Archives: Articles

By Shamsul Islam

Indian PM Modi is set to inaugurate new complex of Indian Parliament on May 28 (2023) which is also the 140th birth anniversary of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar who is described as ‘great son of India’ and ‘Veer’ [gallant/fearless] by the RSS-BJP lot. Thus the new Parliament built under the direct supervision of PM Modi and his chosen few will be dedicated to Savarkar. It is a horrendous and shameful decision in many respects. Dedication to Savarkar will mean rejection of the whole idea of an egalitarian, democratic and secular India which came into being on August 15, 1947. Honouring of Savarkar would also mean dishonouring of the martyrs and participants of the Indian freedom struggle. Let us know the truth as told by Savarkar himself or contained in the archives of Hindu Mahasabha.

Savarkar’s Hatred for the Tricolour

Savarkar, like the RSS, abhorred every symbol of the Indian people’s united struggle against the British rule. In a circular issued on September 22, 1941 to be followed by the Hindu Mahasabha cadres, he declared,

“So far as the flag question is concerned, the Hindus know no flag representing Hindudom as a whole than the ‘Kundalini Kripanankit’ Mahasabha flag with the ‘Om and the Swastik’ the most ancient symbols of the Hindu race and policy coming down from age to age and honoured throughout Hindusthan…Therefore, any place or function where this Pan-Hindu flag is not honoured should be boycotted by the Hindu sanghatanists at any rate…The Charkha-Flag [before the present national flag spinning-wheel used to be at the centre of the Tricolour] in particular may very well represent a Khadi-Bhandar, but the Charkha can never symbolize and represent the spirit of the proud and ancient nation like the Hindus.”

[Bhide, A. S. (ed.), Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s Whirlwind Propaganda: Extracts from the President’s Diary of his Propagandist Tours Interviews from December 1937 to October 1941, na, Bombay, 1940, p. 470-73.]

Savarkar preceded Jinnah in propounding two-nation theory

Muslim league under MA Jinnah demanded Pakistan in March 1940. Long before it Savarkar had laid down his two-nation theory. Savarkar took over the leadership of Hindu Mahasabha [HM] in 1937. While addressing the 19th Session of Hindu Mahasabha at Ahmedabad in the same year stated:

“As it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India, several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing that India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could be welded thus for the mere wish to do so…India cannot be assumed today to be a Unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Moslems, in India.”[i]

[Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan (Collected works of Savarkar in English), Hindu Mahasabha, Pune, 1963, p. 296.]

This shameless collusion between Savarkar and Jinnah was described by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in the following words:

“Strange as it may appear, Mr. Savarkar and Mr. Jinnah instead of being opposed to each other on the one nation versus two nations issue are in complete agreement about it. Both not only agree, but insist that there are two nations in India-one the Muslim nation and the other Hindu nation.”

[Ambedkar, BR, Pakistan or the Partition of India, Government of Maharashtra, Bombay, (reprint of 1940 edition), p. 142.]

Hindu Mahasabha led by Savarkar declared unconditional support to the British government during Quit India Movement

The Quit India Movement began on August 9, 1942 as per Gandhi’s call to ‘Do or Die’ in order to expel the British from India. The British rulers swiftly responded with mass detentions on August 8th itself. Over 100,000 arrests were made which included the total top leadership of Congress including Gandhi, mass fines were levied and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging. Hundreds of civilians were killed in state sponsored violence, many shot by the police and army. Congress was banned. During these times of repression Savarkar announced full support to the British rulers in line with the Muslim League.

Addressing the 24th session of the Hindu Mahasabha at Kanpur in 1942, Savarkar outlined the strategy of the Hindu Mahasabha of co-operating with the rulers in the following words:

“The Hindu Mahasabha holds that the leading principle of all practical politics is the policy of Responsive Co-operation [with the British].” He called upon HM councillors, ministers, legislators and conducting any municipal or any public bodies to offer “Responsive Co-operation which covers the whole gamut of patriotic activities from unconditional co-operation right up to active and even armed resistance…”

[V. D. Savarkar, Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6, Maharashtra Prantik Hindusabha, Poona, 1963, p. 112.]

Savarkar led Hindu Mahasabha ran coalition governments with Muslim League during Quit India Movement

Hindu Mahasabha and Jinnah led Muslim League joined hands in running coalition governments in Bengal and Sind (and later in NWFP) in 1942. Defending this collusion between HM and ML against Congress Savarkar stated,

“In practical politics also the Mahasabha knows that we must advance through reasonable compromises. Witness the fact that only recently in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha on invitation had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League itself in running coalition Government. The case of Bengal is well known. Wild Leaguers whom even the Congress with all its submissiveness could not placate grew quite reasonably compromising and socialable [sic] as soon as they came in contact with the Hindu Mahasabha and the Coalition Government, under the premiership of Mr. Fazlul Huq and the able lead of our esteemed Mahasabha leader Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerji, functioned successfully for a year or so to the benefit of both the communities.”

[Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan (Collected works of Savarkar in English), vol. 6, Hindu Mahasabha, Pune, 1963, pp. 479-80.]

It is to be noted that Mookerji was deputy premier and held the portfolio of suppressing Quit India Movement in Bengal.

Backstabbing Netaji Subhash Chander Bose

When Netaji Subhash Chander Bose was planning to liberate India militarily, Savarkar offered full military co-operation to the British masters. Addressing 23^rd session of Hindu Mahasabha at Bhagalpur in 1941, he declared:

“Our best national interests demands that so far as India’s defence is concerned, Hindudom must ally unhesitatingly, in a spirit of responsive co-operation with the war effort of the Indian government in so far as it is consistent with the Hindu interests, by joining the Army, Navy and the Aerial forces in as large a number as possible and by securing an entry into all ordnance, ammunition and war craft factories…Again it must be noted that Japan’s entry into the war has exposed us directly and immediately to the attack by Britain’s enemies…Hindu Mahasabhaits must, therefore, rouse Hindus especially in the provinces of Bengal and Assam as effectively as possible to enter the military forces of all arms without losing a single minute.”

[Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan (Collected works of Savarkar in English), vol. 6, Hindu Mahasabha, Pune, 1963, p. 460.]

According to HM documents Savarkar was able to inspire one lakh Hindus to join the ranks of the British armed forces.

Savarkar’s mercy petitions were no ruse but instruments of abject surrender

Savarkar submitted minimum 5 mercy petitions [MP] in 1911, 1913, 1914, 1918 and 1920. Savarkarites claim that these were submitted not as an act of cowardice but “as an ardent follower of Shivaji, Savarkar wanted to die in action. Finding this the only way, he wrote six letters to the British pleading for his release”.  A perusal of the two available mercy petitions will prove that there cannot be a lie worse than the claim that Savarkar’s MP petitions were in league with the tricks which Shivaji used to hoodwink the Mughal rulers successfully. The mercy petition dated 14th November, 1913 ended with the following words:

“[Therefore] if the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me, I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of constitutional progress and loyalty to the English government which is the foremost condition of that progress. …Moreover my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the Government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise. The Mighty alone can afford to be merciful and therefore where else can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the Government?”

The petition dated 30^th March 1920 from this prodigal son of the British masters ended with the following words:

“The brilliant prospects of my early life all but too soon blighted, have constituted so painful a source of regret to me that a release would be a new birth and would touch my heart, sensitive and submissive, to kindness so deeply as to render me personally attached and politically useful in future. For often magnanimity wins even where might fails.”

[Available with the National Archives, Delhi.]

There was nothing wrong on the part of the CJ detainees in writing mercy petitions to the British. It was an important legal right available to the prisoners. Apart from Savarkar, Barin, HK Kanjilal, and Nand Gopal too submitted petitions. However, these were only Savarkar and Barin who sought forgiveness for their revolutionary past. Kanjilal and Nand Gopal did not demand any personal favour but status of political prisoners.

Savarkar secured remission of 37.5 years in his sentence of 50 years

Savarkar was incarcerated at Andamans on July 4, 1911 for two life terms [50 years]. On May 2, 1921 [after NINE years TEN months] he was transferred along with his elder brother, Babarao, to the mainland. He was finally released conditionally on January 6, 1924 [total imprisonment TWELVE years SIX months] from Yeravda Jail.

Savarkar as a worshipper of Manusmriti and Casteism

Savarkar is glorified as a rationalist and crusader against Untouchability. Let us compare these claims with Savarkar’s beliefs and acts as recorded in the HM archives. While delivering presidential address to the 22^nd session oh Hindu Mahasabha at Madura He declared Manu to be the lawgiver for Hindus and emphasized that once we “re-learn the manly lessons” which Manu taught “our Hindu nation shall prove again as unconquerable and conquering a race as we proved once”. [Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan (Collected works of Savarkar in English), vol. 6, Hindu Mahasabha, Pune, 1963, p. 426.]

He declared Manusmriti to be “that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation …Today Manusmriti is Hindu law. That is fundamental”. [Savarkar, VD, ‘Women in Manusmriti’ in Savarkar Samagr (collection of writings of Savarkar in Hindi), vil. 4, Prabhat, Delhi, p. 415.]

So far his crusade for Untouchables entry into Hindu temples was concerned he gave undertaking to Brahmins that “the Hindu Maha Sabha shall never force any legislations regarding the entry of untouchables in the ancient temples or compel by law any sacred ancient and moral usage or custom prevailing in those temples. In general the Mahasabha will not back up any Legislation to thrust the reforming views on our Sanatani brothers so far as personal law is concerned”.

[Bhide, A. S. (ed.), Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s Whirlwind Propaganda: Extracts from the President’s Diary of his Propagandist Tours Interviews from December 1937 to October 1941, na, Bombay, 1940, p. 425.]

Savarkar wanted Nepal King to rule India in case the British decided to leave India

Savarkar even preached that it was legitimate to have the King of Nepal as ‘Free Hindusthan’s Future Emperor’ if the British plan to leave India. His advice to the British rulers was very clear:

“If an academical [sic] probability is at all to be indulged in of all factors that count today, His Majesty the King of Nepal, the scion of the Shisodias [sic], alone has the best chance of winning the Imperial crown of India. Strange as it may seem, the English know it better than we Hindus do…It is not impossible that Nepal may even be called upon to control the destiny of India itself. Even Britain will feel it more graceful that the Sceptre [sic] of Indian Empire, if it ever slips out of her grip, should be handed over to an equal and independent ally of Britain like His Majesty the King of Nepal than to one who is but a vassal and a vanquished potentate of Britain like the Nizam.” [Italics as in the original]

[Bhide, AS, (ed.), Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s Whirlwind Propaganda: Extracts from the President’s Diary of his Propagandist Tours Interviews from December 1937 to October 1941, na, Bombay, 1940, pp. 256-57.]

Savarkar criticized Shivaji for not allowing molestation/rape of captured Muslim women

Savarkar was a great defender of molestation and rape as a political tool against the women of adversaries. In his important work of Hindu history, Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, originally written in Marathi and translated in English in 1971 he included a chapter titled ‘Perverted Conception of Virtues’ (chapter VIII). He criticized Shivaji and Chimaji Appa for restoring back to the families the women of defeated Muslim and Portuguese governors. Since Shivaji did not allow molestation of captured women Savarkar complained:

“Did not the plaintive screams and pitiful lamentations of the millions of molested Hindu women, which reverberated throughout the length and breadth of the country, reach the ears of Shivaji Maharaj and Chimaji Appa?”

He went on to lament that “It was the suicidal Hindu idea of chivalry to women which saved the Muslim women (simply because they were women) from the heavy punishments of committing indescribable sins and crimes against the Hindu women. Their womanhood became their shield quite sufficient to protect them”.

[‘Perverted conception of virtues’ in V. D. Savarkar (tr. By S. T. Godbole), Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, Bal Savarkar India, Delhi, 1971, pp. 147-159.]

With these irrefutable facts about Savarkar, PM Modi bent upon honouring him on this May 28 will only accelerate the undoing of democratic-secular India, egalitarian part of the Indian civilization for which RSS has been dreaming since its inception in 1925.

Shamsul Islam is a retired professor Delhi University

Email: notoinjustice@gmail.com

26 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr Shivangi Agarwal

The World Health Organisation (WHO) urges caution while employing extensive language model tools (LLMs) produced by artificial intelligence (AI) to protect and enhance human well-being, human safety, and human autonomy, as well as to preserve public health. Some of the most rapidly growing platforms that mimic comprehending, processing, and creating human communication are LLMs, including ChatGPT, Bard, Bert, and many others. Considerable enthusiasm is generated about their capacity to understand health demands due to their rapid public dissemination and expanding practical application for health-related purposes. It is essential to consider the hazards of utilising LLMs to safeguard people’s health and lessen inequality. It can be crucial for the well-being of people to increase access to health information and improve diagnostic capacity in low-resource settings.

The WHO is dedicated to utilising new technologies, including AI and digital health, to benefit human health. WHO is enthusiastic about using technologies, including LLMs, to support healthcare professionals, patients, researchers, and scientists. However, the usual level of safety that should be applied to new technology is not consistently applied. Adequate caution involves universal adherence to the core principles of openness, diversity, participation by the public, professional oversight, and strict evaluation. The rapid adoption of unproven systems could result in mistakes made by medical professionals, injury to patients, and a loss of trust in AI, undermining the potential long-term benefits of such technology globally.

The various issues necessitate strict regulation for the technologies to be employed safely, efficiently, and morally. The data used to train AI might produce false or erroneous information that could harm inclusivity, equity, and health. The WHO advises that as technology companies try to commercialise LLMs, policymakers should ensure patient safety and protection.

Before they are widely used in ordinary medicine and healthcare, the WHO suggests that issues must be addressed and health system stakeholders can benefit. WHO stresses the significance of following moral guidelines and good governance in the WHO recommendations on the ethics and governance of AI for health. The WHO has identified six guiding principles for AI development: (1) safeguard autonomy; (2) advance human welfare, safety, and the public interest; (3) ensure transparency and understanding; (4) promote accountability and responsibility; (5) foster equity and inclusiveness; and (6) a receptive and sustainable AI.

References:

[https://www.who.int/news/item/16-05-2023-who-calls-for-safe-and-ethical-ai-for-health ]

Dr. Shivangi Agarwal has completed Masters of Public Health .

26 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

By Kim Petersen

Interview with author Wei Ling Chua

The G7 has recently wound up its meeting in Hiroshima, and the participants joined to affirm their fear of the Threat of China. British media reported that prime minister Rishi Sunak said: “China poses the biggest challenge to global security and prosperity of our age with the ‘means and intent to reshape the world order’.” The global septet spoke of “de-risking” rather than “de-coupling” from China. This was prudent because decoupling from the world’s leading manufacturing base would risk plunging all economies into recession. China leads the world in so many facets of production, particularly high technology: high-speed rail, rocket technology, their own space station, lunar and Martian probes and rovers, quantum computing, AI, robotics, bridge building, tunnel construction, chip production, hypersonic missiles, laser weapons, military armaments, nuclear technology, and on and on. Could it be that the Chinese economy is not as sturdy as it seems to be?

I asked Wei Ling Chua, the author of Democracy: What the West can learn from China and Tiananmen Square “Massacre”? The Power of Words vs. Silent Evidence, his forecast for the Chinese economy.

Kim Petersen: In a recent article, “Why China Can’t Pull the World Out of a New Great Depression,” strategic risk consultant F. William Engdahl writes, “… in real physical economic production, China has left the USA and everyone else in the dust. Therefore, the future course of industrial production in China is vital to the future of the world economy.”

He writes that steel production is “the single best indicator of a growing real economy” for which China crushes the competition. China leads in coal production, rare earth mining and processing, motor vehicle production, as supplier of essential cement for construction, aluminum production, and copper consumption. Engdahl adds, “The list goes on.”

Then Engdahl identifies a problem: “A huge problem with China’s economic model over the past two decades has been the fact that it has been a debt-based finance model massively concentrated on real estate speculation beyond what the economy can digest.” He points at the inflated housing market, rising unemployment, the dubiousness of official figures for total state debt, and the lack of transparency for financial information.

It is expected that there would be bumps along the road in the development of what was once, not so long ago, a very poor country compared to the economic colossus that China has become today. In addition to the commodities exported worldwide, China has also garnered much skepticism for its growth and development over the years, and yet China has always managed to steam ahead. China has a planned economy, and assuredly the mandarins have contingency plans for the unexpected.

What is your take on the Engdahl article?

Wei Ling Chua: I think the author lacks an understanding of the CCP series of policies and reforms, and he relies too heavily on the crusader agenda-based line-of-thinking.

Unlike western, Japanese, USSR development that relied heavily on imperialism, expansionism and looting

1) In the first 30 years of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the sources of finance were mainly from the agricultural sector, and the hard work, delegation and sacrifices of the entire population to rebuild the nation.

The Mao era was the hardest era in the history of the PRC, as the country just managed to hold together the entire nation with virtually nothing (no technology, no money, a 90% illiteracy rate, a divided population, a population hungry and in poor health with a super short average life-expectancy of 36 years, a hostile international environment (Korean war, Sino-India war, USSR border war, plus western sanctions, and in the 1960s USSR sanctions as well).

However, Mao managed to win the Korean war with mainly foot soldiers armed with rifles and hand grenades, helped Vietnam to chase away the US occupier, and defeated India and the USSR in skirmishes. China worked herself into the UN to replace the nationalist government as the only legitimate government of China. It also completed the first stage of the Chinese industrial revolution with all types of light industry (self-made household appliances, processed food), an active agriculture sector, fisheries, etc, and heavy industry such as producing trucks, cars, buses, trains, atomic bombs, satellite, missiles, and all type of other military weapons, construction technology…

2) over the next 30 years, China financed her economic reform via opening up with massive foreign investment plus massive land mortgage financing to fund all types of infrastructure across the country.

But, unlike the rest of the developing countries, China used cheap land and labor to attract foreign investment to build factories, and used her own land allocation as a guarantee to print money and provide loans for building infrastructure, commercial and residential property, and therefore, not incurring too much foreign debt. So, most of China’s debts are domestic and are outside of foreign control.

3) Since Xi came into power, his zero tolerance towards corruption and successful anti-corruption policy very much ensured the country’s continued smooth operation with high efficiency and less waste. This is a most vital element in any nation’s development and future prosperity (whereas all western countries are down down and down at the moment due to legalised corruption in the name of lobbying, political donations, speech bureaus, privatisation, etc)

Xi’s centralised medicine approval strategy has successfully reduced all drug prices by up to more than 90%, and hence china was able to introduce sustainable nationwide medicare coverage. Such a policy freed up people’s savings for domestic consumption. This economic generator is a pillar of any advanced country.

Under Xi, the average wages of the nation basically more than doubled.

Yes, like the rest of the world, the real estate market and tax on property transactions are major sources of government revenue. But Xi knew that if the real-estate market was allowed to continue being controlled by a handful of billionaires to reap speculative profits then the housing prices would keep rising. So, he openly told the nation that housing is for people to live, not for speculative profit. He cracked down on irresponsible real estate giants controlling too much real estate and using them to mortgage and buy more. Finally, this caused some collapse in overheated pricing. But unlike the US, there is no too-big-to-fail company in China; Xi froze these troubled giant companies from issuing dividends to shareholders, and made the owners sell their own assets to repay the interest and loans, sell their overseas companies and assets, and then domestic assets to repay the loans. And when the state bails out a company, all those assets return back to the people; i.e., state control.

The author also failed to take in a lot of things that have taken place in China.

4) Yes, there are debt issues in China, but debts should be distinguished between good debt and bad debt:

Across the west, they keep printing money to give away to political donors in exchange for personal benefits at the expense of the taxpayers, they also give away money to voters to win votes. These are bad debts as they produce no future return for the masses.

But, for China, the debts transform into infrastructure domestically and overseas. The outcome is apparent: more and more regions and countries with Chinese investment enjoy economic prosperity; hence, they help China to continue enjoying prosperity despite western decoupling policies.

The winning of trust and friends across the world will only pave the way for China’s Belt and Road win-win strategy to ensure mutual prosperity even without the West. We are now witnessing that the BRICS’s GDP is bigger than that of the G7, and the Chinese economy has been bigger than the entire EU (the combined GDP of 27 countries) since 2021.

Besides, the rise of China’s high-tech economy are obvious: due to China’s superiority in EV car technology, China has just replaced Japan as the world’s biggest new car exporter (the world number 1 in EV car exports), solar technology exports as well, infrastructure exports, ship building etc, and lately, overtaking the US in military armament exports to places like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Thailand… etc. Consider also the growing popularity of the RMB as a reserve currency. It is important to note that China managed to achieve these feats without firing a single shot; it’s all about investment in education, R&D, development of infrastructure, and a policy of win-win.

China’s future is very bright with the coming development, export of chips, nuclear power plants, and reunification with Taiwan. At this moment, the world has seen China managing to finally create a peaceful and Chinese-friendly Central Asia, Russia, Middle East, and ASEAN (excluding the Philippines under Marcos). We also notice that almost all African countries and Latin American countries are also very much preferring China over the West. This peace dividend will help create an entire region surrounding China to move towards the world’s biggest economic block developing in peace and harmony. It will become a magnet for the rest of the world.

Kim Petersen is an independent writer.

26 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dan Lieberman

Israel still has plenty of land for population expansion and its preference to expand by stealing land from Palestinians indicates that nonchalantly making others invisible is a metaphor for making them physically extinct.

An unusual and pleasant experience occurred when I attended the webinar book launch of Never Again: Germans and Genocide after the Holocaust, authored by Dr. Andrew Port, Professor of History at Wayne State University. Skeptical of Germany’s anxiety in remaining identified with the genocidal Nazi past and its servile attempts to gain Jewish approval by assisting Israel, I audaciously framed a question for Dr. Port, “You say never again, but Germany supports Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people. How do you reconcile that hypocrisy?”

I admit that the question was poorly expressed and can be misinterpreted; Germany does not support Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people; Germany has contributed to Israel’s oppression and simmering genocide of the Palestinian people. In addition to German government reparations payments, estimated at $60 billion, the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) sponsors the second-largest scientific research in Israel and German scientists represent the largest group of foreign scientists working in Israel. Between the years 2009-2020, the FRG accounted for 24 percent of Israel’s arms imports. Included in the weapons deals were submarines, which can be equipped with missiles, and four German-made corvette warships for patrolling the coast.

From Germany’s Relations with Israel: Background and Implications for German Middle East Policy, Congressional Research, January 19, 2007.

In 1999 and 2000, in perhaps the most high-profile German arms shipments to Israel since German unification, Germany financed 50% of the costs for three “Dolphin-class” submarines designed specifically for the Israeli navy. In August 2006, the German government committed to deliver and finance one-third of the costs, approximately 1 billion Euros ($1.3 billion), for two more submarines by 2010.

By not admitting that its assistance to Israel has dual use, Germany flirts between contributing and supporting Israel’s oppression — strengthening Israel economically and militarily and enabling donated and other resources to be made available to oppress the Palestinians. The FRG jumped to supporting the oppression when a majority of legislators in the Bundestag voted in favor of a motion to label the international Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement “as an entity that uses anti-Semitic tactics to fulfill its political goals.”

Knowing that moderators do not relish provocative questions, I did not expect my question would be fielded. To my surprise, Dr. Andrew Port, the book’s author interrupted the moderator and noted the question. Here are his words, as accurately as I could transcribe them from the posted video.

Dr. Polk: There`s a question about um, Germany and support for the Palestinian people. That was the first question and I am happy to respond to that even though you may not want me. Is that okay?

Moderator: Of course, please?

Dr. Polk: Yeah, it’s not the first time. So for those of you who can’t see, um, Dan has written, “You say never again, but Germany supports Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people. How do you reconcile that hypocrisy?”
I would say this, I used to be, I used to react to the Germans say, very allegedly to this claim that the Israelis were committing genocide in Israel. The more I did research and the more I learned about the UN genocide convention, I certainly can see why some people would make the case. And I’m not going to comment on that whether or not I do think it’s, um, it’s genocide. Um, but it is certainly a legitimate, um, question is, is it hypocrisy? Well, you know, I, I think, um, it’s not something that I Iooked at. I focused on Cambodia, on Bosnia, and Rwanda and I think it would be very interesting for someone to examine how Germans, uh, talk about it. Yeah, obviously work has been done on this and you know, Dirk Moses with this German catechism that he published, which led to a major debate has brought this topic out into the open. I, l, l think there’s a lot to be. So there is a hypocrisy. Well, you know Germans are in a very difficult position there and you can imagine, you can imagine what it would be like for the Germans to accuse Israelis of genocide, and l think we have to have an understanding for, for the past and for the, the difficult situation you know they face.

The professor displayed bravery in going out of script and expressing his thoughts on a challenging topic — is Israel committing genocide against the Palestinian people? My observation is that he was slightly equivocal, wanting to let the audience know that, by UN Genocide Convention, Article II, the charge is true but not willing to state his agreement. The question remains bogged in debate and polemical exercises that resolve nothing. Genocide never receives agreement until the deadly crime has culminated Then comes the usual soul searching, accusations, recriminations, and a chorus of, “Who can predict the future,” followed by “never again,” and followed by a genocide happening again.

Predicting the future is not difficult when a pattern of events of a contemporary situation compares favorably with those of an earlier period. Carefully study history, find previous events that duplicate contemporary events, trace the earlier history to its climax, and, voilà, assuredly the contemporary events will evolve with the same trajectory. Unless an external occurrence modifies the situation, similar circumstances most likely lead to similar conclusions.

A religious group feels constantly persecuted and desires to preserve its identity. Members band together and seek a new place to live their unique social and communal life in a promised land. After sputtering failures, the group, sponsored by investments and not by a national government, manages to establish itself on already inhabited foreign soil and attract adherents, financial assistance, and adventurers.

The group purchases land from the native population, establishes industries, seeks to win resources, competes with, and begins to pauperize the indigenous people. Friction leads to battles and total war. Security replaces reconciliation and becomes an excuse for the victors to impose severe restrictions on the defeated, steal their property, and oppress them. The native population is decimated and forced from its ancestral lands.

The previous narrative describes the Pilgrim voyage to their promised land and approximates the Zionist incursion into the Levant. An addition to the narrative has the native Pokanoket tribe initially assisting the Pilgrims in their endeavors. After being wary of the newcomers to his territory, the Pokanoket leader, Massoit, came to regard the English as benefactors. The Mayflower boat, perceived as a ‘walking island,’ the iron plows, muskets, and other material goods entranced the Natives and they saw themselves benefiting from a cordial relationship with the Pilgrims.

Palestinians were also willing to cooperate with the Zionists. Khalil Sakakini, a well-known Palestinian nationalist, essayist, and poet initially concurred.

I see no reason why the Jews and the Arabs cannot work together in this great country. There is room for all, and up to the present time there have been no serious quarrels. At the beginning, what little dissension arose has smoothed out, and I believe it is the desire at least of the younger and vigorous and open minded group of Arabs to do everything they can to work amicably with the Jews. We must say that the Jews have brought considerable progress, and as they are mainly spend­ing their own money in developing the country, it would be wrong not to give them credit for efforts in trying to make a future and better Palestine.

After 40 years of a peaceful and helpful relationship, it became evident that the Pilgrims intended to reduce the indigenous people to servitude.

The Pilgrims bought their land from the Natives, but the Natives expected to continue to use the land’s resources.  The colonists built fences where no fences had ever been before, closing off their property to make the land their own. Tensions had long existed due to the two cultures different ways of life.  Colonists’ livestock trampling Native cornfields was a continuing problem.  Competition for resources created friction.  Regional economic changes forced many Natives to sell their land.”- Nathan Philbrick, Mayflower.

The wanting “all or nothing” Zionists pursued a similar path as the wanting pilgrims and their sponsor, Massachusetts Bay Colony. On November 3, 1918, a day after the first anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, a delegation of the Muslim-Christian Association handed a petition signed by more than 100 notables to Ronald Storrs, the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration military governor.

We noticed yesterday a large crowd of Jews carrying banners and overrunning the streets shouting words, which hurt the feelings and wound the soul. They pretend with open voice that Palestine, which is the Holy Land of our Fathers and the graveyard of our ancestors, which has been inhabited by the Arabs for long ages who loved it and died in defending it, is now a national home for them. These are words which displease the heavens.  How do the Jews expect Palestine to be a national home when the Muslims and the Christians never asked that it should be a national home for those of them who are not inhabitants of Palestine?  We Arabs, Muslim and Christian, have always sympathized profoundly with the persecuted Jews and their misfortunes in other countries as much as we sympathized with the persecuted Armenians and other weaker nations. We hoped for their deliverance and prosperity. But there is a wide difference between this sympathy and the acceptance of such a nation in our country, to be made by them a national home, ruling over us and disposing of our affairs. We Muslims and Christians desire to live with our brothers, the Jews of Palestine, in peace and happiness and with equal rights. Our privileges are theirs, and their duties are ours.

The significant result of the Massachusetts Bay Colony settlements was the genocide of the local tribes, which led to the mass extermination of Native tribes throughout North America.

By violently expelling approximately three-quarters of all Palestinians during the period of 1947-1949, the Zionists set the stage for a genocide of the Palestinian people. In 1967, following Israel’s victory in the 6-day war, Israel displaced an estimated additional 300,000 Palestinians. Afterward, Israel’s occupation of the West Bank treated the Palestinians as if they were not there, giving little heed to the Palestinian need for resources, homes, water, agriculture cultivation, infrastructure, and institutions. The only time Israel gives attention to the Palestinians is when they want to take something from them, harass them, or injure them. Israel still has plenty of land for population expansion and its preference to expand by stealing land from Palestinians indicates that nonchalantly making others invisible is a metaphor for making them physically extinct.

Let those skeptical of the eventual genocide respond to questions: “Being continually encroached and reduced to diminishing living space, agriculture, water, and resources, what will happen with the Palestinians in the future?” If life becomes unbearable, where will they find a bearable life? With no leadership or nationality, how can Palestinians maintain ontological security, which is “a stable mental state derived from a sense of continuity in regard to the events in one’s life.” The latter two words are more than an esoteric expression. They define what the Palestinians lack and most need. The absence of ontological security accelerates the deterioration of the Palestinian community, a process caused by the severe Israeli repression.

The other doubt of an ongoing genocide cites the presence of six million Palestinians in Israel and the territories. Reports have about 6 million killed during a few years of the World War II Holocaust. Occurring behind enemy lines during a world war, and without the surveillance and communications available today, the WWII Holocaust was difficult to confirm and prevent. With present-day observation and communication tools, it seems implausible that an oppressor can bring about another holocaust and murder 6 million people in a similar manner and in a short period. Implausible, but not impossible; an accepted statistic has 800,000 Tutsis slaughtered in 100 days in the Rwanda genocide. Unfortunately, even today, in full view of the world, genocide can be done by several means. At this moment, foreign aid prevents the ultimate tragedy and keeps the Palestinian community alive.

According to figures compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, aid to Palestinians amounted to more than $40 billion between 1994 and 2020. The Palestinian Economic Council for Development and Reconstruction totals its foreign aid in 2020 at 1.13 billion dollars, a hefty sum considering that the GDP of Mexico is 1.15 billion dollars. By replacing what should be Israel’s legal and financial commitments as an occupier power to its occupied with their financial assistance to the Palestinians, the U.S. taxpayers and other world peoples subsidize Israel’s theft of Palestinian property and the infrastructure created to oppress the Palestinians, another example of how the Zionists deceive the world. This foreign aid begs the questions, “What will be the fate of the Palestinians if the aid is completely cut,” and “Can it continue forever?” Will the Palestinians live at subsistence levels or will Israel meet its commitments as an occupying power and give attention to Palestinian needs? Given the Zionist past of deceit, lying, trickery, knavery, and criminal behavior, the former is most likely and, with its occurrence, the genocide will escalate. Discussing an anticipated method by which a country can initiate the destruction of a minority within its borders. is unpleasant. Not being aware is worse than feeling unpleasant.

One way to accomplish the deadly deed is by decreasing birth rates and increasing death rates, done by exiling youth, population control, and causing psychological problems that lead to physical problems. The latter is a daily activity that has been visited upon the Palestinians for decades — permanent and flying checkpoints, roadblocks, forcing families into basements while Israel military sleeps overnight in the house, stopping cars and beating the adult male, arbitrary and unjust detentions, punishment of family members for alleged offenses by a relative, allowing tilling of fields and tending of flocks only at prescribed times and specified entry places, and many, many other deliberate mechanisms that wound the Palestinian psyche and diminish ontological security.

If the population decreases by 5 percent annually, in 14 years, the population is halved, and, in 50 years, the population decreases to 10 percent of its initial amount. By these methods, the Palestinian population can be reduced from 6 million to 600,000. The remaining Palestinians will be faceless and wandering people among the many millions of Israelis.

Not wanting to know or not accepting what is obvious are compounded by not being able to handle the horror of the situation and not knowing what to do about it, which places the situation in the same category as previous genocides. The time has arrived to break tradition.

Reciting what to do is exceedingly complex and beyond the scope of this article. Four points:

(1)    Everything must be done peaceably and within the law. The problem to be faced is that if the thrust is succeeding, adversaries resort to violence and lawless activities.

(2)    The United States, Great Britain, and Germany are the principal culprits in setting the stage for the genocide of the Palestinian people. Their governments must be shamed and changed.

(3)    The Jewish people are identified with committing the genocide. They and their synagogues should realize they must redeem themselves or face an eternal backlash for their support of  Zionist Israel, which calls itself, “the Jewish state,” and has disgraced Judaism.

(4)    Institutions, such as PBS and many “think tanks” should purge themselves of pro-Israel elements who use the institution to campaign for Israel, which, indirectly campaigns for the liquidation of the Palestinians.

Considering the prolonged suffering of the Palestinian people, almost 75 years of unendurable oppression, the genocide is superfluous. In the PBS documentary, America and the Holocaust, Deborah Lipstadt says, “If ‘the time to stop a Holocaust is before it happens,’ then it means you have to lay on the table the ingredients that go into it. Maybe these ingredients don’t add up to it… But if you’re seeing people assembling, in the kitchen, the same ingredients, you’ve got to say, you cannot wait until the meal is prepared.”

Well, Ms. Lipstadt and the rest of the world, don’t wait, inform the authorities in the government you now inhabit to get on the ball and thwart the predicted genocide of the Palestinian people.

Dan Lieberman publishes commentaries on foreign policy, economics, economics, and politics at https://dlieb10gmailcom.substack.com/.

26 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

By Jeffrey D. Sachs

By recognising that the question of NATO enlargement is at the centre of this war, we understand why U.S. weaponry will not end this war. Only diplomatic efforts can do that.

George Orwell wrote in 1984 that “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” Governments work relentlessly to distort public perceptions of the past. Regarding the Ukraine War, the Biden administration has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Ukraine War started with an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In fact, the war was provoked by the U.S. in ways that leading U.S. diplomats anticipated for decades in the lead-up to the war, meaning that the war could have been avoided and should now be stopped through negotiations.

Recognising that the war was provoked helps us to understand how to stop it. It doesn’t justify Russia’s invasion. A far better approach for Russia might have been to step up diplomacy with Europe and with the non-Western world to explain and oppose U.S. militarism and unilateralism. In fact, the relentless U.S. push to expand NATO is widely opposed throughout the world, so Russian diplomacy rather than war would likely have been effective.

The Biden team uses the word “unprovoked” incessantly, most recently in Biden’s major speech on the first-year anniversary of the war, in a recent NATO statement,, and in the most recent G7 statement. Mainstream media friendly to Biden simply parrot the White House. The New York Times is the lead culprit, describing the invasion as “unprovoked” no fewer than 26 times, in five editorials, 14 opinion columns by NYT writers, and seven guest op-eds!

There were in fact two main U.S. provocations. The first was the U.S. intention to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia in order to surround Russia in the Black Sea region by NATO countries (Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, and Georgia, in counterclockwise order). The second was the U.S. role in installing a Russophobic regime in Ukraine by the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian President, Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014. The shooting war in Ukraine began with Yanukovych’s overthrow nine years ago, not in February 2022 as the U.S. government, NATO, and the G7 leaders would have us believe.

Biden and his foreign policy team refuse to discuss these roots of the war. To recognise them would undermine the administration in three ways. First, it would expose the fact that the war could have been avoided, or stopped early, sparing Ukraine its current devastation and the U.S. more than $100 billion in outlays to date. Second, it would expose President Biden’s personal role in the war as a participant in the overthrow of Yanukovych, and before that as a staunch backer of the military-industrial complex and very early advocate of NATO enlargement. Third, it would push Biden to the negotiating table, undermining the administration’s continued push for NATO expansion.

The archives show irrefutably that the U.S. and German governments repeatedly promised to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not move “one inch eastward” when the Soviet Union disbanded the Warsaw Pact military alliance. Nonetheless, U.S. planning for NATO expansion began early in the 1990s, well before Vladimir Putin was Russia’s president. In 1997, national security expert Zbigniew Brzezinski spelled out the NATO expansion timeline with remarkable precision.

U.S. diplomats and Ukraine’s own leaders knew well that NATO enlargement could lead to war. The great US scholar-statesman George Kennan called NATO enlargement a “fateful error,” writing in the New York Times that, “Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”

President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Defence William Perry considered resigning in protest against NATO enlargement. In reminiscing about this crucial moment in the mid-1990s, Perry said the following in 2016: “Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when NATO started to expand, bringing in eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia. At that time, we were working closely with Russia and they were beginning to get used to the idea that NATO could be a friend rather than an enemy … but they were very uncomfortable about having NATO right up on their border and they made a strong appeal for us not to go ahead with that.”

In 1998, then U.S. Ambassador to Russia, and now CIA Director, William Burns, sent a cable to Washington warning at length of grave risks of NATO enlargement: “Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.”

Ukraine’s leaders knew clearly that pressing for NATO enlargement to Ukraine would mean war. Former Zelensky advisor Oleksiy Arestovych declared in a 2019 interview “that our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”

During 2010-2013, Yanukovych pushed neutrality, in line with Ukrainian public opinion. The U.S. worked covertly to overthrow Yanukovych, as captured vividly in the tape of then U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt planning the post-Yanukovych government weeks before the violent overthrow of Yanukovych. Nuland makes clear on the call that she was coordinating closely with then Vice President Biden and his national security advisor Jake Sullivan, the same Biden-Nuland-Sullivan team now at the centre of U.S. policy vis-à-vis Ukraine.

After Yanukovych’s overthrow, the war broke out in the Donbas, while Russia claimed Crimea. The new Ukrainian government appealed for NATO membership, and the U.S. armed and helped restructure the Ukrainian army to make it interoperable with NATO. In 2021, NATO and the Biden Administration strongly recommitted to Ukraine’s future in NATO.

In the immediate lead-up to Russia’s invasion, NATO enlargement was centre stage. Putin’s draft US-Russia treaty (December 17, 2021) called for a halt to NATO enlargement. Russia’s leaders put NATO enlargement as the cause of war in Russia’s National Security Council meeting on February 21, 2022.. In his address to the nation that day, Putin declared NATO enlargement to be a central reason for the invasion.

Historian Geoffrey Roberts recently wrote: “Could war have been prevented by a Russian-Western deal that halted NATO expansion and neutralised Ukraine in return for solid guarantees of Ukrainian independence and sovereignty? Quite possibly.” In March 2022, Russia and Ukraine reported progress towards a quick negotiated end to the war based on Ukraine’s neutrality. According to Naftali Bennett, former Prime Minister of Israel, who was a mediator, an agreement was close to being reached before the U.S., U.K., and France blocked it.

While the Biden administration declares Russia’s invasion to be unprovoked, Russia pursued diplomatic options in 2021 to avoid war, while Biden rejected diplomacy, insisting that Russia had no say whatsoever on the question of NATO enlargement. And Russia pushed diplomacy in March 2022, while the Biden team again blocked a diplomatic end to the war.

By recognising that the question of NATO enlargement is at the centre of this war, we understand why U.S. weaponry will not end this war. Russia will escalate as necessary to prevent NATO enlargement to Ukraine. The key to peace in Ukraine is through negotiations based on Ukraine’s neutrality and NATO non-enlargement. The Biden administration’s insistence on NATO enlargement to Ukraine has made Ukraine a victim of misconceived and unachievable U.S. military aspirations. It’s time for the provocations to stop, and for negotiations to restore peace to Ukraine.

Jeffrey D. Sachs, Professor of Sustainable Development and Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University, is Director of Columbia’s Center for Sustainable Development and the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

26 May 2023

Source: johnmenadue.com

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Dragan Vujicic

The West’s support of Neo-Nazism in Ukraine should come as no surprise. Historically, powerful U.S. financial interests not only supported Nazi Germany as well as Bandera Nazism in Ukraine. In some regards the totalitarian practice of Neo-nazism is akin to the doctrine of the Neocons as formulated in the Project of the New American Century (PNAC).

And Serbia, beware, you are the only country in Europe which has courageously stood up against US pressures.

This and much more is revealed in this interview with Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, economist, professor emeritus at the University of Ottawa and editor of the renowned anti-globalist Global Research website.

***

Dragan Vujicic: How do you view the war between Ukraine and Russia?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky: The war in Ukraine ended before it began. The Russians literally destroyed their Air Force and Navy at the very outset in February-March 2022.

Also Russia has strategic control over a large part of the Black Sea and total control of the Sea of Azov. Turkey which is a NATO heavyweight is an unspoken ally of Russia. Turkey controls the southern flank of the Black Sea.

Anyone who has a minimal understanding of military strategies, knows that you cannot wage a conventional ground war without a Navy and an Airforce.

Now, after these recent Pentagon “leaks”, there is ample evidence that Ukraine is running out of ammunition and that they do not have (even with US-NATO support) the military capabilities to confront the Russians.

Hopefully there will be a cease-fire to save lives. I think that the war could end in a month or so and negotiations might begin. But there are obstacles to reaching this objective. There is a crisis in bona fide diplomacy. The Biden administration refuses to enter into dialogue with Russia with a view to reaching a cease-fire and peace negotiations.

In fact, the biggest problem is that politicians in America believe in their own propaganda. They think they can defeat Russia by using nuclear weapons. Nukes have been re-categorized. Tactical so-called low yield mini-nukes have been slated for use in the conventional war theater. If nukes are used that would lead us into a WW III scenario.

I have researched the history of nuclear weapons, starting with the Manhattan Project (the creation of the American atomic bomb). Many people simply do not know that the Manhattan Project in the immediate wake of Hiroshima, Nagasaki in August 1945 was intended to wage a nuclear war against the USSR, at a time when the Soviet Union and the U.S. were allies.

DV: Are you talking about plans for nuclear war after 1945?

PMC: What I am referring to is the U.S Blueprint of September 15, 1945 according to which the US War Department planned to drop more than 200 atomic bombs on 66 cities of the Soviet Union. This is not mentioned in the history books. See:

http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/1945-Atomic-Bomb-Production.pdf 

DV: What are the nuclear capabilities of the U.S’s main rivals today?

PMC: Russia and China are on par with the U.S. with regard to nuclear capabilities. The U.S. has a 1.3 trillion dollar project assigned solely to nuclear weapons, which constitutes Big Money for the US-NATO defense contractors. We are at a dangerous crossroads. Western politicians believe that they can win a nuclear war.

DV: With the war in Ukraine, Nazism has reemerged, now they call it neo-Nazism?

PMC: The U.S. financial establishment have supported the Nazis since the outset of the Third Reich. Wall Street, The Federal Reserve  and the Bank of England supported Adolf Hitler’s election campaign  for Chancellor in the wake of the Weimar Republic. They had business interests in Nazi Germany. There were powerful US economic interests behind the Third Reich including Prescott Bush, the grandfather of George W. Bush.

Moreover, it is common knowledge that you do not go to war if you do not have Oil and Hitler started Operation Barbarossa on June 22, 1941, a military operation for which he needed a huge amount of fuel. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil  of  New Jersey (today’s Exxon) supplied Hitler’s troops until 1945. Without the sale of U.S. oil to Nazi Germany, Operation Barbarossa would not have taken place.

Before Harry Truman became president in 1945, when he was senator he stated his position as follows:

“If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia; and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany”

DV: Today the world is moving towards de-dollarization and the Multipolar world is born.

PMC: I think many analysts and journalists do not understand what de-dollarization means. The dollar as a currency is not the main issue. What is at stake is the macroeconomic apparatus of dollarised countries and their relationship with Wall Street and the Washington consensus.

The Federal Reserve, Wall Street  et al,  generate dollar denominated debts, which then enables them to enforce Neoliberal economic policies Worldwide.

The central banks of dollarized Third World countries are invariably defunct, controlled by Wall Street, the IMF and the World Bank.

De-dollarization requires “Exit” from the institutions which sustain the (dollar denominated) Debt Crisis. These institutions include the IMF and the WB (which control the central banks of the Global South), not to mention the regional development banks and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

As far as the BRICS member states are concerned, India, South Africa and Brazil are heavily dollarized, ie. in the stranglehold of IMF conditionalities. They are not sovereign nation-states. What is required is for sovereign countries to have their own central bank which does not depend on external creditors.

DV: Is Russia considered the bearer of the current de-dollarization?

PMC: Their post-Cold War financial and banking institutions are in many regards still aligned with the West. Let us recall that the neoliberal agenda was imposed on Russia under the proxy Boris Yeltsin government in the early 1990s.

I should also mention the fate of Russia’s gold and dollar deposits in Western banks. They are significant for the Russian government. When Russia’s “Special Military Operation” began in February 2022, about 200 billion dollars of Russia’s Central Bank reserves deposited in Western banks were frozen. And that does not include the billions of dollars of assets of Russia’s “oligarchs” deposited in the Western banking system. Why did they not attempt to withdraw those funds?

DV: Is Russia, from a military standpoint better organized than the USA and NATO.

PMC: The US and European companies which produce weapons for US-NATO, (i.e. the military industrial complex) are entirely in private hands. In practice, the wars waged by US-NATO are privatized, they serve private corporate interests under the label of “national security”.

The “owners of war” are primarily interested in profit and more profit, from the proceeds of weapons sales, rather than the performance of the advanced weapons systems which they sell to US-NATO.

Militarily, Russia is ahead of US-NATO in many regards, specifically with regard to its air defense system (S-400) which is superior to the U.S. Patriot (ADS).

DV: There are many stupid and dangerous things in that war?

PMC: Yes, let’s point to the actions of the so-called International Criminal Court (ICC), which accused President Putin of the war crime of forcibly transferring Ukrainian children to Russia. This is  obvious nonsense. The  ICC did not blame Russia for aggression against a neighboring country, but for removing children from war-torn areas in Donbass, ultimately to save the lives of those children. It’s idiocy and the ICC is totally corrupt.

DV: When talking about the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, what is the relevance of the Davos WEP agenda?

PMC: Russia’s relations with the World Economic Forum are contradictory. Eight months before the February 2022 “Special Military Operation”, Russia participated in a scenario with the WEF on procedures and actions in the event of a major cyber attack.

The “Davos players” are routinely in contact with Russia’s financial establishment. In turn Russia’s financial and banking interests including Russia’s Central Bank have retained their connections with the Washington Consensus as well as with the IMF and the World Bank.

Putin is aware that there are intruders in Russia’s financial system.

DV: What to do when the UN is absolutely blocked?

PMC: It must be known that the UN was at the outset a project which was very much influenced by powerful banking interests including the Rockefellers. I should say that the UN system at the outset of the post war era had international legitimacy and acceptance as an instrument of peace. I have worked for a number of UN agencies as a consultant.

Now the UN is de facto privatized and coopted, partner of the WEF, serving the interests of the financial elites. I would characterize them as “sold out”. They have betrayed the United Nations.

As outlined by the late Padre Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann (who was President of the UN General Assembly in 2008-2009), the UN system needs to be completely restructured with a view to restoring the true spirit of internationalism.

Padre Miguel was my mentor. In this regard, I have worked in Asia, China, Latin America… and I realize just how people from all walks of life in different continents share the same values. Everyone should live in justice and with justice.

DV: How do you view Serbia’s international position?

PMC: Exceptional. Serbia has not caved in to the pressures of Washington, i.e. sanctions on Russia.

DV: Serbia is still being pressured to give up Kosovo and Metohija?

PMC: Based on my experience and from the documents on the international status of Kosovo. I do not think it is possible to negotiate the possibility of Kosovo and Metohija gaining the status of a sovereign nation state.  Kosovo and Metohija belong to Serbia under international law. It is true that there is a US military base there but that is another topic for discussion.

DV: What is another reason why the Republic of Kosovo must not be internationally recognized?

PMC: The leader of the KLA, Hashim Thaci in 1998-99 was wanted by Interpol, for crimes committed in the 1990s. He was used by US-NATO to create a mafia state.

Hashim Thaci and Madeleine  Albright, (1998)

It’s ironic that Thaci is now being held in prison and tried for crimes against humanity committed in the late 1990s. Why didn’t they arrest him in 1999, when they knew everything?

22 May 2023

Source: www.globalresearch.ca

By Countercurrents Collective

The global debt increased by $8.3 trillion in the first quarter of the year to a near-record high of $305 trillion amid an aggressive tightening of monetary policy by central banks, the Institute of International Finance (IIF) has revealed.

According to its quarterly Global Debt Monitor (GDM) report on Wednesday, the reading is the highest since the first quarter of last year and the second-highest quarterly reading ever.

“Global debt is now $45 trillion higher than its pre-pandemic level and is expected to continue increasing rapidly,” said the IIF in the GDM.

After peaking near 360% in 2021 the debt-to-output ratio has stabilized around 335%, above pre-pandemic levels.

The IIF warned that the combination of such high debt levels and rising interest rates had pushed up the cost of servicing that debt, prompting concerns about leverage in the financial system.

The IIF also noted the growth of shadow banking, or credit intermediation from non-bank financials.

“Shadow banks now account for more than 14% of financial markets, with the majority of growth stemming from a rapid expansion of U.S. investment funds and private debt markets.”

Specifically, the report mentioned the “large portion” of corporate debt held by life insurance companies, “raising concerns over their increased exposure to less liquid assets.”

“With financial conditions at their most restrictive levels since the 2008-09 financial crisis, a credit crunch would prompt higher default rates and result in more ‘zombie firms’ – already approaching an estimated 14% of U.S.-listed firms,” the IIF said.

Despite concerns over a potential credit crunch following recent turmoil in the banking sectors of the U.S. and Switzerland, government borrowing needs to remain elevated, the finance industry body stressed.

According to the report, aging populations and rising healthcare costs continue putting strain on government balance sheets, while “heightened geopolitical tensions are also expected to drive further increases in national defense spending over the medium term,” which would potentially affect the credit profile of both governments and corporate borrowers.

“If this trend continues, it will have significant implications for international debt markets, particularly if interest rates remain higher for longer,” the IIF cautioned.

The report showed that total debt in emerging markets hit a new record high of more than $100 trillion, around 250% of GDP, up from $75 trillion in 2019. China, Mexico, Brazil, India and Türkiye were the biggest upward contributors, according to the IIF.

As for the developed markets, Japan, the US, France and the UK posted the sharpest increases over the quarter, it said.

The report partly focused on the effects of last year’s rapid rise in rates in some bank balance sheets.

“Although recent bank failures appear more idiosyncratic than systemic,” the report said, “fear of contagion has prompted significant deposit withdrawals from U.S. regional banks.”

The IIF voiced its concern that tighter lending practices among smaller banks would hurt some businesses and households harder.

“Given the central role of regional banks in credit intermediation in the U.S., worries about their liquidity positions could result in a sharp contraction in lending to some segments.”

The report showed 75% of the IIF’s emerging market (EM) universe saw an increase in debt levels in dollar terms in the first quarter, with the overall figure crossing over $100 trillion for the first time.

Some of the larger EMs have benefited from the relative weakness of the dollar, which has attracted investors to their local currency debt. But for others access to markets has been harder or non-existent on either tighter spreads as rates rose in developed markets or fast-rising borrowing costs.

“With the interest rate differential between EMs and mature markets diminishing, EM local currency debt is less appealing for foreign investors,” the IIF said.

World Economic Forum said on May 16, 2022 (What does ‘global debt’ mean and how high is it now?, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/05/what-is-global-debt-why-high/):

Borrowing was already surging before the pandemic – but COVID-19 and now the war in Ukraine have pushed global debt to new highs.

About a year ago IMF warned: Countries need to work together to tackle this debt mountain in order to safeguard global stability and prosperity.

“In the end, the impact will be most sharply felt by those households that can least afford it,” it adds.

Experts warn: Low-income countries and households suffer the most from high debt levels.

Global debt is borrowing by governments, businesses and households.

In 2021, the global debt was a record $303 trillion, according to the IIF.

That was a further jump from record global debt in 2020 of $226 trillion, as was reported by the IMF in its Global Debt Database.

The current debt wave is the world’s fourth since 1970, the World Bank says.

Emerging and developing economies have been the worst hit by previous debt crises, World Bank research shows.

If countries default on their debts, it can cause panic on financial markets and economic slowdowns.

For businesses, meeting repayments on high levels of debt can mean less money is available to invest. Insolvency is also a risk for businesses that are unable to pay back their loans.

For households, high levels of debt can force them to cut some areas of spending, such as food or fuel.

When low-income countries get into debt distress, it is associated with “protracted recessions, high inflation and fewer resources going to essential sectors like health, education and social safety nets, with a disproportionate impact on the poor”, the World Bank says.

Debt distress is when a country is unable to fulfill its financial obligations, such as repayments due on its debt. The IMF and World Bank believe 60% of low-income countries are at or near this point.

As food and fuel prices soar, governments may need to give more grants to households in need to help them cover costs, particularly in low-income countries, the IMF says.

Countercurrents is answerable only to our readers. Support honest journalism because we have no PLANET B.

22 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

By Teddy Ogborn

As the planet’s biggest investor, with $9 trillion in assets under management and an army of tech-savvy analysts trained on the scent of easy money, numbers are BlackRock’s bread and butter. A giant with such an enormous appetite should find room for all kinds of facts and figures – but this one’s a bit of a picky eater.

The BlackRock Annual General Meeting is on May 24th, and resolutions submitted by shareholders will be going to a vote. The board advocates for or against those resolutions in a statement released last month. One resolution they unanimously recommend shareholders vote against is Item 7 – the ‘Impact Report for Climate-Related Human Risks of iShares U.S. Aerospace and Defense Exchange-Traded Fund’ resolution, submitted by CODEPINK.

The resolution simply calls on BlackRock to research and publish the climate impacts of this industry-wide investment offering (ticker code ITA). Among the dozens of companies represented in ITA are Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing – companies that profit directly from mass killings. Lockheed Martin developed the bombs Saudi Arabia used on a Yemeni school bus full of children in 2018, and Raytheon is the contractor behind the expansion of the US’ nuclear arsenal.

But the significant climate impact of these companies often goes unmentioned. By providing ballistic missiles and aerospace tech to the Pentagon, these companies fuel the latter’s carbon emissions – making the U.S. military the planet’s largest institutional emitter of greenhouse gasses, and thus a leading cause of our present climate crisis. This is one of many reasons that BlackRock’s continued acknowledgement of the severity of the climate crisis is at serious odds with the investment platforms it sells.

If BlackRock’s CEO and chairman Larry Fink has a catchphrase, it’s “we are a fiduciary to our clients.” In the guise of displaying the firm’s humble loyalty to investors, this line is usually delivered with an exculpatory tenor: “Sure we call the shots, but it’s our investors who pull the trigger.” For a corporation that is second only to the US and China in terms of the financial power it wields, this is an extremely convenient way to pass the buck. But Fink’s M.O. is to publicly play both roles – on one hand a duty-bound servant, on the other, a super-powerful arbiter of global financial affairs.

For years, activists have worked to expose the problem with these incongruencies, and it’s paid off. In his 2020 letter to investors, Fink underscored the reality of the climate crisis, stating plainly that “climate risk is investment risk” in order to highlight the trillions of dollars in damage and lost revenue that will stem from fossil-fueled disasters. After coming under intense fire for the firm’s continued investment in the dirtiest fossil fuel sector, Fink pledged to cut thermal coal from some of its offerings. Climate activists got a glimmer of hope. Could this signal the beginning of the end for climate-killing investments?

But since 2020, BlackRock has shown that Fink was full of hot air. The firm included gaping loopholes in the new coal rules, rendering them moot. The total of those thermal coal investments now hovers around $110 billion, and BlackRock is the planet’s second-biggest funder of fossil fuels. Climate-conscious language has evaporated from Fink’s annual letters and public statements. But that performative display of climate goodwill in 2020 exposed the truth: BlackRock is capable of partially decarbonizing the global economy. It’s not a question of ability, as it tends to claim, but one of will. Its board’s statement against CODEPINK’S resolution is a case study in the firm’s duck-and-weave approach when faced with this fact.

In short, the board argues that ITA’s information page already provides all the “sustainability characteristics” an investor could possibly want to see. The board points out that the “implied temperature rise,” or ITR, associated with the operation of the companies is clearly displayed. What the board leaves out speaks volumes: the ITR is listed as “>3.0° C.” In other words: the sector is slated to exceed emissions levels that are consistent with global warming of 3 degrees Celsius. This is a stunning figure for several reasons.

A temperature rise above 3 degrees Celsius won’t produce “more-April-beach-days” weather. Three degrees means melted ice caps, the death of the Amazon rainforest, mass migration of climate refugees, global food shortages – that “>3.0° C” means the end of life as we know it. The board kindly informs us that ITR shows whether the index is “progressing toward the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement.” But the Paris goal is 1.5 degrees Celsius, and you’d never know that from reading the board’s statement.

A popular ethics thought experiment goes like this: You are presented with a button. If you press it, a random person will be killed; but you’ll be a million dollars richer. Do you press it? In obscuring the effects of a greater-than-3-degrees future, BlackRock omits the catch. The question BlackRock poses to its clients is: “Would you press a button for a million dollars?” The response is predictable and perilous.

Further, the board’s statement says that the ITR metric is provided by “third party” research  – that third party in this case is Morgan Stanley, another notoriously major player in the financial sector. Morgan Stanley also provides an ESG (or Environmental, Social, and Governance) score for the fund. It assigns ratings from “AAA” – “leaders” in ESG – to “CCC” – “laggards.” In a move that would be laughable were it not so troubling, Morgan Stanley recognizes that ITA will help to produce an apocalyptic level of warming of at least 3 degrees – yet gives ITA the triple-A score, a blue ribbon for ethical investment.

Setting aside a much-needed investigation of Morgan Stanley’s methodology, it is abundantly clear that investors are being seriously misled by the presentation of ITA as “sustainable.” BlackRock, per its opposition statement to CODEPINK’s resolution, believes it has no obligation to remedy the issue. For a company that prides itself on providing accurate numbers to clients so they can make informed investment decisions, it is shocking how intent BlackRock is to underplay the climate impacts of ITA.

Few people would choose to sit idle in a house that is burning – but statistically few people, I’d wager, truly understand their home is burning. It remains to be seen whether I’m right across the board – whether erstwhile investors in ITA (nukes and all) would reallocate their money if they knew what a “greater than 3” world will look like.That isn’t my decision to make, but neither is it BlackRock’s.

BlackRock’s clients deserve to know the climate impact of ITA. This isn’t just a reasonable request, one that is well within BlackRock’s wheelhouse and purview – it’s a moral obligation to investors.

Teddy Ogborn is an activist and organizer based in New York City with a BA in Comparative Literature from Haverford College.

19 May 2023

Source: countercurrents.org

By Michael Welch and Dr. Naomi Wolf

“I speak as the granddaughter of a woman who lost nine siblings to the Holocaust. We have an obligation to speak out against murder in our own communities.” – Naomi Wolf [1]

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” – Martin Luther King (cited as favorite quote by Magda Havas) [2][3]

A smoking gun?

Reams of data are coming out of Pfizer’s internal documents, released under court orders from a Texas judge. The judge ruled that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the data guiding the decision by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to approve the approval of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine “is of paramount public importance.” [4]

The documents were released at a rate of 55,000 pages per month. One of the individuals rolling up her sleeves and digging into the numbers alongside a team of reportedly hundreds of doctors, scientists, oncologists, medical fraud investigators and other experts was Naomi Wolf. The facts she revealed, based on Pfizer’s own documents showed shocking statistics, including 1223 fatalities during a three month period, half of the adverse events, which included fatalities, occurred within 48 hours of the injection, and the vaccine was killing adults, babies and fetuses with adverse events ranging from 3 to 1 to 8 to 1. [5]

Pfizer had documented these and other hazards by February 2021 and rather than inform the public, they urged people, including pregnant mothers, with intensive campaigns to get the jab. [6]

Wolf has spoken up on this subject. In numerous articles online, and in the media interviews. [7]

But earlier this month, on May 9, the UK media regulator Ofcom found the broadcaster GB News of an interview between Naomi Wolf and host Mark Steyn on October 4 2022 in breach of Broadcast rules. Ofcom said the interview guest was relaying views that would be potentially harmful to the public. Ofcom received 422 complaints about the show’s comments being “dangerous” and including “misinformation” that was “unopposed” by Steyn. [8]

Is a journalist citing information from a FOIA requested release of information and bringing it to the attention of the public an example of “dangerous” information harmful to the public being aired?

Another interesting twist to the COVID “pandemic” is the interesting case of 5G installations around the globe that were happening at the same time as the virus was allegedly spreading around the globe.

A number of studies, for instance here, here, and here, document illnesses attributable to radio frequency radiation. This is not necessarily to say that the virus wasn’t hazardous. However, the two dynamics can act in a synergistic way to complicate the lives for those subjected to both in intense ways.

On this week’s episode of the Global Research News Hour we talk to Naomi Wolf about her research into Pfizer’s internal files and about the immense act of what she calls censorship recently directed toward her and Mark Steyn by Ofcom, and the UK government actually linked to it. We also speak with Magda Havas, an emerita professor from Trent University and specialist in environmental toxicology who has spoken of the harms associated with radio frequency radiation for years. She discusses the links between COVID-19 and the rise of 5G in our communities and across the planet. Finally, we speak briefly to Dr. Brent Roussin, the Chief Provincial Public Health Officer in Manitoba about how he defends his own decisions related to COVID-19 in the face of many critics present on this program.

Dr. Naomi Wolf is a former political consultant and Co-Founder of the DailyClout, a platform that empowers democracy-building. She is the author of the best-selling The Beauty Myth, which launched her reputation as a leading voice within Third Wave feminism, and she authored the 2007 book The End Of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot.

Professor Magda Havas is Professor Emerita at Trent University and a specialist on Environmental Toxicology. Dr. Havas has been an advisor to several public interest groups and educational groups concerned with the health of the environment. She is currently science advisor on EMF-related issues to several non-profit organizations.

Dr. Brent Roussin was the Chief Provincial Public Health Officer throughout the pandemic in Manitoba.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 392)

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 .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am.

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time.

Notes:

1. https://www.globalresearch.ca/uk-media-regulator-ofcom-goes-after-me-mark-steyn-telling-truth/5818861
2. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/jan/06/dan-patrick/half-true-dan-patrick-martin-luther-king-saying-li/
3. https://rumble.com/v2kcqe6-5g-and-covid-symptoms-dr.-magda-havas-saskatoon-day-3-national-citizens-inq.html
4. https://www.fdanews.com/articles/206113-federal-judge-tells-fda-it-must-make-public-55000-pages-a-month-of-pfizer-vaccine-data
5. https://www.globalresearch.ca/uk-media-regulator-ofcom-goes-after-me-mark-steyn-telling-truth/5818861
6. ibid;
7. https://www.globalresearch.ca/author/naomi-wolf
8. https://www.globalresearch.ca/uk-media-regulator-ofcom-goes-after-me-mark-steyn-telling-truth/5818861

19 May 2023

Source: www.globalresearch.ca