at loggerheads. A proxy-war or a civil-war would then make Afghanistan descent further into chaos.
The situation to be precise is that Afghanistan is on a very sticky wicket. If two proverbs might come to help; let’s see which way the camel sits or which way the wind blows.
The writer is a former Uttar Pradesh State Information Commissioner. He writes on international politics.
References:
4- https://indianexpress.com/article/world/afghan-women-in-doha-talks-team-taliban-have-to-face-respect-us-6599091/
6- https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/afghan-lawmakers-russian-support-taliban-no-secret
7- https://www.ft.com/content/69110b85-bce9-45cb-a2f4-eadcd3edc6e3
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.