Archives: Articles

By Ben Norton

23 Sep 2020 – Western government-funded intelligence cutouts trained Syrian opposition leaders, planted stories in media outlets from BBC to Al Jazeera, and ran a cadre of journalists. A trove of leaked documents exposes the propaganda network.

Update (September 29, 2020): A few days after this article was published, the authenticity of these leaked materials was indirectly confirmed by the British government, which reported that hundreds of Foreign Office documents detailing its Syria propaganda operations were hacked in an alleged cyber attack.

Leaked documents show how UK government contractors developed an advanced infrastructure of propaganda to stimulate support in the West for Syria’s political and armed opposition.

Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding, from what they said to where they said it.

The leaked files reveal how Western intelligence cutouts played the media like a fiddle, carefully crafting English- and Arabic-language media coverage of the war on Syria to churn out a constant stream of pro-opposition coverage.

US and European contractors trained and advised Syrian opposition leaders at all levels, from young media activists to the heads of the parallel government-in-exile. These firms also organized interviews for Syrian opposition leaders on mainstream outlets such as BBC and the UK’s Channel 4.

More than half of the stringers used by Al Jazeera in Syria were trained in a joint US-UK government program called Basma, which produced hundreds of Syrian opposition media activists.

Western government PR firms not only influenced the way the media covered Syria, but as the leaked documents reveal, they produced their own propagandistic pseudo-news for broadcast on major TV networks in the Middle East, including BBC Arabic, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and Orient TV.

These UK-funded firms functioned as full-time PR flacks for the extremist-dominated Syrian armed opposition. One contractor, called InCoStrat, said it was in constant contact with a network of more than 1,600 international journalists and “influencers,” and used them to push pro-opposition talking points.

Another Western government contractor, ARK, crafted a strategy to “re-brand” Syria’s Salafi-jihadist armed opposition by “softening its image.” ARK boasted that it provided opposition propaganda that “aired almost every day on” major Arabic-language TV networks.

Virtually every major Western corporate media outlet was influenced by the UK government-funded disinformation campaign exposed in the trove of leaked documents, from the New York Times to the Washington Post, CNN to The Guardian, the BBC to Buzzfeed.

The files confirm reporting by journalists including The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal on the role of ARK, the US-UK government contractor, in popularizing the White Helmets in Western media. ARK ran the social media accounts of the White Helmets, and helped turn the Western-funded group into a key propaganda weapon of the Syrian opposition.

The leaked documents consist mainly of material produced under the auspices of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. All of the firms named in the files were contracted by the British government, but many also were running “multi-donor projects” that received funding from the governments of the United States and other Western European countries.

In addition to demonstrating the role these Western intelligence cutouts played in shaping media coverage, the documents shine light on the British government program to train and arm rebel groups in Syria.

Other materials show how London and Western governments worked together to build a new police force in opposition-controlled areas.

Many of these Western-backed opposition groups in Syria were extremist Salafi-jihadists. Some of the UK government contractors whose activities are exposed in these leaked documents were in effect supporting Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra and its fanatical offshoots.

The documents were obtained by a group calling itself Anonymous, and were published under a series of files entitled, “Op. HMG [Her Majesty’s Government] Trojan Horse: From Integrity Initiative To Covert Ops Around The Globe. Part 1: Taming Syria.” The unidentified leakers said they aim to “expose criminal activity of the UK’s FCO and secret services,” stating, “We declare war on the British neocolonialism!”

The Grayzone was not able to independently verify the authenticity of the documents. However, the contents tracked closely with reporting on Western destabilization and propaganda operations in Syria by this outlet and many others. (Update: After this article was published, the UK government told Middle East Eye that Foreign Office documents concerning the work of its contractors in Syria had been hacked and published online.)

UK Foreign Office and military wage media war on Syria

A leaked UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office report from 2014 reveals a joint operation with the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development to support “strategic communications, research, monitoring and evaluation and operational support to Syrian opposition entities.”

The UK FOC stated clearly that this campaign consisted of “creating network linkages between political movements and media outlets,” by the “building of local independent media platforms.”

The British government planned “Mentoring, training and coaching for enhanced delivery of media services, including digital and social media.”

Its goal was “to provide PR and media handling trainers, as well as technical staff, such as cameramen, webmasters and interpreters,” along with the “production of speeches, press releases and other media communications.”

An additional 2017 government document explains clearly how Britain funded the “selection, training, support and communications mentoring of Syrian activists who share the UK’s vision for a future Syria… and who will abide by a set of values that are consistent with UK policy.”

This initiative entailed British government funding “to support Syrian grassroots media activism within both the civilian and armed opposition spheres,” and was targeted at Syrians living in both “extremist and moderate” opposition-held territory.

In other words, the UK Foreign Office and military crafted plans to wage a comprehensive media war on Syria. To establish an infrastructure capable of managing the propaganda blitz, Britain paid a series of government contractors, including ARK, The Global Strategy Network (TGSN), Innovative Communication & Strategies (InCoStrat), and Albany.

The work of these firms overlapped, and some collaborated in their projects to cultivate the Syrian opposition.
Western government contractor ARK plays the media like the fiddle

One of the main British government contractors behind the Syria regime-change scheme was called ARK (Analysis Research Knowledge).

ARK FZC is based in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates. It brands itself as a humanitarian NGO, claiming it “was created in order to assist the most vulnerable,” by establishing a “social enterprise,  empowering local communities through the provision of agile and sustainable interventions to create greater stability, opportunity and hope for the future.”

In reality ARK is an intelligence cutout that functions as an arm of Western interventionism.

In a leaked document it filed with the British government, ARK said its “focus since 2012 has been delivering highly effective, politically-and conflict-sensitive Syria programming for the governments of the United Kingdom, United States, Denmark, Canada, Japan and the European Union.”

ARK boasted of overseeing $66 million worth of contracts to support pro-opposition efforts in Syria.

On its website, ARK lists all of these governments as clients, as well as the United Nations.

In its Syria operations, ARK worked together with another UK contractor called The Global Strategy Network (TGSN), which is directed by Richard Barrett, a former director of global counter-terrorism at MI6.

ARK apparently had operatives on the ground inside Syria at the beginning of the regime-change attempt in 2011, reporting to the UK FCO that “ARK staff are in regular contact with activists and civil society actors whom they initially met during the outbreak of protests in spring 2011.”

The UK contractor boasted an “extensive network of civil society and community actors that ARK has helped through a dedicated capacity building centre ARK established in Gaziantep,” a city in southern Turkey that has been a base of intelligence operations against the Syrian government.

ARK played a central role in developing the foundations of the Syrian political opposition’s narrative. In one leaked document, the firm took credit for the “development of a core Syrian opposition narrative,” which was apparently crafted during a series of workshops with opposition leaders sponsored by the US and UK governments.

ARK trained all levels of the Syrian opposition in communications, from “citizen journalism workshops with Syrian media activists, to working with senior members of the National Coalition to develop a core communications narrative.”

The firm even oversaw the PR strategy for the Supreme Military Council (SMC), the leadership of the official armed wing of Syria’s opposition, the Free Syrian Army (FSA). ARK created a complex PR campaign to “provide a ‘re-branding’ of the SMC in order to distinguish itself from extremist armed opposition groups and to establish the image of a functioning, inclusive, disciplined and professional military body.”

ARK admitted that it sought to whitewash Syria’s armed opposition, which had been largely dominated by Salafi-jihadists, by “Softening the FSA Image.”

ARK took the lead in developing a massive network of opposition media activists in Syria, and openly took credit for inspiring protests inside the country.

In its training centers in Syria and southern Turkey, the Western government contractor reported, “More than 150 activists have been trained and equipped by ARK on topics from the basics of camera handling, lighting, and sound to producing reports, journalistic safety, online security, and ethical reporting.”

The firm flooded Syria with opposition propaganda. In just six months, ARK reported that 668,600 of its print products were distributed inside Syria, including “posters, flyers, informative booklets, activity books and other campaign-related materials.”

In one document spelling out the UK contractors’ communications operations in Syria, ARK and the British intelligence cutout TGSN boasted of overseeing the following media assets inside the country: 97 video stringers, 23 writers, 49 distributors, 23 photographers, 19 in-country trainers, eight training centers, three media offices, and 32 research officers.

ARK emphasized that it had “well-established contacts” with some of the top media outlets in the world, naming Reuters, the New York Times, CNN, the BBC, The Guardian, the Financial Times, The Times, Al Jazeera, Sky News Arabic, Orient TV, and Al Arabiya.

The UK contractor added, “ARK has provided regular branded and unbranded content to key pan-Arab and Syria-focused satellite TV channels such as Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, BBC Arabic, Orient TV, Aleppo Today, Souria al-Ghadd, and Souria al-Sha’ab since 2012.”

“ARK products promoting HMG (Her Majesty’s Government) priorities by fostering attitudinal and behavioural change are broadcast almost every day on pan-Arab channels,” the firm bragged. “In 2014, 20 branded and un-branded Syria reports were produced on average by ARK each month and broadcast on major pan-Arab television channels such as Al Arabiya, Al Jazeera, and Orient TV.”

“ARK has almost daily conversations with channels and weekly meetings to engage and understand editorial preferences,” the Western intelligence cutout said.

The firm also took credit for placing 10 articles per month in pan-Arab newspapers such as Al Hayat and Asharq Al-Awsat.
US-UK program Basma cultivates Syrian media activists

The Syrian opposition media war was organized within the framework of a project called Basma. ARK worked with other Western government contractors through Basma in order to train Syrian opposition activists.

With funding from both the US and UK governments, Basma developed into an enormously influential platform. Its Arabic Facebook page had over 500,000 followers, and on YouTube it built up a large following as well.

Mainstream corporate media outlets misleadingly portrayed Basma as a “Syrian citizen journalism platform,” or a “civil society group working for a ‘liberatory, progressive transition to a new Syria.’” In reality it was a Western government astroturfing operation to cultivate opposition propagandists.

Nine of the 16 stringers used by Al Jazeera in Syria were trained through the US/UK government’s Basma initiative, ARK boasted in a leaked document.

In an earlier report for the UK FCO, filed just three years into its work, ARK claimed to have “trained over 1,400 beneficiaries representing over 210 beneficiary organisations in more than 130 workshops, and disbursed more than 53,000 individual pieces of equipment,” in a vast network that reached “into all of Syria’s 14 governorates,” which included both opposition- and government-held areas.

The Western contractor published a map highlighting its network of stringers and media activists and their relationships with the White Helmets as well as newly created police forces across opposition-controlled Syria.

In its trainings, ARK developed opposition spokespeople, taught them how to speak with the press, and then helped arrange interviews with mainstream Arabic- and English-language media outlets.

ARK described its strategy “to identify credible, moderate civilian governance spokespeople who will be promoted as go-to interlocutors for regional and international media. They will echo key messages linked to the coordinated local campaigns across all media, with consortium platforms able to cover this messaging as well and encourage other outlets to pick it up.”

In addition to working with the international press and cultivating opposition leaders, ARK helped develop a massive opposition media super-structure.

ARK said it was a “key implementer of a multi-donor effort to develop a network of FM radio stations and community magazines inside Syria since 2012.” The contractor worked with 14 FM stations and 11 magazines inside Syria, including both Arabic- and Kurdish-language radio.

To propagate opposition broadcasts across Syria, ARK designed what it called “Radio in a Box” (RIAB) kits in 2012. The firm took credit for providing equipment to 48 transmission sites.

ARK also circulated up to 30,000 magazines per month. It reported that “ARK-supported magazines were the three most popular in Aleppo City; the most popular magazine in Homs City; and the most popular magazine in Qamishli.”

A Syrian opposition propaganda outlet directly run by ARK, called Moubader, developed a huge following on social media, including more than 200,000 likes on Facebook. ARK printed 15,000 copies per month of a “high-quality hard copy” Moubader magazine and distributed it “across opposition-held areas of Syria.”

The British contractor TGSN, which worked alongside ARK, developed its own outlet called the “Revolutionary Forces of Syria Media Office (RFS),” a leaked document shows. This confirms a 2016 report in The Grayzone by contributor Rania Khalek, who obtained emails showing how the UK government-backed RFS media office offered to pay one journalist a staggering $17,000 per month to produce propaganda for Syrian rebels.

Another leaked record shows that in just one year, in 2018 – which was apparently the final year of ARK’s Syria program – the firm billed the UK government for a staggering 2.3 million British pounds.

This enormous ARK propaganda operation was directed by Firas Budeiri, who had previously served as the Syria director for the UK-based international NGO Save the Children.

40 percent of ARK’s Syria project team were Syrian citizens, and another 25 percent were Turkish. The firm said its Syria team staff had “extensive experience managing programmes and conducting research funded by many different governmental clients in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Turkey, the Palestinian Territories, Iraq and other conflict-affected states.”
Western contractor ARK cultivates White Helmets “to keep Syria in the news”

The Western contractor ARK was a central force in launching the White Helmets operation.

The leaked documents show ARK ran the Twitter and Facebook pages of Syria Civil Defense, known more commonly as the White Helmets.

ARK took credit for developing “an internationally-focused communications campaign designed to raise global awareness of the (White Helmets) teams and their life saving work.”

ARK also facilitated communications between the White Helmets and The Syria Campaign, a PR firm run out of London and New York that helped popularize the White Helmets in the United States.

It was apparently “following subsequent discussions with ARK and the teams” that The Syria Campaign “selected civil defence to front its campaign to keep Syria in the news,” the firm wrote in a report for the UK Foreign Office.

“With ARK’s guidance, TSC (The Syria Campaign) also attended ARK’s civil defence training sessions to create media content for its #WhiteHelmets campaign which launched in August 2014 and has since gone viral,” the Western contractor added.

In 2014, ARK produced a long-form documentary on the White Helmets, titled “Digging for Life,” which was repeatedly broadcast on Orient TV.

While it was running the White Helmets’ social media accounts, ARK bragged that it was boosting followers and views on the Facebook page for Idlib City Council.

The Syrian city of Idlib was taken over by al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, which then went on to publicly execute women who were accused of adultery.

While effectively aiding these al-Qaeda-aligned extremist groups, ARK and the British intelligence cutout TGSN also signed a document with the FCO hilariously pledging to follow “UK guidance on gender sensitivity” and “ensure gender is considered in all capacity building and campaign development.”

Setting the stage for lawfare on Syria

Another leaked document shows the Western government-backed firm ARK revealing that, back in 2011, it worked with another government contractor called Tsamota to help develop the Syrian Commission for Justice and Accountability (SCJA). In 2014, SCJA changed its name to the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA).

The Grayzone exposed CIJA as a Western government-funded regime-change organization whose investigators collaborated with al-Qaeda and its extremist allies in order to wage lawfare on the Syrian government.

ARK noted that the project initially worked “with seed funding from the UK Conflict Pool to support investigative and forensic training for Syrian war crimes investigators” and has since “grown to become a major component of Syria’s transitional justice architecture.”

Since the US, European Union, and their Middle East allies lost the military phase of their war on Syria, CIJA has taken the lead in trying to prolong the regime-change campaign through lawfare.

InCoStrat creates media network, helps them interview al-Qaeda

In the leaked documents, another UK government contractor called Innovative Communications Strategies (InCoStrat) boasted of building a massive “network of over 1600 journalists and key influencers with an interest in Syria.”

InCoStrat stressed that it was “managing and delivering a multi donor project in support of UK Foreign Policy objectives” in Syria, “specifically providing strategic communication support to the moderate armed opposition.”

Other funders of InCoStrat’s work with the opposition in Syria, the firm disclosed, included the US government, the United Arab Emirates, and anti-Assad Syrian businessmen.

InCoStrat served as a liaison between its government clients and the Syrian National Coalition, the Western-backed parallel government that the opposition tried to create. InCoStrat advised senior leaders of this Syrian shadow regime, and even ran the National Coalition’s own media office from Istanbul, Turkey.

The Western contractor took credit for organizing a 2014 BBC interview with Ahmad Jarba, the then-president of the opposition National Coalition.

The firm added that “journalists have often reached out to us in search of the appropriate people for their programmes.” As an example, InCoStrat said it helped plant its own Syrian opposition activists in BBC Arabic reports. The firm then added, “Once making the initial connections we encouraged the Syrians to maintain the relationships with the journalists in the BBC instead of using ourselves as the conduit.”

Like ARK, InCoStrat worked closely with the press. The firm said it had “extensive experience in engaging Arab and international news media,” adding that it worked directly with “heads of regional news in major satellite TV networks, press bureaus and print media.”

“Key members of InCoStrat have previously worked as Middle East correspondents for some of the world’s largest news agencies including Reuters,” the Western contractor added.

Also like ARK, InCoStrat established a vast media infrastructure. The firm set up Syrian opposition media offices in Dera’a, Syria; Istanbul and Reyhanli, Turkey; and Amman, Jordan.

InCoStrat worked with 130 stringers across Syria, and said it had more than 120 reporters working inside the country, along with “an additional five official spokesmen who appear several times a week on international and regional TV.”

InCoStrat also established eight FM radio stations and six community magazines across Syria.

The firm reported that it penetrated the armed opposition by developing “strong relationships with 54 brigade commanders in Syria’s southern front,” that involved “daily, direct engagement with the commanders and their officers inside Syria,” as well as defected officers Free Syrian Army (FSA) units in government-held Damascus.

In the leaked documents, InCoStrat boasted that its reporters organized interviews with many armed opposition militias, including the al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra.

Don’t just plants media stories; “initiate an event” to create your own scandals

In its media war on Damascus, InCoStrat pursued a two-pronged campaign that consisted of the following: “a) Guerrilla Campaign. Use the media to create the event. b) Guerrilla Tactics. Initiate an event to create the media effect.”

The intelligence cutout therefore sought to use the media as a weapon to advance tangible political demands of the Syrian opposition.

In one case, InCoStrat took credit for a successful international campaign to force the Syrian government to lift its siege of the extremist-held opposition stronghold of Homs. The Grayzone contributor Rania Khalek reported on the crisis in Homs, which was besieged by Damascus after the far-right Sunni fundamentalists that controlled it began carrying out sectarian massacres against religious minorities and kidnapping Alawite civilians.

“We connected international journalists with Syrians living in besieged Homs,” InCoStrat explained. It organized an interview between Britain’s Channel 4 and a doctor in the city, which helped raise international attention, ultimately leading to an end to the siege.

In another instance, the UK contractor said it “produced postcards, posters and reports” comparing the secular government of Bashar al-Assad to the fundamentalist Salafi-jihadists in ISIS. Then it “provided a credible, Arabic-English speaking Syrian spokesperson to engage the media.”

The campaign was very successful, according to InCoStrat: Al-Jazeera America and The National published the firm’s propaganda posters. The British contractor also organized interviews on the topic with The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, The Guardian, The Times, Buzzfeed, Al-Jazeera, Suriya Al-Sham, and Orient.

After regime change comes Nation Building Inc.

InCoStrat has apparently been involved in numerous Western-backed regime-change operations.

In one leaked document, the firm said it helped to train civil society organizations in marketing, media, and communications in Afghanistan, Honduras, Iraq, Syria, and Libya. It even trained a team of anti-Saddam Hussein journalists inside Basra, Iraq after the joint US-UK invasion.

In addition to contracting for the United Kingdom, InCoStrat disclosed that it has worked for the governments of the United States, Singapore, Latvia, Sweden, Denmark, and Libya.

After NATO destroyed the Libyan state in a regime-change war in 2011, InCoStrat was brought in in 2012 to conduct similar communications work for the Libyan National Transitional Council, the Western-backed opposition that sought to take power.
Coordinating with extremist militias, cooking news to “reinforce the core narrative”

The leaked documents shed further light on a UK government contractor called Albany.

Albany boasted that it “secured the participation of an extensive local network of over 55 stringers, reporters and videographers” to influence media narratives and advance UK foreign policy interests.

The firm helped create an influential Syrian opposition media outfit called Enab Baladi. Founded in 2011 in the anti-Assad hub of Daraya, at the beginning of the war, Enab Baladi was aggressively marketed in the Western press as a grassroots Syrian media operation.

In reality, Enab Baladi was the product of a British contractor that took responsibility for its evolution “from an amateur-run entity into one of the most prominent Syrian media organizations.”

Albany also coordinated communications between opposition media outlets and extremist Islamist opposition groups by hiring an “engagement leader (who) has deep credibility with key groups including (north) Failaq ash-Sham, Jabha Shammiyeh, Jaysh Idleb al Hur, Ahrar ash-Sham, (center) Jaysh al Islam, Failaq al Rahman, and (south) Jaysh Tahrir.” Many of these militias were linked to al-Qaeda and are now recognized by the US Department of State and European governments as official terrorist groups.

Unlike other Western government contractors active in Syria, which often tried to feign a semblance of balance, Albany made it clear that its media reporting was nothing more than propaganda.

The firm admitted that it trained Syrian media activists in a unique “newsroom process” that called to “curate” news by “collecting and organising stories and content that support and reinforce the core narrative.”

In 2014, Albany boasted of running the Syrian National Coalition’s communications team at the Geneva Peace talks.

Albany also warned that revelations of Western government funding for these opposition media organizations that were being portrayed as grassroots initiatives would discredit them.

When internal emails were leaked showing that the massive opposition media platform Basma Syria was funded by the United States and Britain, Albany wrote, “the Basma brand has been compromised following leaks about funding project aims.”

The leaks on social media “have damaged the credibility and trustworthiness of the existing branded platform,” Albany wrote. “Credibility and trust are the key currencies of the activities envisaged and for this reason we consider it essential to refresh the approach if the content to be disseminated is to have effect.” The Basma website was taken down soon after.

These files provide clear insight into how the Syrian opposition was cultivated by Western governments with imperial designs on Damascus, and was kept afloat with staggering sums of cash that flowed from the pockets of British taxpayers – often to the benefit of fanatical militiamen allied with Al Qaeda.

While Dutch prosecutors prepare war crimes charges against the Syrian government for fighting off the onslaught, the leaked files are a reminder of the leading role that Western states and their war-profiteering companies played in the carefully organized destruction of the country.

Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker.

19 October 2020

Source: www.transcend.org

By David Suzuki

For many, the pandemic has renewed our innate appreciation for and connection to nature. People have taken to growing food on windowsills and in backyard and community gardens. We’re cultivating yeasts to bake bread and getting outside more to walk, run, swim and cycle.

In the face of uncertainty, nature brings solace and sustenance. Research shows time spent in forests — and even just looking at trees or photos of them — boosts immune systems, lowers blood pressure, reduces stress, improves mood and ability to focus, and increases energy levels and sleep quality.

As we consider the natural world, we must remember that how we talk about it matters. Steven Nitah, former elected chief of Lutsel K’e Dene First Nation and four-time member of the Northwest Territories legislative assembly, says shifting our language can help shift our understanding. “We need to re-do land use plans. We need to rebuild those plans as land-relationship plans,” he says, urging us to re-imagine and re-orient our relationship with nature — to manage for abundance based on reciprocity and to recognize our responsibilities to the land, water and air.

As a society, we continue to exceed biological limits, which increases our species’ collective exposure to risk. With climate disruption, our refusal to contain carbon emissions has put our well-being and survival at risk.

In his essay “The year America melted down,” Omar El Akkad observes, “Mask-wearing has become politicized, just as school shootings became politicized, just as climate change became politicized, just as any instance of communal survival at the expense of personal profit inevitably becomes politicized.”

Things that shouldn’t be politicized are, but El Akkad argues battle lines continue to be drawn around issues that pit individual rights against responsibilities to uphold the common good. Individual rights only matter in the commons, though, and so must include responsibility.

In times of compounded crises — a pandemic, crippling racism, rising inequity and escalating climate risk — we can no longer afford to listen to advocates of narrow self-interest or those who falsely claim that favouring the wealthy and powerful will send benefits trickling down to the rest. In Canada, the most affluent 0.5 per cent of families now holds 20.5 per cent of the wealth — some $2.4 trillion — and income inequality continues to grow.

If, as El Akkad says, polarization is rising between those who champion individual rights to profit and those who believe in collective responsibility to people and planet, we must make explicit choices to work toward equity, inclusivity and a more balanced relationship with the natural world.

We have the chance to invest in and create a better future. Why wouldn’t we choose this path? What stands in our way?

To envision new ways and to act differently, we need to co-create stories of what is possible and worthwhile.

In her book Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants, ethnobotanist, professor and Citizen Potawatomi Nation member Robin Wall Kimmerer encourages us to recognize the world as a gift. Humility, she says, will help us make better choices.

Stories have always helped humans make sense of the world, and Kimmerer says they’re strong tools for restoring the land and our relationship to it. “We need to unearth the old stories that live in a place and begin to create new ones, for we are storymakers, not just storytellers.” We have the power to tell different stories that help right our relationships and better enable us to work for the good of all.

Although everyone can benefit from the wisdom in Indigenous Peoples’ stories, Kimmerer cautions against wholesale appropriation. We must take inspiration from the old stories and build more balanced narratives about relationships between people, place and planet.

The choice isn’t as complex as some might have us believe. We can choose humility, caring and wisdom based on knowledge gained from Indigenous Peoples, scientists and experts, and shoulder the responsibilities to each other and Earth through our actions — creating a better future for all. Or we can continue on as we have, knowing that the crises we face will worsen.

Humanity’s ability to take the first path lies in the values we choose, the stories we tell ourselves and the strength of the relationships we are willing to build with each other and Earth.

David Suzuki , an award-winning geneticist and broadcaster, co-founded the David Suzuki Foundation in 1990.

18 October 2020

Source: countercurrents.org

By Maya Evans

The NATO & US backed war on Afghanistan was launched 7th October 2001, just a month after 9/11, in what most thought would be a lightning war and a stepping stone onto the real focus, the Middle East. 19 years later and the US is still trying to extricate itself out of the longest war in its history, having failed in 2 of its three original aims: toppling the Taliban and liberating Afghan women. Perhaps the only target confidently met was the assassination of Osama Bin Laden in 2012, who was in fact hiding out in Pakistan. The overall cost of the war has been over 100,000 Afghan lives, and 3,502 NATO and US military fatalities. It has been calculated that the US has so far spent $822 billion on the war. While no up to date calculation exists for the UK, in 2013 it was thought to have been £37 billion.

Peace talks between the Taliban, Mujaheddin, Afghan Government and US have been slowly unfolding over the last 2 years. Mainly taking place in the city of Doha, Qatar, the talks consisted predominantly of older male leaders who have been trying to kill one another for the last 30 years. The Taliban almost certainly have the upper hand, as after 19 years of fighting 40 of the richest nations on the planet, they now control at least two thirds of the country’s population, claim to have an endless supply of suicide bombers, and have most recently managed to secure a controversial deal with the US for the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners. All along the Taliban have been confident of the long game despite the US initial 2001 promise to defeat the Taliban.

Most ordinary Afghans hold out little hope for the peace talks, accusing the negotiators of being disingenuous. Kabul resident 21-year-old Naima says: “The negotiations are just a show. Afghans know those people have been involved in war for decades, that that they are now just making deals to give Afghanistan away. What the US says officially and what is done is different. If they want to wage war then they will, they are in control and they are not in the business of bringing peace.”

20-year-old Imsha, also living in Kabul, noted: “I don’t think the negotiations are for peace. We’ve had them in the past and they don’t lead to peace. One sign is that when negotiations are going on people are still being killed. If they’re serious about peace, then they should stop the killing.”

Civil society groups and young people have not been invited to the various rounds of talks in Doha, and on only one occasion was a delegation of women invited to put their case for maintaining the hard-earned rights gained over the last 19 years. Although women’s liberation was one of the three main justifications given by the US and NATO when invading Afghanistan in 2001, it is not one of the key negotiation issues for the peace agreement, instead the main concerns are around the Taliban never again hosting al Qaeda, a ceasefire, and an agreement between the Taliban and Afghan Government to share power. There is also the question as to whether the Taliban present at the peace talks in Doha represent all the various fractions of the Taliban both across Afghanistan and in Pakistan – many Afghans note they do not have the remit of all divisions, and on that basis, talks are automatically illegitimate.

So far, the Taliban have agreed to talk with the Afghan Government, a somewhat promising indication as previously the Taliban have refused to accept the legitimacy of the Afghan Government which, in their eyes, was the illegitimate puppet Government of the US. Also, a ceasefire is one of the prerequisites of the peace deal, sadly there has been no such ceasefire during the talks with attacks on civilians and civil buildings being an almost everyday occurrence.

President Trump has made it clear that he wants to remove US troops from Afghanistan, though it is likely the US will want to maintain a foothold in the country by way of US military bases, and the mining rights being opened up to US corporations, as discussed by President Trump and Ghani in September 2017; at that point, Trump described US contracts as payment for propping up the Ghani Government. Afghanistan resources make it potentially one of the richest mining regions in the world. A joint study by The Pentagon and the United States Geological Survey in 2011 estimated $1 trillion of untapped minerals including gold, copper, uranium, cobalt and zinc. It is probably no coincidence that the US special peace envoy at the talks is Zalmay Khalilzad, former consultant for the RAND corporation, where he advised on the proposed trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline.

Although Trump wants to reduce the remaining 12,000 US troops down to 4,000 by the end of the year, it is unlikely the US will withdraw from their remaining 5 military bases still ensconced in the country; the advantage of having a foothold in a country which boarders its main rival China will be near impossible to relinquish. The main bargaining piece for the US is the threat to withdraw aid, as well as the potential to drop bombs – Trump has already shown willingness to go in hard and fast, dropping ‘the mother of all bombs’ on Nangahar in 2017, the biggest non-nuclear bomb ever dropped on a nation. For Trump, a single large bomb or intense carpet aerial bombing will be his probable course of action if talks fail to go his way, a tactic that would also shore up his presidential campaign which is being fought on the lines of a ‘cultural war’, whipping up racism mixed with white nationalism.

Despite the UN call for an international ceasefire during the Covid 19 lockdown, fighting has continued in Afghanistan. The disease is known to have infected to date 39,693 and killed 1,472 people since the first confirmed case on the 27th February. Four decades of conflict have undermined a barely functioning health service, leaving the old especially vulnerable to the disease. After the virus first emerged in Afghanistan, the Taliban released a statement saying they considered the disease to be both a divine punishment for human wrongdoing and a divine test of human patience.

With 4 million people internally displaced, Covid 19 will undoubtably have a devastating impact on refugees in particular. Dire living conditions within camps make it almost impossible for internally displaced people to protect themselves, with impractical social distancing in a one room mud hut, normally home to at least 8 people, and hand washing a huge challenge. Drinking water and food are in scarce supply.

According to the UNHCR there are 2.5 million registered refugees from Afghanistan globally, making them the second biggest population of displaced peoples in the world, yet it’s the official policy of many EU countries (Britain included) to forcibly deport Afghans back to Kabul, in the full knowledge that Afghanistan has been classified the “world’s least peaceful country”. In recent years forcible deportations from EU countries have tripled under the “Joint Way Forward” policy. According to leaked documents, the EU were fully aware of the dangers for Afghan Asylum seekers. In 2018 UNAMA documented the highest ever recorded civilian deaths which included 11,000 casualties, 3,804 deaths and 7,189 injuries. The Afghan Government agreed with the EU to receive deportees out of fear that a lack of cooperation would lead to aid being cut.

This weekend is part of a national action to mark solidarity with refugees and migrants who are currently facing the hostile environment of harsh British policy and treatment. It comes within days of our Home Secretary Preti Patel having suggested we dump refugees and undocumented migrants trying to cross the channel on Ascension Island, to imprison people on disused ferries, to build “marine fences” across the channel, and to deploy water cannons to make huge waves to swamp their boats. Britain wholeheartedly committed to the war on Afghanistan in 2001, and now it dodges its international responsibilities to safeguard people fleeing for their lives. Britain should instead admit culpability for conditions forcing people to become displaced and pay reparations for the suffering its war has caused.

Maya Evans co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence, UK. www.vcnv.org.uk

13 October 2020

Source: countercurrents.org

By UN News

5 Oct 2020 – While COVID-19 has affected all countries, the pandemic is “uneven”, and it is estimated that 10 per cent of the global population may have been infected with the virus, senior officials with the World Health Organization (WHO) said today.

Speaking to a special session of the agency’s Executive Board, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said 10 countries account for 70 per cent of all reported cases and deaths, and just three countries account for half.

“Not all countries have responded the same way, and not all countries have been affected the same way”, he told the 34 members.

Most people still at risk

Globally, there were more than 35 million cases of COVID-19 as of Monday, and more than one million deaths.

Dr. Michael Ryan, WHO Emergencies Director, reported that the pandemic continues to evolve, with a surge in Southeast Asia, an “upward trajectory” in the northern hemisphere, and an increase in cases and deaths in Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean. Meanwhile, the situation “is currently rather more positive” in Africa and the Western Pacific.

“Our current best estimates tell us that about 10 per cent of the global population may have been infected by this virus. This varies depending on country; it varies from urban to rural; it varies between different groups. But what it does mean is that the vast majority of the world remains at risk”, said Dr. Ryan.

“We know the pandemic will continue to evolve. But we also know we have the tools that work to suppress transmission and save lives right now, and they are at our disposal. The future depends on the choices we collectively make about how we use those tools; develop, scale-up and distribute others.”

Four country scenarios

Tedros outlined four scenarios countries are facing during the crisis.

Some nations took quick and decisive action against the pandemic, thus avoiding large outbreaks. And while some countries suffered large outbreaks, they were able to bring them under control and suppress the virus.

“Third, while some countries brought the virus under control, as economies and societies have eased restrictions, there has been an increase in cases”, he continued. And fourth, there are still some countries in the “intense phase of transmission.”

Tedros stressed that “every situation can be turned around”, underlining the importance of strong leadership, clear and comprehensive strategies, consistent communication, as well as engaging the population.

Funding and solidarity

With the northern hemisphere influenza season fast approaching, and COVID-19 cases increasing in some countries, the WHO chief outlined three priorities for the coming months, including increasing funding to ensure all people will have equal access to any potential treatments.

Tedros urged countries to “realize the full potential” of the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator, which includes a groundbreaking global collaboration to speed up development of vaccines that will be available to anyone, anywhere who needs them.

The ACT Accelerator was launched in April and has secured around $3 billion so far. However, Tedros said some $34 billion is still required, with $14 billion needed now to maintain momentum.

“History will not judge us kindly if it records that trillions of dollars were poured into domestic stimulus packages, but the international community could not find the funds to ensure equitable access for all people”, he said.

Besides highlighting the funding gap, Tedros underscored the need to “continue to make the most of the tools we have” to fight the pandemic. These range from practicing physical distancing and wearing masks, but also include surveillance, isolation, compassionate care, contact tracing and quarantine.

“And third, I will never tire of calling for solidarity”, he said. “Finger-pointing will not prevent a single infection. Apportioning blame will not save a single life.”

Independent review expected

The meeting with WHO’s Executive Board provided an opportunity to discuss developments around the implementation of a COVID-19 strategic preparedness and response plan, as well as steps taken to initiate a review by an independent panel.

The 34 members will be briefed on Tuesday by the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response (IPPR). They also will hear from two other bodies: the International Health Regulations Review Committee and the Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee for the WHO Health Emergencies Programme.

Tedros has also launched an urgent investigation into reports of alleged sexual exploitation and abuse by people who identified themselves as working for WHO in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, during the major Ebola outbreak in the east which ended in June.

A list of candidates to lead the investigation has been identified, with more details to follow.

12 October 2020

Source: www.transcend.org

By teleSUR

In the last five years, the blockade succeeded in cutting off financing to Venezuela, preventing it from accessing the required currency to acquire food, medicine, spare parts and essential raw materials for economic activity.

11 Oct 2020 – Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro addressed to the peoples of the world in a letter published on Saturday to denounce the illegal blockade that the U.S. government has imposed upon his country for about two decades.

Maduro explained that in the last five years “the blockade succeeded in cutting off financing to Venezuela, preventing it from accessing the required currency to acquire food, medicine, spare parts and essential raw materials for economic activity.”

Moreover, “the U.S. has decreed a ban on the commercialization of Venezuelan hydrocarbons, its main export product, and source of fiscal income,” the president added.

Amid the increase of hostilities against the South American nation, Venezuela’s National Constitutional Assembly approved on October 8 the Anti-Blockade Law for National Development and the Guarantee of the Rights of the Venezuelan people, which aims at protecting the citizens from the continuous attacks on the economy and the wellbeing of the population.

In this sense, Maduro explained that the law “will allow for the creation of mechanisms to improve the nations’ income.” Furthermore, it will stimulate internal economic activity and carry out productive alliances.

The letter highlights the deadly impact of the U.S. blockade on the Venezuelan people as research carried out by the U.S. Center for Economic and Policy Research revealed that the blockade “is responsible for at least 400.000 deaths” in the country.

Despite several attempts by the U.S. government to discredit Venezuela’s electoral process, president Nicolás Maduro explained that all democratic conditions were established to hold the legislative elections on December 6 2020 as over 90 percent of political organizations have registered before the National Electoral Council.

12 October 2020

Source: www.transcend.org

By Josh Marcus

The move will make it hard for the country to import humanitarian goods like food and medicine, US allies say.

9 Oct 2020 – The Trump administration on Thursday [8 Oct] imposed a new, crushing round of sanctions that virtually blacklists Iran’s entire financial sector – raising concerns it will cut off the country’s ability to import humanitarian goods like food and medicine.

Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin said in a statement that the sanctions, which target 18 banks and penalize foreign institutions that do business with them, are part of efforts to cut down on “illicit access to U.S. dollars” and won’t stifle humanitarian efforts.

“Our sanctions programs will continue until Iran stops its support of terrorist activities and ends its nuclear programs,” Secretary Mnuchin said. “Today’s actions will continue to allow for humanitarian transactions to support the Iranian people.”

The country is struggling with both a record-setting coronavirus outbreak and a currency crisis, making the latest round of sanctions, which essentially sever Iran from the global financial system, an even heavier blow.

Foreign companies or individuals doing business with the banks will have 45 days to unwind their relationships, and then will face “secondary sanctions.”

The move is the latest escalation with Iran as the president continues a tough re-election bout.

In September, the Trump administration sought to unilaterally re-impose UN sanctions against Iran that had been lifted as part of the 2015 nuclear deal, though fellow UN Security Council nations have not to recognized the decision.

In 2018, the Trump administration withdrew the US from the deal and reimposed some of the sanctions it had lifted, and tense relations have remained since. In 2019, the president designated the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a foreign terrorist organization, over objections from the US Department of Defense.

And in 2020, following earlier attacks the U.S. alleged were led by Iranian-backed militias, a drone strike in Iraq killed Iran’s top military commander, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, and the country responded with missile attacks on U.S. forces.

Mr Trump’s rival in the election, former Vice President Joe Biden, supports returning to the nuclear deal.

12 October 2020

Source: www.transcend.org

By Ramzy Baroud

9 Oct 2020 – ‘International law’ remains one of the most discussed terms in the context of the Israeli occupation of Palestine. It is almost always present, whether the discussion pertains to the Israeli wars and siege on Gaza, the expansion of illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank or the encroaching apartheid throughout Israel and the Occupied Territories.

Despite the importance and relevance of the term, however, it rarely translates into anything tangible. The Israeli siege on Gaza, for example, has continued, unabated, for nearly 14 years, without international law serving as a protector of Palestinian civilians against Israeli violations of human rights. More recently, on September 13, the Israeli government approved 1,000 illegal settlement units in the West Bank, in stark violation of international law. It is likely that Israel will go ahead with it, anyway.

With regard to violating international law, Israel is in a unique category of its own, for Israel’s behavior is always governed by its military strength and the backing of its Western allies.

To gain more insight into the relationship between international law, conflict resolution and accountability, I spoke with Professor Richard Falk, one of the world’s leading experts on international law and former UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian Human Rights.

Of particular relevance to our discussion are the current Palestinian efforts at pursuing international action to hold alleged individual Israeli war criminals accountable at the International Criminal Court (ICC). The fact that the Court has agreed to investigate alleged war crimes in occupied Palestine has generated an angry response from Israel and unprecedented sanctions from Washington, targeting ICC judges and staff, including Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda.

I asked Professor Falk about the ‘limited scope’ of the ICC investigation, as the Court will only be looking into Israeli war crimes, thus, for now, excluding crimes against humanity, among other illegal practices that should be applicable in the case of Israel.

“The scope of the investigation is something that is ill-defined, so it is a matter of political discretion,” Professor. Falk said, adding that “the Court takes a position that needs to be cautious about delimiting its jurisdiction and, therefore, it tries to narrow the scope of what it is prepared to investigate.”

“I don’t agree with this view … but it does represent the fact that the ICC, like the UN itself, is subject to immense geopolitical pressure,” Falk told me. Still, the seasoned international law expert described the ICC investigation as a “breakthrough”.

“It’s a breakthrough even to consider the investigation, let alone the indictment and the prosecution of either Israelis or Americans that was put on the agenda of the ICC, which led to a pushback by these governments … Israel has denounced the Court as if it is improper to examine any State that claims the matter of geopolitical impunity. So you have a core denial of the rule of law.”

Undeniably, this breakthrough and the advanced position of international institutions regarding the illegitimacy of the Israeli occupation are the outcome of the insistent effort put in by Professor Falk and other champions of international law throughout the years. In fact, the relentless attempts aimed at silencing Falk – and others like him – were carried out so that their criticism of Israel’s violations did not, eventually, lead to such dreaded investigations, like that of the ICC.

“There are very militant Zionist-oriented NGOs, like UN Watch, that engage in defamatory kinds of activities and use all their resources and energy to persuade people, including the UN Secretary-General, to criticize me and urge my dismissal or some type of sanctions,” Falk reflected on the challenges he faced during his term at the UN between 2008-14.

Fortunately, but also tellingly, “in the end, the role of Special Rapporteur was respected … and there was so much support for my activity, including foreign ministries and also from outside the Islamic world. I felt that it was an important kind of presence to maintain.”

“The Zionist groups were, of course, very frustrated and they didn’t try to respond to my reports on the violations of human rights in the Occupied Territory; instead, they concentrated on defaming and smearing the messenger rather than addressing the message,” Falk said, identifying the very essence of the strategy used by pro-Israel groups, whether at the UN or elsewhere.

I also asked Professor Falk about the term ‘Israeli occupation’ as, in my limited understanding, the term has been devised by the Geneva Conventions – and previous international definitions – to regulate a transitional period during which an Occupying Power is in charge of the welfare and well-being of the civilian population living in an Occupied Territory.

“International law is quite ambiguous about the duration of a military occupation and Israel has made a kind of specious argument that the Geneva Conventions and the normal law governing belligerent occupation doesn’t apply here, because this is disputed sovereignty rather than a case where another country has been occupied,” Falk said.

Coupled with US-western support and vetoes at the Security Council, Israel has historically exploited this ambiguity to entrench – instead of ending – its occupation of Palestine.

Since international law “doesn’t provide an endpoint to the Occupation, the most effective way of challenging it from an international law perspective is that Israel has committed so many fundamental breaches of the obligations of an Occupying Power – the establishment of the settlements, the incremental annexation, the integration of Jerusalem into the sovereign State of Israel..”

“They are all fundamental violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention and they represent an effort to make the end of Occupation not possible in the sense that it was meant: turning the society back to the civilian population that is occupied,” Falk continued, describing this situation as a “serious flaw, legally and politically.”

“But is there a reason for optimism?” I asked Professor Falk, whose energy and tireless work continue to define this indefatigable warrior of human rights.

“As colonialism and oppression lost their acceptance as forms of legitimate political behavior, the political balance shifted and the perseverance of national struggles turned out to be more formidable than the weaponry at the disposal of the colonial powers,” Falk said.

According to Professor Falk, history is clearly on the side of Palestinians, who are already “winning the legitimacy war”.

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of The Palestine Chronicle.

12 October 2020

Source: www.transcend.org

By Jacob Crosse

8 Oct 2020 – The collective wealth of the world’s 2,189 billionaires has risen to $10.2 trillion, an increase of nearly $1.3 trillion in the past three years, according to a new report by the Swiss bank UBS and PricewaterhouseCoopers. The unprecedented surge in wealth takes place amidst a global pandemic that has killed more than one million people worldwide, including more than 215,000 in the United States alone.

The report, “Riding the Storm,” is based on data from 43 markets, including interviews with 60 billionaires, accounting for around 98 percent of global billionaire wealth. It sums up the results: “Most of the decade was a time of exceptional prosperity for billionaires regardless of sector…”

The US continues to have the largest concentration of billionaire wealth, accounting for 36 percent of the world’s total, or $3.6 trillion. China ranked second with $1.6 trillion and saw the largest growth over the decade, by 1,146 percent.

Third was Germany, where billionaire wealth totaled $594.9 billion, an increase of 175 percent from 2009’s $216.1 billion. While fourth in terms of billionaire wealth at $467.6 billion, Russia saw the smallest growth by percentage, 80 percent, from $260.2 billion in 2009 to $467.6 billion in 2020.

The $10.2 trillion amassed by less than .0003 percent of the global population is more than the estimated 2020 Gross Domestic Product of every country on the planet except for the US and China. The staggering total hoarded by less than 2,200 people, or about the number of COVID-19 deaths in the US within the last 72 hours, surpasses the previous high of $8.9 trillion recorded in 2017.

For a household earning the average US median income, it would take over 16 million years to accumulate $1 trillion, not even enough to cover what has been collectively usurped from global society in less than three years. Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America, has calculated the cost of ending hunger in the US at $25 billion, which could be done 400 times over with $1 trillion.

The billionaires who have increased their wealth the most, according to the authors, are in the “technology, healthcare and industrial sectors,” including Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The report states: “During 2018, 2019 and the first seven months of 2020, technology billionaires’ total wealth rose by 42.5% to USD 1.8 trillion, supported by the surge in tech shares.”

The surge in technology and medical shares was buoyed by unlimited cash from the Federal Reserve, included as part of the $2.2 trillion CARES Act passed at the end of March in a near-unanimous vote by both Democrats and Republicans.

This financial bailout made a “big difference” in the fortunes of billionaires, with the authors writing: “Billionaire wealth is loosely correlated with equity markets, due to holdings in listed companies, and a few weeks makes a big difference. From the end of March, governments’ huge fiscal and quantitative easing packages drove a recovery in financial markets. By the end of July 2020, billionaire wealth was back above its 2019 level.”

Particularly obscene is the surge in wealth of billionaires in the health care industry, in the midst of a deadly global pandemic. The authors write, “Healthcare billionaires’ total wealth increased by 50.3% to $658.6 billion, boosted by a new age of drug discovery and innovations in diagnostics and medical technology, as well as latterly COVID-19 treatments and equipment.”

The report adds: “The number of tech billionaires grew from 68 in 2009 to 234 in 2020, while the number of healthcare billionaires grew from 48 to 167. Tech and healthcare billionaires’ total wealth both multiplied by four times – from $321.3 billion to $1.3 trillion for tech and from $120.8 billion to $482.9 billion for healthcare.”

And what are these “pandemic profiteers” spending their fortunes on? To get some idea, Christie’s auction house in New York held its latest online auction, “20th Century Evening Sale” live-streamed from the Rockefeller Center in New York on October 6. In one night, the world’s wealthiest spent over $340 million on 59 different 20th and 21st century art pieces. The auction also featured the most expensive dinosaur skeleton ever sold, a fossilized Tyrannosaurus rex, for $27.5 million.

The massive concentration of wealth is a decades’ long and bipartisan policy of redistribution to the rich. The Institute for Policy Studies measured the tax obligations of America’s billionaires as a percentage of their wealth between 1980 and 2018 and found that it had decreased 79 percent. Over the last 20 years, the growth in US billionaire wealth has been 200 times greater than the growth in median wealth.

While the billionaires are richer than ever, the response of the ruling class to the pandemic has produced a massive social catastrophe for the working class. In the United States, tens of millions are unemployed and being cut off of all benefits, facing poverty, homelessness and hunger.

Earlier reports found that the 643 wealthiest Americans increased their wealth by a staggering $845 billion between March 18 and September 15. During that same time, over 62 million people in the US applied for unemployment benefits. An estimated 10.5 million jobs were eliminated, with major companies such as Disney, United Airlines, and Cineworld announcing tens of thousands additional layoffs in the last week.

12 October 2020

Source: www.transcend.org

By Muhammad Mahmood

The Friday Sermon

On Friday, October 2, 2020, the Muslim Jumma (Friday Congregation) prayer day, French President Emmanuel Macron said this in a speech in the Western Paris suburb of Les Mureaux that “Islam is a religion that is in crisis all over the world today, we are not just seeing this in our country”. He further added that Islam was in crisis due to “an extreme hardening of positions” and in his speech, Macron also expressed his pious desire to” liberate” Islam in France from foreign influences by improving oversight of foreign financing of mosques, implying somewhat that Islam, Muslims, terrorism and radicalisation are one and the same.

Interestingly, some regarded Macron’s speech positively and saw this is as an important step in creating “French Islam”, a view of the French political establishment’s ”house Arab” and a long time friend of President Macron, Hakim El Karoui. Karouni argued that “it was a speech against Islamism, but it was pro-Islam”. Hoswever, Yasser Louati, a French Muslim activist disagreed and tweeted saying, “The repression of Muslims has been a threat, now it is a promise”. Louati further adds that Macron’s new measures “embolden” the far-Right and anti-Muslim Left at the same time. Many also accuse Macron of stirring up Islamophobic and racist feelings against Muslims at a time when Islamophobia is already on the rise in France.

Rim-Sarah Aloune, a French academic referring to the speech said “ No mention of white supremacy even though we are a country that exported the racist and white supremacist theory of the “great replacement” used by the white terrorist who committed the horrific massacre of Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand. She was referring to the 2019 massacre at the Christchurch Mosques in New Zealand that killed 51 Muslim worshippers and wounded 49. The Australian white supremacist terrorist, Brenton Tarrant, cited French Islamophobic thinker Renaud Camus who according to him, inspired him to undertake his terrorist actions.

France’s Muslim hatred and its hypocrisies

In fact, hatred of Muslims by France’s Christians and their self-styled seculars is nothing new. It is the staple of every day French political and social discourses at many levels, from the government, politicians, the scholars and the media. In this regard, it is also of interest to note that it was in Clermont in France on November 27, 1097, Pope Urban II, called for a crusade for the first time against the Muslims and ordered his fanatic murderous faithfuls to capture Jerusalem. So anti-Muslim hatred in France has a long history that stretches over a millennium.

Macron is not the first French President to promise new Islam, successive French presidents have done so since the 1980s. His policy is largely guided by ideology to foster an “Islam of Enlightenment” that is “compatible with the values of the Republic” without clearly defining what that will entail except that state would designate “certified Imams” for mosques, though the idea of state certification does not extend to Christian clergies and Jew Rabbis. Double standards are the hall marks of Western societies in general and their politicians, in France, this has taken the form of an art.

Some would argue that such hypocrisies are the reflection of moral and political crisis that these societies are presently experiencing, exacerbated further by more than a decade of continuing economic crisis. This is nowhere more on display than in the US now, the leader of the Western world and France itself is on the march of a political take over by the far Right party Front National led by Marine Le Pen. The recent polls suggest Macron and Le Pen are running neck to neck. Now Macron is doubling down on security (read “Islamist terrorism”) and identity (read spreading Islamophobia) issues, as his political arsenals to attract far-right voters in the 2022 presidential election.

Macron’s talk of the “Muslim Problem” is the latest example of mainstream politicians pandering to the far-right. In fact, Macron at present is more worried about Marine Le Pen than Islam, but the vilification Islam is being used by Macron to enhance his credential among Le Pen’s Islamophobic supporters. However, the far-Right think tank such as French GRECE is well ahead in building a framework of Islamophobia that can be used both as political tactic and a political rhetoric than Macron can do. They have been having quite a bit of success in incorporating the tactics of the left such as Gramscian concept of hegemony where they are articulating their strategy based on cultural power which they argue, must precede political power. Spreading of Islamophobia by the far Right is the product of that endeavour to attain cultural hegemony to capture political power.

In this scenario of a rise in Islamophobia in France, how Macron – of which he himself is a part of – is going to “reorganise” Islam without undermining the “values of the Republic” is a puzzle. Unless he means something else, enshrined in the 1905 Separation of Church and State law his reference to the “values of the Republic” is quite clear and which underpins “laicite”, that explicitly bars the state from interfering with private religious affairs.

Another intriguing aspect of Macron’s reformation of Islam is that he apparently is opting to partner with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE – homes of a certain brand of Islam that many Muslims believe is extreme and have problem with – to work to establish his brand of “French” Islam and yet the same Arab countries are France’s partners and collaborators in its war against Arab countries that are more moderate, namely Syria and Libya where war crimes are being committed daily with France’s complicity.

Another aspect of France’s double standard is that in a bid to overthrow the Assad regime, it has been instrumental in providing support and material help to the Islamist terrorist groups like ISIS and similar types of Islamist terrorist outfits in Syria. After destroying Libya, France is now backing the Libyan war lord Khlifa Haftar to wage war against the UN backed government of Libya led by Fayez al-Sarraj based in Tripoli.

In accordance with the Sykes-Picot pact which was rubber stamped by the pliant and now defunct League of Nations, the ”secular” France also created in 1920 a colonial state called Lebanon out of the greater Syria. In fact, Syria did not recognise Lebanon as a separate state until 2008.

France granted independence to Lebanon in 1943 but left behind an institutionalised confessional state – “a form of consociationalism in which the highest offices are proportionately reserved for representatives from certain religious communities” – to safeguard the political and economic interests of the Maronite Catholics who were the local collaborators of the French colonial establishment in Lebanon. It must be also noted that 96 percent of French Christians are Catholic. Since gaining independence in 1943, Lebanon has politically remained a dysfunctional state due to the “secular” France’s entrenching of confessionalism into the body politic of that country. Not a great example of “laicite”, secularism – is it?

While Macron’s Friday speech was mocked by some on social media by some as a “Khutba” or sermon because it was delivered on the weekly Muslim communal prayer day, it is beyond joke. France in effect once again is evaluating its relationship with its Muslim minority who now numbers 6 million, constituting 9 percent of the population, the single largest Muslim population in any country in Western Europe.

A leading French Muslim activist described Macron’s project as “A comprehensive institutional framework to control and regulate Islam, with a clear repressive drive”.

As has been highlighted in a statement by 100 Muslim academics, activists and others Macron in fact, is constructing a “Muslim Problem” as they pointed out “ More than the necessity to fight terrorism as a criminal phenomenon, President Macron is to-day participating, with his speech, in constructing a Muslim problem, targeting believers and their faith”.

France like the US has made it a habit to making enemies for itself to justify its military interventions and aggressions, primarily directed at Middle-Eastern Arab countries, to reshape them to suit their economic and political interests.

“We pity a ruler”

Macron is not facing up to the reality that France is politically, militarily and more importantly economically facing at the present time. Increasingly, France is becoming an irrelevant country, geologically, that is. Macron’s bid to reshape the Middle East far exceeds France’s capacity. In Europe itself where Jean Monnet, the Frenchman who helped crafting what has eventually to become the European Union or more precisely the club France, was intended mainly to safeguard France’s political, economic and strategic interests from those of Germany, now precariously and quite ironically, has to hang on to the coat tail of Germany to make its presence felt.

Joseph Massad, Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University, New York wrote in the Middle East Eye that “ Macron is not the first French ruler who wanted to “liberate” Islam. This is an old French “secular” tradition”. He further added France’s crisis with Islam is a legacy of 200 years of French colonial brutality. He also pointed out that by the very start of the 20th century as the French concern about their “crisis” with Islam increased with the acquisition of colonies with large Muslim population, the colonial quest for knowledge on Islam became necessary to understand its (Islam) future in the 20th century. This is what Edward Said detailed in his book, Orientalism where he showed how colonial necessity drove the study of the orient in general and Islam in particular in the West with the sole objective to dominate and not appreciate the culture of the colonised people. This was the root of the emergence of the academic “Orientalists Industry” in the West.

However, with all the understanding of Islam dished out by mostly lslamophobic French orientalists and French colonial settler (pied noir) Arabists in North Africa, Professor Massad opined “the project of transforming Islam into something European Christianity and French laicite can tolerate continues afoot in 2020, but with unsatisfactory results as far as Macron is concerned, especially as France’s funding of Jihadist groups in Syria has not so far brought about the French-sought after Islam”.

Now Macron is facing much bigger problem at home than his problem with Islam. French economic growth has been stagnant for more than a decade. Unemployment has been stuck between 9 percent and 11 percent. The deep gap between the rich and poorer citizens is on the rise. France’s richest one percent owns 20 percent of wealth, yet the median monthly wage is about US$1,930 which indicates half of French workers are paid less than that. The declining living standards and purchasing power have morphed into a collective national despair as was reflected in the Yellow Vest movement.

The situation has, in effect, been worsening in the aftermath of the Global Financial crisis of 2007-08 which also created the serious ongoing debt crisis. The slowdown of growth has made it much harder to deal with the other main challenge, the very high level of unemployment. To further worsen the situation, the corona virus pandemic has created the worst economic crisis in decades causing havoc within the country.

Macron’s image being the president for the rich does not help to garner popular support in such a critical time in the country’s history which is marked by economic stagnation and rising unemployment and poverty. He knows that support for him has been withering. His desperate bid to shore up popularity by hanging on to rhetoric that does more harm than good to him individually and Fance as a whole that a leading Muslim scholar who felt sorry for Macron, summed up the situation this way “ We pity a ruler who is still living in crisis and the spectre of religious wars of the middle ages”.

Muhammad Mahmood is an economic and political analyst.

12 October 2020

Source: countercurrents.org

By Peter Koenig

Rumors have it that the remaining months of 2020 may bring drastic and explosive changes in the world’s financial system. But such “doomsday” rumors have been floating around every beginning of fall during the last few years. Why? – The US dollar is getting weaker and weaker. It is not quite on a free fall, but still remains a major trading currency and a key world reserve currency. And for many economists that’s difficult to understand.

However, it is unlikely that that the collapse of the dollar will come from one day to the next. That would not be good for the world economy, as still too many countries depend on the dollar.

Facts are,

i) China’s foreign exchange reserves have just increased to US$ 3.112 trillion equivalent, of which about US$ 1.3 trillion denominated in US-dollars – and in general forex-reserves continue to grow;

ii) within short, possibly by the end of 2021, the Chinese yuan, or renminbi (RMB) could become the world’s third largest reserve currency, after the US-dollar and the euro, surpassing the Japanese yen and the British pound, reported by CNBC;

iii) according to Morgan Stanley , at least 10 regulators (i.e. Central Banks and similar forex regulating institutions) added the yuan to their reserves in 2019, bringing the total to 70 – and rising; and

iv) according to the FED, the US economy could lose in excess to one third of its GDP up to the end of 2020 or mid-2021, while China’s economy is expected to grow by 1.3% (IMF) in 2020, and by China’s own estimate up to 3.5%.

Given the dismal covid-related world economy collapsing, and with China being the only major economy expected to grow this year, the number of yuan reserve holders may increase drastically by the end of 2020 and especially through 2021, suggesting that central banks around the world realize that for their financial stability, they must increase their yuan holdings significantly in the foreseeable future. This means shedding other reserve currencies, like the Japanese Yen, the British Pound, but especially the US-dollar. For example, Russia has dumped the dollar, reducing her dollar debt-holdings by 96%.

The Russian Trade Minister, Denis Manturov, called on his BRICS colleagues to increase their trading in local currencies instead of US dollars. Trade in national currencies is a key aspect of cooperation of the five-nation alliance that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa and it is an effective way to dedollarize their economies.

China and Russia and many of the Shanghai Cooperation (SCO) countries are trading for many years already in their local currencies, or in yuan, especially cross-border trading, but they are also promoting currency swap arrangements with other countries, eager to escape the iron fist of sanctions of the United States.

In an interview with MarketWatch, senior fellow Stephen Roach at Yale University and former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, says coronavirus may cause a dramatic decline of the US dollar in the near future – “In a Covid era, everything unfolds at warp speed.” Roach also predicted an up to 35% drop of the dollar against major international currencies. He adds, given today’s economic outlook, this might happen rather quickly.

Indeed, while western economies are struggling keeping afloat, China is preparing to launch a new international currency, the digital, gold-backed, possibly crypto-RMB as an international payment and reserve currency, completely outside the dollar-dominated SWIFT system. The new digital RMB money is currently tested in several Chinese cities with positive results.

The People’s Bank of China – China’s Central Bank – recently revealed plans to have its sovereign digital currency ready in time for the 2022 Winter Olympics. The international rollout could actually happen much earlier, possibly in 2021, or earlier if warranted by international monetary events. In any case, the new trading currency may very likely find an astounding attraction by many countries that are eager to dedollarize and get out from under the boot of threats of sanctions by Washington.

It is clear that any money or legal tender that will grow into a major international trading and reserve currency needs to be backed by a strong economy. Backing of a strong economy is fully commensurate with the yuan. China’s economy today in real – and solid – output and long-term stability can easily be assessed as the world’s strongest. Comparing for example the Chinese GDP with the US GDP is like day and night: The Chinese GDP consists of more than two thirds of tangible and solid production and construction of infrastructure, housing, transport, energy and so on; while the US GDP is almost the reverse, more than half is consumption and service industries. Most hard production is outsourced. This undoubtedly distinguishes the yuan or RMB from fiat currencies, as are the dollar and the euro – which are backed by nothing. Simply put, China’s economy and her currency attract a lot of international trust and confidence.

Unfortunately, these differences are not (yet) reflected by the undistinguished linear accounting of GDP, but they are recognized by international economic observers and analysts, including nations’ treasurers around the world.

These are good reasons for the new digital RMB or yuan to grow fast as a primary trade and reserve asset for many countries. It will most likely far outrank Bitcoin, which is often heralded as possibly the “new gold”, or reserve currency.

Not only would the number of countries holding the Chinese currency in their reserve coffers increase rapidly, but the total amount of yuan reserve holdings might skyrocket faster than analysts expect, signaling clearly the end of the US-dollar hegemony. This might undoubtedly shift the global balance of economic power.

“Looking back years later, the two defining historic events of 2020 would be the coronavirus pandemic, and the other would be [China’s] digital currency,” Xu Yuan, a senior researcher with Beijing’s University’s Digital Finance Research Centre, told recently the South China Morning Post.

These developments are not ignored by Washington. The US will not so easily give up its dollar hegemony which means largely control over the world’s economy and financial flows. Although the times of total dollar-control of the world economy are irreversibly gone, Washington intends to slow down the power shift as long as possible. Though a hot war is not excluded, more likely is a currency war.

In line with the Great Reset announced by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and, in parallel, the IMF prediction of the Great Transformation (see this and this), a kind of currency revolution might be initiated, possibly introducing a major instrument for launching the Great Reset, alias Transformation.

As a hypothesis, Washington could, via the IMF, return to some kind of a gold standard. It could take the form of a digital SDR-type currency-basket intended to replace the dollar and the emerging digital yuan / RMB as trading and reserve currency. The current composition of the SDR contains the five major international forex currencies, US dollar (41.73%), euro (30.93%), yuan (10.92%), yen (8.33%), and British pound (8.09%).

Although the yuan is vastly undervalued, especially as compared with the US-dollar and the euro, the yuan is finally present in the basket since 2017 and has thereby become an official international exchange and reserve asset. The respective weights in the SDR basket have last been set in 2016 and are valid for 5 years, meaning they are up for renegotiation and readjustment in 2021.

Continuing with the hypothesis of the new gold standard, it might well be that in the hypothetical new SDR-like currency, gold would take a prominent role, one that overshadows the weakness of the US dollar. However, as was the case with the 1944 gold-standard, Washington-Treasury-FED would insist on the value of gold in the basket being linked to the dollar – which would de facto disproportionately increase the respective weight of the dollar in the basket.

If such a hypothetical deal would be accepted by the majority of countries – the US has still the sole veto right in the two Bretton Woods Institutions, IMF and World Bank – the hypothetical gold-based “SDR” would be a serious contender to the emerging internationalized digital yuan / RMB.

To forego such a situation, a possible currency war, China, as a holder of large direct and indirect gold reserves, may consider establishing a “gold commodity” market priced in yuan / RMB – and invite other large gold producers, like Russia, Venezuela, South Africa and others not in the US orbit, to join in an alternative currency, i.e. a yuan-denominated gold market, or a weighted average gold value of, say, the three major participants of the alternative gold commodity market.

This alternative currency denominated gold would be strengthened by the power of the respective economies which would back it.

In the end – as is already demonstrated today – international trust in the respective economies and their currencies – gold backed or not – will determine the outcome of a possible currency confrontation. China, already engaged in cross-border trading in local currencies and expanding yuan-trading arrangements internationally, for example, with currency swap measures in place with Russia, Iran and Venezuela, would be well placed to break the US-currency hegemony.

Finally, the goal is not to have one hegemon to replace another domineering power, but to establish a balanced world with several regional hubs or financial centers which would promote a monetary equilibrium that would gradually accompany progress of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the bridge that spans the world (see this), with increasingly equal access to vital resources for building peacefully a World Community with a Shared Future for Mankind.

*

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

This article was originally published on New Eastern Outlook.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst.

6 October 2020

Source: www.globalresearch.ca