Just International

Watch: Al Jazeera’s “Massacre at Dawn” Gives Glimpse of Horror in Shujaiya

By Shahd Abusalama

My body shakes as tears fall out of control after watching the first minute of Al Jazeera’s 22-minute documentary on the Shujaiya massacre which Israel committed in the eastern Gaza City neighborhood a week ago today, killing dozens and flattening the entire area.

Thinking that the footage contained in Massacre at Dawn is just a fraction of the horror makes it even worse. No wonder Israel prevented media from covering the brutality that our people endured there.

(Readers in the United States can watch the documentary with English subtitles here. It can also be watched on Al Jazeera Arabic without subtitles.)

I tried to put myself to sleep as only sleep can give me a break from the pain. My attempts failed. So I got up to share with you the most heartbreaking scenes that keep playing back once I close my eyelids.

“My son is gone!”

The mother’s voice at 3:35 in the video saying, “My son is gone! Mahmoud is gone” echoes in my mind.

The mother was running, escaping death along with her son. Her son suddenly is shot and falls. She stops despite that Israeli forces were still shooting.

She risks her life to rescue him and starts screaming, “My son got injured. My son is dying. Help!” But no ambulances are allowed there. Finally a man comes, carries her son and they continue running. I don’t know if they survived.

Watch the traumatized elderly man at 5:58 who stutters, out of breath, “There was shelling. Everything was bombed.”

“We were stuck in the house while bombings everywhere. My son was killed and my hand got injured,” he says (my translation). “My son is still over there [in the house]. We were sitting together. I went to the toilet. I returned to find blood flooding out of his neck. He has been bleeding since the morning.”

Listen to the cries of the man at 7:00 who tries to prevent the camera from filming him, refusing to appear broken. “Instead of [us] feeding our babies with milk, they sent them rockets!” he exclaims.

The reporter asks him, “Do you have a house here?” He replies, “I have a house and I lost my four kids,” trying to hide his tears from the camera.

“Are they kids? Don’t worry. Speak so the world can see what we’re suffering here,” the reporter says. So the man tries hard to continue with a voice choked with tears, ”They’re kids. I don’t know where they are!” They might be lost, or dead, or under the rubble, some people took them or they evaporated, he says.

Listen to the woman at 8:05 who is running and screaming like mad: “Our house collapsed over us while were inside. We left, miraculously” (my translation).

Orphaned child

Then comes the injured child Bisan Daher on her hospital bed at 9:35, whose condition is like countless others who were the only survivors of their massacred families. She lost her parents and her siblings.

At 10:20, a man is crying with his children: “We were sleeping at the house normally. I don’t know how, the house was shelled all of a sudden. And shelled once again. I got out to find my wife dying in the hallway” (my translation).

His son at 10:35 says (my translation): “Our house was destroyed and my mother was killed. We took her to hospital but she became a martyr. She was looking through the window of my sister’s room when a missile hit the apartment below us and killed her. And our house was destroyed, how will we live?”

At 10:55, the boy’s sister says, “We weren’t doing anything. I woke up after a ‘warning’ rocket hit our house. Only seconds later, we found Mom dying in the hallway. We started screaming, calling for ambulance to rescue her but she was already dead. May she rest in peace.”

“Just like in 1948!”

At 12:28, a man who is fleeing says (my translation), “At al-Mansoura street, we were running in between bodies, torn pieces are on both sides, everywhere. Houses collapsed over their inhabitants. Worse than Sabra and Shatila.”

Another man escaping with his family says at 16:10: ”Just like in 1948! We are fleeing again. Let the world hear this. This is a new exodus.”

Within the scene of people fleeing Shujaiya, an elderly man paralyzed by shock is unable to run. His son retrieves him and carries him on his back, as he says, “May God get revenge of them [Israel].”

‪#‎GazaUnderAttack‬: As you watch this, just remember that this is just a glimpse of the indescribable horror endured by our people in Shujaiya.

That’s why Israel didn’t want its ugliness to be reported to the world and prevented media from entering the area as they were massacring civilians.

Remember that these people are the voices who had a chance to be heard. They were luckier than others, who suffered and were killed amidst the world’s silence.

Shahd Abusalama, 23, is a Palestinian artist, a blogger and an English literature graduate living in Gaza City.

28 July, 2014
Electronicintifada.net

 

VIDEO: In Memory of Salem Shammaly

By International Solidarity Movement

28 July, 2014
Palsolidarity.org

In honour of the memory of Salem Khalil Salem Shammaly, the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) has published all the raw footage, taken by Mohammed Abedullah, of Salem’s murder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbZxbziFV5w

Yesterday during the ceasefire, Salem’s body was finally able to be recovered and buried after five long days. Salem’s cousin, Mohammed Al-Qattawi, explained that Salem’s body was so badly decomposed that his mothers, sisters, and friends couldn’t bare to see him to say goodbye.

So many families are now trying to bury their children, their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and friends. The first cemetery the family went to was full to capacity. The second cemetery was able to help them, but they were forced to open an already used grave, to place Salem in. In the last 20 days, over 1,058 Palestinians have been killed.
On the 20th of July, Salem and his family left the Shajiya neighbourhood at dawn after the Israeli military began shelling homes and destroying the area.

The ISM contacted Salem’s sister, Shireen, and asked her if she could tell us more about her brother, and what happened to him and their family.

“With the rest of the people, we headed towards the city center assuming that it would be a safe place. After the announcement of the truce, we heard a call through a local radio station from other family members who were stranded in the region; among them was our cousin.

Salem then disappeared for two days. We went daily to the al-Shifa Hospital to look at the records to check if they received any information about him, whether he was wounded in the hospital or a martyr, but we had no luck. My father kept asking relatives and neighbors and everyone he would meet to find out where his son could be.
On the 22nd of July in the morning, the power supply came back, which only lasts for three hours a day at my house. We connected the mobile phones and the laptop as well as the lamps so we could charge them in preparation for the night. My sister opened her Facebook account to read about the happenings of last night and to keep updated with news and pictures and about the invasion of Shajiya.

She found a video that drew her attention titled ‘Israeli sniper killing wounded civilian’. Once she opened the video, my other sister, who was sitting next to her, screamed and said, “this is Salem’s voice. I swear, its Salem’s voice.”

We waited until the video completed buffering and saw Salem walking, helping the paramedics to rescue the injured. Then, one of us screamed and called for our father, “Dad, Salem is alive, come!”

We got a chair for our father, sat down, and all concentrated on the laptop screen waiting for the end. Suddenly the camera was distorted and then it settled on Salem lying on the ground. We all became quiet and speechless. We sat calmly and our father said, “thank God, Salem was wounded. Maybe the foreigners took him to a hospital…” But before my father could finish his sentence, Salem was shot the third and fatal shot.

Salem was a young man in the prime of his youth. He had dreamt to live his life like any other at his age. He was handsome and affectionate and could never hide what was in his heart. He has been waiting to grow up and to marry and have a family. We were waiting for him to grow up in order to assist our sick father and to support our family. He did not like politics at all. He was only in interested in his family and football.

Why did they kill him in this brutal way? He was shot in broad daylight and, during the time of truce, the only thing in his hand was a cheap mobile phone. Was he shot by an Israeli sniper who discovered that he did not pose any threat or danger? Then why did they not leave him in order to regain consciousness or to be rescued? Why did they shoot a second and third bullet?!

God, if he was part of the resistance then we would have said that it was the path that he had chosen, but he had no relationship with them.

Is it not enough that they have deprived us from his joyful presence? Why are they also depriving us from the chance to say goodbye to him and to bury him? Where are the people who call and urge for human rights initiatives? Where is Switzerland, the backer of the Geneva Conventions, which provides for the protection of human rights?

Look at us, do we not look like humans? How are we so different from them? Where are your laws and your organizations and your promises? If you cannot enforce the laws promised, then why create them? We see that animal rights are applied in a more fair and equal manner than what you call “human rights”.

To The family Of The One Thousandth Victim Of Israel’s Genocidal Slaughter In Gaza

By Ilan Pappe

I do not know yet who your loved one was. She might have been a baby a few months old, or a young boy, a grandfather or one of your children or parents. I heard about your loved one’s death from Chico Menashe, a political commentator on Reshet Bet, Israel’s main radio station.

He explained that the killing of your loved one, as well as turning Gaza neighborhoods to rubble and driving 150,000 people from their homes, is part of a well-calculated Israeli strategy: this carnage will destroy the impulse of Palestinians in Gaza to resist Israeli policies.

I heard this while reading in the 25 July edition of the supposedly respectable Haaretz the words of the not so respectable historian Benny Morris that even this is not enough.

He calls the genocidal policies so far “refisut” — feebleness of mind and spirit. He demands far more massive destruction in the future with the knowledge that this is how you behave if you want to defend your “villa in the jungle,” as former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak described Israel.

Inhuman wilderness

Yes, I am afraid to say the Israeli media and academia are fully behind the massacre apart from few, hardly audible voices in this inhuman wilderness. I am not writing this to tell you that I am ashamed — I long ago dissociated myself from this state ideology and do all I can as an individual to confront and defeat it. Probably it has not been enough; we are all inhibited by moments of cowardice, egotism and maybe a natural impulse to take care of our family and loved ones.

And yet I feel the urge today to make a pledge to you, which none of the Germans my father knew during the time of the Nazi regime was willing to make to him when the thugs committed genocide against his family. This is not much of a pledge at your moment of grief, but it is the best I can offer and saying nothing is not an option. And doing nothing is even less than an option.

This is 2014 — the destruction of Gaza is well documented. This is not 1948 when Palestinians had to struggle hard to tell their story of horror; so many of the crimes Zionist committed then where hidden and never came to light, even until today. So my first and simple pledge is to record, inform and insist on the truth.

My old university, University of Haifa, has recruited its students to disseminate Israel’s lies all over the world using the Internet, but this is 2014 and propaganda of this kind will not hold water.

Pledge to boycott

But surely this is not enough. I pledge to continue the effort to boycott a state that commits such crimes. Only when the Union of European Football Associations throws Israel out, when the academic community refuses to have any institutional ties with Israel, when airlines hesitate to fly there, and when every outfit that may lose money because of an ethical stance in the short-term understands that in the long run it will gain both morally and financially — only then we will begin to honor your loss.

The boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement has had many achievements and continues its tireless work. The obstacles still include the false allegation of anti-Semitism and the cynicism of politicians. This is how an honorable initiative by British architects to force their colleagues in Israel to take a moral stance rather than be accomplices in the criminal colonization of the land was blocked at the last moment.

Similar initiatives were sabotaged elsewhere by spineless politicians in Europe and the United States. But my pledge is to be part of the effort to overcome these hurdles. The memory of your loved one will be the driving force, together with the vivid memory of the suffering of the Palestinians in 1948 and ever since.

Slaughterhouse

I do it all egotistically. I really pray and hope that in this worst moment of your life when Palestinians stand in Shujaiya, Deir al-Balah or Gaza City, gazing at the slaughterhouse created by Israeli warplanes, tanks and artillery, you would not lose hope in humanity.

This humanity even includes Israelis, those who do not have the courage to speak but who express their horror in private as my overflowing email and Facebook inboxes attest, as well as the small handful who demonstrate publicly against the incremental genocide in Gaza.

It also includes those not born yet who perhaps will be able to escape a Zionist indoctrination machine that teaches them, from cradle to grave, to dehumanize the Palestinians to such a level that the burning alive of a sixteen-year-old Palestinian boy fails to move them or shatter their belief in their government, army or religion.

Defeated

For their sake, mine and yours, I wish we can also dream of the day after — when Zionism will be defeated as the ideology that governs our lives between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean sea and we all have the normal life we crave for and deserve.

So I pledge today not to be distracted even by friends and Palestinian leaders who still foolishly pin their hopes on the long-gone “two-state solution.” If one has the impulse to be involved in bringing regime change in Palestine, the only reason to do this is for a struggle for equal human and civil rights and full restitution for all those who are and were victimized by Zionism, inside and outside the beloved land of Palestine.

May whoever is your loved one rest in peace knowing that their death was not in vain — not because it will be avenged and revenged. We do not need more bloodshed. I still believe there is a way of bringing evil systems to an end with the power of humanity and morality.

Justice also means bringing the murderers who killed your loved one and so many others to court, and we must pursue bringing Israel’s war criminals to trial in international tribunals.

It is a far longer way and, at times, even I feel the impulse to be part of a force that uses hard power to end the inhumanity. But I pledge myself to work for justice, full justice, restorative justice.

This is what I can pledge — to work to prevent the next stage in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

The author of numerous books, Ilan Pappe is professor of history and director of the European Centre for Palestine Studies at the University of Exeter.

28 July, 2014
Electronicintifada.net

Not Just Numbers: Online Memorial Publishes Names, Faces of Palestinians Killed In Gaza

By Ali Abunimah

Qassem Talal Hamdan, 23, was killed on 13 July 2014 in Beit Hanoun in northern Gaza. An engineering student, his “dream was to be a successful engineer to build and develop his country.”

Iman Khalil Abed Ammar was just nine years old. She was killed on 20 July in the Shujaiya massacre along with her brothers, four-year-old Asem and thirteen-year-old Ibrahim.

Mahmoud Abdel Hamid Elzowidi, 23, and Mohammad Khalid Jamil Elzowidi, 20, were among five members of their family killed on 19 July when Israel bombed their house in Beit Hanoun.

These are the names of just six of the more than 1,000 Palestinians known to have been killed in almost three weeks of relentless Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip.

On Saturday, during a twelve-hour “humanitarian truce,” the full extent of the mass destruction Israel has inflicted was revealed as people were able to re-enter neighborhoods such as Shujaiya, and dozens more bodies were pulled from under the rubble. Many people are still missing.

Afraid that the names of those slaughtered by Israel would get lost in the staggering statistics of death, two women have set up the website Humanize Palestine (humanizepalestine.com) as an online memorial to Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks.

Bayan Abusneineh and Dana Saifan are both recent graduates of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and have both been active in Students for Justice in Palestine.

I spoke with Abusneineh, who told me that she and Saifan got the idea to start the project after seeing many graphic images of the bodies of Palestinians who had died violent deaths circulating through social media.

“Initially when everything was happening it was necessary for people to see these graphic images, to know the reality of what is going in Gaza,” Abusneineh explained. “But then I started thinking about those three Israeli settler youths who were kidnapped – their faces were everywhere. Generally, when Israelis are killed, their bodies are not shown. You only see smiling faces, and that creates empathy.”

Abusneineh said that Humanize Palestine was intended to serve first and foremost “as a reminder and memorial for our own community. People were already making an effort to put names out there, and we saw them sharing some of the images of friends and relatives when they were alive, so our project is another way to bring them together.”

But she also says she hopes that people outside the Palestinian community will “see it and understand better who Palestinians are. This is how they lived. This is how their lives were ended.”

I asked Abusneineh how she and Saifan verify the images, names and other information they publish on the site, and she talked about the process: “We started just compiling images about a week ago on a Google document and we realized we could make something bigger. We started going through Twitter, Tumblr, trying to get verification. People were sharing pictures of family members and we got into contact with them as well.”
“When we find someone circulating information, we try to find multiple pictures of the person matched to a name,” she explained. “We check to see if the name is on a list of casualties on a credible website. If we can’t find a match, we don’t use the image. We also try our best to match information up with stories published in the media. There have been a lot we didn’t use.”

Still the effort is not perfect, Abusneineh acknowledges, which is why she thinks it is crucial to see Humanize Palestine as a community effort. Several people have helped to refine, correct and track down information, and there is now an email address on the site for people to send in submissions.

“We’ve had a lot of people contribute pictures saying these are my cousins, this is their picture and this is what happened to them, and we’re hoping to put those up too.” Others have even sent in art work and poetry.
The website also includes Palestinians who may have been combatants, such as brothers Mustafa Abd El Hadi Abu Mur, 20, and Khaled Abd El Hadi Abu Mur, 23 who, the site says, “died together in Rafah in defense of their nation.”

Abusneineh acknowledges that the site is a lot of work, but she sees value in it becoming a permanent memorial if the community effort can be built and maintained.

Although she agreed to speak to The Electronic Intifada in order to explain the goals of Humanize Palestine, Abusneineh says that she and Saifan have not put their own names on the website itself, “because we want the focus to be entirely on the people whose lives we write about.”

The website features not only Palestinians killed by Israel in Gaza, but victims of Israeli army and settler attacks in the occupied West Bank as well.

“We don’t want it just to be when a huge massacre happens. People still die every day because of the occupation. So we hope to continue,” she says.

Ali Abunimah is Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada and author of The Battle for Justice in Palestine, now out from Haymarket Books.

28 July, 2014
Electronic Intifada

The Empire Economy Does Not Serve The Economy Or People

By Kevin Zeese & Margaret Flowers

As US Empire fades, we must choose our path forward

World history is filled with empires, e.g. the Roman and Byzantine empires, the European colonial empires, various ancient Iranian empires, the Arab Caliphate and Ottoman Empire, the Soviet Union to name a few. These historic empires have one thing in common: they no longer exist. As the lifecycle of empire wanes, rather than being a benefit to the home country, sustaining empire becomes more expensive than it is worth.

While the US economy and military remain the largest in the world, the economy is faltering and losing its vitality. Chalmers Johnson, a CIA analyst who became a critic of the agency and author of a series on US Empire, writes :

“Thirty-five years from now, America’s official century of being top dog (1945-2045) will have come to an end; its time may, in fact, be running out right now. We are likely to begin to look ever more like a giant version of England at the end of its imperial run, as we come face-to-face with, if not necessarily to terms with, our aging infrastructure, declining international clout, and sagging economy.”

The US began as a colony of European empires, especially of England, and then evolved into its own North American Empire. Thomas Jefferson called the United States an “empire of Liberty” when he purchased the Louisiana Territory in 1803. As “Manifest Destiny” took root, the US stole land of Indigenous peoples, appropriated Texas and Oregon and then went onto California. The Mexican War and Texas cessation took 55% of Mexico’s pre-1836 territory including lands in present day California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming as well as Texas through its cession from Mexico.

The modern US Empire has its roots in the Spanish-American War when the US occupied Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines and in the two World Wars. Since World War II, the United States has been a growing global imperial power at war—somewhere—every year. Seymour Melman wrote in March of 2003: “Now, at the start of the twenty-first century, every major aspect of American life is being shaped by our Permanent War Economy.” This has been a prime cause of the hollowing out of the domestic economy.

Rather than fixing the infrastructure, which the American Society of Civil Engineers ranks in its annual report card as a D+, the federal government’s “financing is lavished without stint to promote every kind of war industry, and foreign investing by U.S. firms.” As Seymour points out “there is no public ‘space’ for dialogue on how to improve the quality of our lives. Such topics are subordinate to ‘how to make war.’”

Economy and Empire

An empire must keep its client states happy as well as its transnational corporations profitable. This has resulted in a foreign policy designed for corporate interests and foreign oligarchs. The Wikileaks documents show US secrecy often hides crimes , abuses and unethical behavior linked to corporate interests; it also hides actions of a government that operates not for the public interest but for the profits of transnational corporations ; and that is why secrecy is often necessary. We see this most glaringly in the rigged trade agreements being negotiated in secret except for hundreds of corporate advisers who work with the US Trade Representative in writing the agreements.

The flood of migrants coming from Central America is blowback from US foreign policy in the region. Just as NAFTA undermined the Mexican economy, Central American trade agreements have done the same for that region. Further, US support for brutal governments who impoverish their people and support for coups against governments that try to create greater equity have made these nations very difficult to live in. Even US drug policy adds to the misery in these countries. People desperate to survive come North in the hopes of finding a better life. While some cities, most recently Vancouver, seek to become sanctuary cities that protect immigrants, the Obama administration takes the approach of criminalization and deportation .

Not only does Empire foreign policy undermine the federal budget, with 55% of discretionary spending going to the military, but it also undermines the US economy as jobs are shipped overseas and corporations hide trillions of dollars in assets overseas to avoid paying taxes (see, for example, this article, Boycott Walgreens: The Tax-Dodger On The Corner ) . Empire economics does not serve the workers in the US or abroad and does not serve the security of people as safety nets are shredded as austerity is needed to fund weapons and war.

The cost of war has escalated. Just one weapons system, the F-35, a fighter jet that has been grounded because it does not work, has cost $49 billion per year since the program begin in 2006. Hayes Brown of Think Progress made a list of what that money could have been spent on instead. It could have bought a mansion for every homeless person, fed every school child in the US, funded every humanitarian crisis or provided global security through the UN or provided funding to rebuild America.

The economic impact of Empire policy is going to take a new turn as nations become allies outside of US influence. This week was the beginning of an alternative to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) officially launched the BRICS Development Bank . This comes at the same time that 78 nations have called for a new era where there is respect for the sovereignty of nations and policies that seek economic, environmental and social justice. Many nations of the world are fighting back against US hegemony.

Empire Economy Causing Unrest

Not only are governments challenging US dominance, but people are fighting back as well. A wave of revolts, not only in the US but around the world, against big finance capitalism that allows transnational corporations to dominate the world economy has the power structure, including bankers , on heightened alert. The US military has been spending tens of millions since 2008 in the Minerva Project studying how protest movements develop and go viral. This week we learned the military was studying how to control emotions by manipulating social media . We also learned that spy agencies also have tools to manipulate social media in order to control people.

And, we see their fear in the harsh way they handle protests against Empire policies. Last week in Syracuse, a nonviolent protester against drones and grandmother of three, Mary Anne Grady Flores, was sentenced to one year in jail . You can see video of her moving sentencing speech here . After her sentencing, another drone protester was convicted and is also facing a year in jail. Flores was released on bail pending appeal , but 7 subsequent drone protesters were hit with heavy bail after they were arrested.

The Empire advocates should be afraid. Earlier this year a war was stopped when people united to oppose the attack on Syria. Currently, the Israelis cannot hide their war crimes, even if the media does not report them. We are developing our own media tools that can stop and expose the realities of wars

The former Assistant Secretary of Treasury Paul Craig Roberts reviews the realities of the failing US economy , piercing the veil of false media reporting on a non-existent “recovery” and tying it to the Empire economy, asking:

“In view of this reality, why is Washington pushing its puppet in Kiev toward war with Russia? Why is Washington pushing NATO to spend more money and build more bases on which to deploy more troops in the Baltics and Eastern Europe, especially when Washington’s contribution will be the largest part of the cost? Why is Washington re-entering the Middle East conflict that Washington began by inciting Sunni and Shia against one another? Why is Washington constructing new naval and air bases from the Philippines to Vietnam in order to encircle China?

“If Washington is this unaware of its budget constraints and its financial predicament, it cannot be long before Americans experience economic catastrophe.”

The Arc of US Empire Shows Decline

The last 100 years of Empire and imperialism brought the US great wealth, creating the largest economy in the world which the IMF values as $17 trillion or one-quarter of the global economy. Today, the US economy is struggling with high unemployment, record numbers of Americans dropping out of the job market, large trade deficits and declines in many measures of standard of living. At the same time, other countries, most notably China, India, Brazil and Russia, are beginning to challenge the US.

As noted earlier, these countries along with South Africa joined together to create the BRICS development bank to challenge the World Bank and IMF, which are dominated by the US and its western allies. This may be the most important challenge to US economic dominance since 1945 especially when combined with bilateral agreements between countries that omit the US dollar, weakening its position as the reserve currency of the world.

Alfred W. McCoy, author of Policing America’s Empire: The United States, the Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State , convened a global working group of 140 historians to consider the fate of the US as an imperial power. He predicts four scenarios for the future of the United States, all leading to the end of Empire.

First on the list is economic decline. He writes that “three main threats exist to America’s dominant position in the global economy: loss of economic clout thanks to a shrinking share of world trade, the decline of American technological innovation, and the end of the dollar’s privileged status as the global reserve currency.” The scenario ends with:

“After years of swelling deficits fed by incessant warfare in distant lands, in 2020, as long expected, the U.S. dollar finally loses its special status as the world’s reserve currency. Suddenly, the cost of imports soars. Unable to pay for swelling deficits by selling now-devalued Treasury notes abroad, Washington is finally forced to slash its bloated military budget. Under pressure at home and abroad, Washington slowly pulls U.S. forces back from hundreds of overseas bases to a continental perimeter. By now, however, it is far too late.”

The second is fear of oil shock by the leadership which explains the US’ current extreme energy extraction boom even though it threatens the environment and public health. McCoy writes that the waning economic power of the United States has caused it to lose control of the world’s oil supplies. In 2010, he pointed out that while the US was still a gas guzzler, “China became the world’s number one energy consumer this summer, a position the U.S. had held for over a century.”

Further he emphasized the rising power of Iran and Russia, two countries the US is belligerent with, saying that by 2025 they will “control almost half of the world’s natural gas supply, which will potentially give them enormous leverage over energy-starved Europe. Add petroleum reserves to the mix and, as the National Intelligence Council has warned , in just 15 years two countries, Russia and Iran, could ‘emerge as energy kingpins.’” Competing with them through extreme energy extraction, under the “all of the above” energy strategy, will come at tremendous cost to the ecology of the US and the planet.

The third scenario is what our last article on Empire examined : Military Misadventure. McCoy writes : “Counterintuitively, as their power wanes, empires often plunge into ill-advised military misadventures. … These operations, irrational even from an imperial point of view, often yield hemorrhaging expenditures or humiliating defeats that only accelerate the loss of power.” He points to the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, with war threatened in Pakistan.

McCoy describes how with the US military “stretched thin from Somalia to the Philippines and tensions rising in Israel, Iran, and Korea, possible combinations for a disastrous military crisis abroad are multifold.” Since writing this, the US military is stretched even thinner with more military crisis areas, e.g. Libya, Syria, the Ukraine and Russia unfolding. Each could grow into a wider conflict.

The final scenario is World War III in the Asian Pacific which he described as having previously been “America’s Lake,” but which is now challenged by China. The US fears China as, he notes, “the Pentagon reported that Beijing now holds ‘the capability to attack… [U.S.] aircraft carriers in the western Pacific Ocean’ and target ‘nuclear forces throughout… the continental United States.’”

The Wikileaks cables that were published after McCoy’s article further describe the fears of the US as a declining world power in the face of China. A March 24, 2009 State Department cable describes a meeting between Secretary of State Clinton and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd held in Washington, DC. During the meeting Clinton complained about how difficult it was to take action against China asking “How do you deal toughly with your banker?” Rudd says Australia was playing close attention to China and building up its Navy in response. He urged the US and its allies to pull China into US-dominated structure of state relations, “while also preparing to deploy force if everything goes wrong.”

No doubt this conversation was one of many that led to Obama’s Asian Pivot and the increased focus on negotiating the China-less Trans-Pacific Partnership thus encircling China militarily and economically. McCoy, writing prior to these policy changes, predicts vast resources being spent on the full “spectrum in all dimensions of the modern battlespace.” He describes this including not just traditional military weapons but “a new digital network of air and space robotics, advanced cyberwarfare capabilities, and electronic surveillance.” All of this preparation for conflict with China comes at the expense of the faltering domestic economy and indebted federal budget.

These scenarios describe the decline of US Empire and each has the potential for tremendous negative effects on the domestic economy as the decline occurs. McCoy finds that “every significant trend points toward a far more striking decline in American global power by 2025 than anything Washington now seems to be envisioning.”

How quickly do empires unravel? McCoy writes a warning:

“Despite the aura of omnipotence most empires project, a look at their history should remind us that they are fragile organisms. So delicate is their ecology of power that, when things start to go truly bad, empires regularly unravel with unholy speed: just a year for Portugal, two years for the Soviet Union, eight years for France, 11 years for the Ottomans, 17 years for Great Britain, and, in all likelihood, 22 years for the United States, counting from the crucial year 2003.” (Note: the year of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.)

Creating a Different Future

Of course, it does not have to be this way. The people of the United States can educate themselves about these realities and mobilize to force the government to take a very different course. Chalmers Johnson presents a different vision :

“If, however, we were to dismantle our empire of military bases and redirect our economy toward productive, instead of destructive, industries; if we maintained our volunteer armed forces primarily to defend our own shores (and perhaps to be used at the behest of the United Nations); if we began to invest in our infrastructure, education, health care, and savings, then we might have a chance to reinvent ourselves as a productive, normal nation.”

Melman argues that to achieve this “We must come to grips with America’s State Capitalism and its Permanent War Economy. Failing that, there is no hope for any constructive exit.” Johnson does not see this scenario as likely, but it is up to us to make it likely, to recreate the world as we want it to be. The crisis of American Empire is an opportunity for a new course of action that can save us, and the world.

There has been more than 100 years of people seeking to end war as a means of solving conflicts between nations and peoples. A new campaign, World Beyond War , is seeking to organize a global movement to end war. They are raising money for a billboard campaign that will build on the opposition to war, teach that ‘war cannot end war’ and let people know there is a movement for them to join.

While ending war and US Empire would be monumental changes, they seem reasonable when we look at the predicament of the United States: the economy is failing, the world is looking for alternatives to the US dollar, the US military has not won a major war since World War II and is stretched thin around the globe, the cost of military equipment has skyrocketed, the traditional energy supply is uncertain and risky, the people and nations around the world are revolting and public opinion in the US opposes war and militarism.

On a positive note, as we write this the US House of Representatives just voted in a bipartisan landslide 370 to 40, to require the President to come to Congress to get authorization to renew the war in Iraq. Last year a war in Syria was stopped when it became clear Congress would not support it – after citizen pressure. The people have more power than we realize.

Now is the time to build our power and use it. Let’s organize to end Empire and militarism and create an alternative democratized economy that puts the needs of people and the planet first.

This is Part II of a series on Empire. Part I: U.S. Empire Reaches A Breaking Point Time to End It

27 July, 2014
Countercurrents.org

 

Half of Humanity Launches a New World Economic Order

By Dennis Small

July 22—In mid-July, as the planet was being wracked by growing war horrors in eastern Ukraine, Iraq, and Gaza, and by economic depression caused by the death throes of the trans-Atlantic financial system, heads of state representing half of humanity gathered in Brazil and took the first steps toward creating a New World Economic Order.

The leaders of the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), met on July 16 in Fortaleza for the VI BRICS Summit, and the next day they were joined by the heads of state of South America in the capital city Brasilia. The BRICS account for 43% of the world’s population and 27% of the planet’s land area; when Ibero-America is added in, they jointly represent 48% of the human race, and one third of the Earth’s land area (Figure 1).

At the summit and its numerous associated bilateral and multilateral meetings, that half of humanity adopted a project that is premised on rejecting the current casino financial system, and replacing it with one providing credit for high-technology development projects; on educating and training youth to meet the growth challenges of the future; on full respect for national sovereignty, banishing the imperial policy of regime change and wars; and on explicit promotion of the common good among nations—the Westphalian principle.

“History tells us the law of the jungle isn’t the way of human coexistence,” Chinese President Xi Jinping stated on July 16.

“Every nation should obey the principle of equality, mutual trust, learning from each other, cooperating and seeking joint benefits … for the construction of a harmonious world, sustained peace, and joint prosperity.”

The British Queen was not pleased by these developments, seeing in them an existential threat to the Empire. Lyndon LaRouche was pleased—for the same reason. For 40 years, the renowned American statesman has devised programs, and organized for them internationally, of global financial reform and great development projects—most recently his “Four New Laws To Save the U.S.A. Now!”—of precisely the sort that have now been placed on the agenda by the BRICS.

“The BRICS and allies are building a world system based on real value, not phony paper value,” LaRouche stated July 18.

“They are deciding what real value is, and they are imposing it, which is the cost of the productive powers of labor in a changing situation.”

The underlying problem that we have to deal with today, LaRouche elaborated, is the “asymmetry of value in the world,” which is coming from two distinct systems that are operating with a different logic and different metrics: They are totally incompatible.

The first system is the trans-Atlantic system. “These bastards,” LaRouche stated, “who hold pieces of paper that they say are worth quadrillions, and they’re prepared to kill for that,” as the case of Argentina’s battle against the vulture funds shows, as does the pro-vulture ruling of the Aristotelian idiot otherwise known as Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court. What these people are holding, this paper, LaRouche added, is absolutely worthless. “It’s like taking rags out of a bucket and trying to sell them”; or even worse, it’s just the promise of future delivery of derivatives on those rags, that they’re saying actually has value.

This is the dead hand of the past, trying to stop humanity from creating any future for itself.

On the other side, we have an emerging system, incompatible with the first, which is building a market based on real value. And real value, LaRouche elaborated, comes from, and is measured by, the development of the productive powers of labor—that is, through the introduction of scientifically created new technologies, implementing productive processes which increase the energy-flux density through the physical economy in such fashion as to immensely increase the productive powers of labor. That new system will create a process whereby the increase in energy-flux density will itself increase at an accelerating rate.

This role of technological progress and scientific advance, LaRouche specified, is what the human species uniquely does. Such creativity is actually the source of value in an economy, and it is the way in which our action to create the future defines present value. It is the central concept of the American System of Political Economy, on which the United States was founded.

The decisive strategic question today, LaRouche concluded, is whether the United States will join that emerging New World Economic Order, or will remain joined at the hip to the British Empire—as it is under the impeachable President Barack Obama—and bring destruction down upon itself and the rest of the world. The same existential issue faces Europe.

Building a Nuclear Future
The BRICS Summit issued a 72-point Fortaleza Declaration (see below), which announced the formation of a New Development Bank (NDB), initially capitalized at $50 billion, to fund infrastructure projects in BRICS and other countries; as well as a Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) with $100 billion to help nations deal with capital flight and other forms of financial warfare.

Most international commentators have engaged in endless contortions, dissecting sentences from the Fortaleza Declaration and speeches at the summit, to try to determine whether these new BRICS institutions are meant to merely complement the British Empire’s International Monetary Fund and other institutions, or to replace them with a new financial architecture. But the answer to that question lies not in parsing written or spoken words, but in the intent behind the creation of the new institutions, which is best reflected in two fundamental issues which were pervasive throughout the discussions: the future and youth, and nuclear energy.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was most eloquent on the first of these, emphasizing to the plenary session of the Summit “the uniqueness of BRICS as an international institution. For the first time, it brings together a group of nations on the parameter of ‘future potential,’ rather than existing prosperity or shared identities. The very idea of BRICS is thus forward-looking.” He urged the BRICS to now go beyond “being summit-centric,” proposing that the youth of the BRICS nations should take a lead in expanding people-to-people contact between their nations. He suggested establishing a BRICS Young Scientists’ Forum, setting up BRICS language schools “to offer language training in each of our languages,” and exploring the creation of a BRICS University.

Modi concluded:

“Excellencies, we have an opportunity to define the future—of not just our countries, but the world at large…. I take this as a great responsibility.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin struck a similar note in comments to the press on July 17, evaluating the results of his trip:

“The BRICS are all young states, and the future belongs to the young.”

As for the issue of nuclear energy, discussion of it and conclusion of numerous concrete deals permeated the summit and related bilateral meetings, especially those of Russia’s Putin with Argentina’s Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff. This, despite the fact that the Fortaleza Declaration itself—in many ways a “consensus document” typical of such international gatherings—does not mention the matter, other than to defend Iran’s right to develop peaceful nuclear energy.

The true measure of value in an economy, LaRouche has emphasized, is the impact of science and technology in continually increasing the energy-flux density of the productive processes. Although the required science-driver for the world economy is the development of thermonuclear fusion energy, the current insistence on nuclear fission among the BRICS and allied countries is highly significant, as it reflects a commitment to raising the economy’s overall energy-flux density.

Far better than any monetary or GDP-based measure, energy-flux density and other physical economic parameters best indicate the BRICS’ direction.

Figure 2 shows nuclear energy as a percentage of total electricity generation—which is an indicator of overall energy-flux density—in a number of BRICS countries (Russia, India, and Brazil), as compared to representative European countries (Germany and Spain), looking at both current and projected levels. In the case of Germany, for example, the British Empire’s criminal green policy of de-nuclearization has already led to a drastic collapse of nuclear from 28% of total electricity in 1990, to 15% today. The German government of Angela Merkel has adopted a policy of reducing that to zero by the year 2020! Spain is almost as bad.

Compare that to what Russia has done, increasing its proportion of nuclear from 11% in 1990 to 18% in 2013, with a policy of raising that proportion to some 27% by 2030. Other BRICS countries have smaller proportions of nuclear to total electricity today, but they are defiantly committed to a nuclear future. Brazil, for example, plans to increase nuclear from 3% to 15% by 2030. As President Rousseff stated just before the summit began: “Our countries are among the largest in the world, and they cannot be content, in the midst of the 21st Century, with any kind of dependency. Recent events demonstrate that it is essential that we seek for ourselves our scientific and technological autonomy.”

South Africa has also just announced that it is resuming its nuclear program, with plans to build six new nuclear plants (see article in this section).

It is of note that China has the largest nuclear construction program in the world today—a distinction which in the 1970s went to the Roosevelt-created Tennessee Valley Authority. In fact, of the 66 nuclear plants currently under construction worldwide, 50 of them are in the BRICS countries. In other words, 43% of the world’s population is constructing 75% of the world nuclear plants; or, the rate of nuclear construction is 4.3 times greater per capita in the BRICS than in the rest of the world.

The reality is, of course, much starker than those simple numbers indicate, because nuclear energy is being actively destroyed in much of the trans-Atlantic sector (and Japan), as a direct result of the British Empire’s suicidal green policies. The BRICS and allies have made it clear that will have none of it: They have taken the British Queen’s green agenda, as reflected in the Copenhagen Resolution, and thrown it in the trash can.

LaRouche put a fine point on it:

“What about Frau Merkel of Germany?” he asked July 18. She represents the worthless view of value; she’s tearing down nuclear energy, destroying her economy and making it absolutely worthless, he said. “What’s the value of her opinions? Not much.” The BRICS and Ibero-America are building a world market based on real value, and they are already far more productive than Europe and the United States, which insist on values being set by some crazy judge—Scalia in the Argentine case.

Great Infrastructure Projects
Also reflective of the BRICS’ focus on real value, was the emphasis placed on creating a credit system to fund major infrastructure investment. Two important such projects moved forward in and around the BRICS Summit.

The first was the idea of fulfilling the centuries-old dream of building a transcontinental railroad to connect the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of South America (Figure 3). This took shape in the discussion between Chinese President Xi and Peruvian President Ollanta Humala, and then with Brazil’s President Rousseff. An agreement was reached to open bidding for foreign, including Chinese, companies, to participate in the construction of one critical segment of that project: the “T”-shaped Palmas-Campinorte-Annapolis/Campinorte-Lucas route in central Brazil.

The importance of that segment within the overall project is clear from Figure 4, a schematic map first published by EIR back in 1988. The northern terminus of Palmas is a stone’s throw from the famous Carajás project in the middle of the Amazon jungle, the world’s largest (and purest) iron ore deposit, which is now connected by rail only to the Atlantic port of São Luis. Once built, the western rail terminus of Lucas would then be halfway to the Brazil-Peru border, where the projected rail line would link up with a Peruvian branch that would cross the Andes at Saramirisa—the lowest pass in that giant mountain range—and from there, to one or more Peruvian ports for shipment across the Pacific Ocean. This would drastically cut shipping time and costs from Brazil (and other Southern Cone countries like Argentina) to Eurasian powerhouses like China, India, and Russia.

Even greater efficiencies and growth and productivity can be achieved as this South American Transcontinental Railroad is able to connect directly by rail with Asia, as high-speed maglev rail lines are constructed and opened up through the Darién Gap and the Bering Strait (Figure 3).

There are various possible routes for a South American Transcontinental Railroad. (The one under discussion among China, Brazil, and Peru centers on São Paulo-Santa Fé do Sul-Cuiabá-Porto Velho-Pucallpa-Saramirisa-Bogotá-Panamá. Another viable option is São Paulo-Santa Fé do Sul-Santa Cruz-Desaguadero-Saramirisa-Bogotá-Panamá, which has long been studied.) In fact, earlier versions of precisely this project were drawn up by the Intercontinental Railway Commission, started by U.S. Secretary of State James Blaine, which employed U.S. Army engineers to survey and project lines tying the United States through to Argentina and Brazil, presenting a completed map of the intended route project to President William McKinley in 1898 (Figure 5). The strongly pro-American System McKinley commemorated Blaine’s plans as the future of humanity, speaking in 1901 at the Pan-American exposition in Buffalo—where McKinley was shot dead in a British-run operation.

Another great project, the construction of an Interoceanic Canal through Nicaragua (Figure 6), was announced on July 9 by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega. The massive project will be carried out by the Chinese company HKND, but President Putin also made an unannounced stopover in Nicaragua on July 12, on his way to the BRICS Summit, to offer Russia’s support. The canal will run 173 miles from the mouth of the Brito River on the Pacific Coast in southeastern Nicaragua, to the mouth of the Punta Gorda River on the Caribbean side. It will include two locks, and 65 miles of it will pass through Lake Nicaragua, and have a projected passage time of 30 hours, coast to coast, for the 5,100 of the largest ships in the world that will be able to use this canal.

Project engineers report that over 50,000 construction workers will be required, and that once in operation it will generate 200,000 jobs, including its sub-projects (airport, two ports, tourist center, etc.).

President Ortega, in announcing the selected route, stated that the country’s entire educational system was being revamped to produce the engineers and skilled workers that the project will require, He also held up a book containing the feasibility studies for constructing such a canal produced by the United States government and adopted by the U.S. Congress 118 years ago, in 1896, detailing the benefits such a canal would bring.

The irony was lost on no one. China is actively involved in massive job-creating economic projects in Central America—the United States’ proverbial “back yard”—while the U.S. under Obama has helped destroy that area with his policy of drug legalization, on top of decades of the British Empire’s free-trade economic devastation. Today, one-third of the population of El Salvador has been forced to emigrate to the U.S., in a desperate search for the means of survival; while official unemployment in neighboring Honduras now surpasses 60%.

The broader commitment to infrastructure development was emphasized in the last of the multiple historic summits which took place in Brasilia in mid-July, that of the heads of state and special representatives of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), who met with Chinese President Xi and the Unasur heads of state on July 17. Their joint declaration (see below) emphasized the “important opportunity for mutual development” which exists, announcing

“the establishment of a broad partnership of equality, mutual benefit, and common development between China and Latin America and the Caribbean.”

The New Development Bank
There is little question that the New Development Bank (NDB) and Contingent Reserve Agreement (CRA) are the seed crystals of an entirely new, international financial architecture—although a major political battle lies ahead in order to force this policy through, over the violent objections of the City of London and Wall Street, including their agents within some of the BRICS countries. The founding document of the NDB cautiously sticks to the idea that the NDB and CRA are only meant to “complement” existing institutions like the IMF; but the principles on which they were founded not only contradict those of the IMF, but mutually exclusive.

Most significant, the NDB is clearly geared to lend money for real development, without the hated austerity conditionalities and green policies associated with the IMF and World Bank. For example, the CELAC-China joint declaration contains a radical departure from IMF/World Bank conditionalities, calling “to make good use of the concessionary loans granted by China, in accord with the necessities and priorities of the recipient countries…. We stress the importance of building and modernizing infrastructure.”

Argentine President Fernández, who was given featured billing (after host Rousseff) at the BRICS-Unasur Summit, issued the clearest call for a new world financial order: “We, sirs, are posing then, a new global financial order, one that is not just fair and equitable, but indispensable…. What we demand from the world, is precisely the creation of a new global financial order which will permit sustainable and global economic growth…. Thus, the appeal to all nations is to join forces in this real crusade for a new global political, economic and financial organization that will have positive social, political, economic, and cultural consequences for our nations.”

President Putin—who, like Argentina’s Fernández, is no stranger to being the target of economic warfare—presented a complementary proposal: “BRICS nations should cooperate more closely in commodities markets. We have a unique resource base: Our nations hold 30-50% of global reserves of various resources. Therefore, we believe it is imperative to develop cooperation in mining and processing, and organize a center for training experts in the metals industries in BRICS nations.”

Such an agreement would break the British Empire’s stranglehold on world commodities, and their ability to speculate with nations’ livelihood and their very existence.

To be viable for these purposes, the NDB and CRA would have to function with a firewall against the cancerous dollar-denominated system. It is noteworthy that the NDB is authorized to both receive additional capitalization in non-dollar currencies in the future, as well as to issue loans to BRICS and other nations in non-dollar currencies.

Once three, four, or more countries are involved in great projects receiving such non-dollar loans, a new currency will have in effect been created, in which fixed exchange rates among the national participants will also follow. That step alone would instantly bring about a return to the pre-1971 Bretton Woods system of fixed (predictable) exchange rates, wiping out, with the stroke of a pen, trillions of dollars of speculation on currency futures.

But for the NDB to be able to truly take on the tasks of global reconstruction, the United States must become a full partner in its capitalization and functioning as the centerpiece of a global Hamiltonian credit system, of the sort specified in LaRouche’s Four Laws. Today’s “dollar,” which is no longer the sovereign currency of the United States, but rather a supra-national betting instrument under the control of the British Empire, must also return to its proper role as the Treasury-issued “greenback.”

In short, the central strategic question posed by the mid-July BRICS Summit, is: When will the United States rid itself of President Obama, and return to the American System policies it was founded on, and which half of humanity, led by the BRICS, is now implementing?

Narendra Modi http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2014/2014_20-29/2014-29/pdf/14_4129.pdf

Vladimir Putin http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2014/2014_20-29/2014-29/pdf/15-16_4129.pdf

Xi Jinping http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2014/2014_20-29/2014-29/pdf/17_4129.pdf

Cristina Fernandez http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2014/2014_20-29/2014-29/pdf/18_4129.pdf

LaRouche’s record http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2014/2014_20-29/2014-29/pdf/19-21_4129.pdf

 

New World Disorder: Emerging Division Between East And West Threatens To Plunge The Globe Into Chaos

By Michael Snyder

In general, over the last several decades the world has experienced an unprecedented era of peace and prosperity. The opening up of relations with China and the “end of the Cold War” resulted in an extended period of cooperation between East and West that was truly unique in the annals of history. But now things are shifting.

The civil war in Ukraine and the crash of MH17 have created an enormous amount of tension between the United States and Russia, and many analysts believe that relations between the two superpowers are now even worse than they were during the end of the Cold War era. In addition, the indictment of five PLA officers for cyber espionage and sharp disagreements over China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea (among other issues) have caused U.S. relations with China to dip to their lowest point since at least 1989.

So could the emerging division between the East and the West ultimately plunge us into a period of global chaos? And what would that mean for the world economy?

For as long as most Americans can remember, the U.S. dollar and the U.S. financial system have been overwhelmingly dominant. But now the powers of the east appear to be determined to break this monopoly.

Four of the BRICS nations (China, Russia, India and Brazil) are on the list of the top ten biggest economies on the planet, and they are starting to make moves to become much less dependent on the U.S.-centered financial system of the western world. For example, just last week the BRICS nations established two new institutions which are intended to be alternatives to the World Bank and the IMF…

So in their summit, from July 14 to 16, the five BRICS announced two major initiatives aimed squarely at increasing their power in global finance. They announced the launch of the New Development Bank, headquartered in Shanghai, that will offer financing for development projects in the emerging world. The bank will act as an alternative to the Washington, D.C.—based World Bank. The BRICS also formed what they’re calling a Contingent Reserve Arrangement, a series of currency agreements which can be utilized to help them smooth over financial imbalances with the rest of the world. That’s something the IMF does now.
Clearly, the idea is to create institutions and processes to supplement — and perhaps eventually supplant — the functions of those managed by U.S. and Europe. And they would be resources that they could control on their own, without the annoying conditions that the World Bank and the IMF always slap on their loans and assistance.
This comes at a time when both China and Russia are seeking to emphasize their own currencies and move away from using the U.S. dollar so much.

Even in the Western media, it is being admitted that China’s yuan is “a growing force in global finance”, and according to CNBC the use of Chinese currency in international trade is growing very rapidly…

Of the German companies profiled, 23 percent are using the renminbi to settle trades, up from 9 percent last year, while usage in Hong Kong rose to 58 percent from 50 percent and to 17 percent from 9 percent in the U.S.
Usage of the renminbi among French companies – a new addition to this year’s list – was high at 26 percent.
And of course Russia has been actively pursuing a “de-dollarization strategy” for months now. Each new round of economic sanctions pushes Russia even further in the direction of independence from the U.S. dollar, and Gazprom has been working hard to get large customers to switch from paying for natural gas in dollars to paying for natural gas in euros and other currencies. For much more on this, please see my previous article entitled “Russia Is Doing It – Russia Is Actually Abandoning The Dollar”.

At this point, it seems clear that Russia plans to permanently decouple from the U.S. economy and the U.S. financial system. Just today we learned that Vladimir Putin plans to make Russia less dependent on U.S. companies such as IBM and Microsoft, and any future rounds of sanctions are likely to cause even more damage to U.S. firms that do business in Russia.

But potentially much more troubling for the U.S. economy is the startling deterioration in the relationship between the Obama administration and China. Some analysts are even describing this as “a tipping point”…

One day, the United States indicts five PLA officers for cybercrimes; the next, the United States claims victory in WTO disputes over car tariffs and rare earth minerals. All this is happening while the United States promises enduring support for Asian allies, and it has moved openly to challenge the legitimacy of Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea. Meanwhile, China is busy creating facts on the ground and water. Last month, a $1 billion Chinese oil rig set up operations in territorial waters claimed by Vietnam. In the East China Sea, Chinese SU-27 fighter jets have come within 100 feet of Japanese surveillance aircraft.

This was all capped at the recent Shangri-La Asian Security dialogue in Singapore (Asia’s annual defense-ministers meeting): Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel bluntly described China’s behavior as “destabilizing, unilateral actions.” The PLA deputy chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Wang Guanzhong, accused the United States of “hegemonism.”

The mood has soured, more than the usual ups and downs of big-power relationships.
The question now is not whether a “new type of relationship” is in the offing, but rather, whether U.S.-Chinese relations have reached a tipping point.
Most Americans could not care less about what China is doing in the South China Sea, but to the Chinese this is a very, very big deal. In fact, China just sent a surveillance vessel to Hawaii as a bit of payback for what they regard as U.S. “provocations” in the region.

In the old days, China would have probably never have done such a thing. But China is gaining confidence as the gap between the U.S. military and the Chinese military rapidly closes…

Away from the Chinese military’s expanding capabilities in cyberspace and electronic warfare, Beijing is growing the size and reach of its naval fleet, advancing its air force and testing a host of new missiles, the Pentagon said Thursday.
An annual report to Congress on China’s evolving military capability concluded that the modernization was being driven in part by growing territorial disputes in the East and South China seas, as well as by Beijing’s desire to expand its presence and influence abroad.
In fact, the Chinese military has grown so powerful that we are now seeing headlines such as this one in The Week: “China thinks it can defeat America in battle”.

And the Russian military has made tremendous strides as well. Putin has been working hard to modernize the Russian nuclear arsenal, the Russians now have a “fifth generation” fighter jet that is supposedly far superior to the F-22 Raptor, and they have nuclear submarines that are so incredibly quiet that the U.S. Navy refers to them as “black holes”.

If Russia and China stay united, they are more than capable of providing a counterbalance to U.S. power around the globe.

But even if military conflict is not in our immediate future, the breakdown in relations between East and West could still have a dramatic impact on the global economy.

Over the years, the U.S. and China have developed a highly symbiotic relationship that fuels a tremendous amount of economic activity all over the planet. Each year, we buy hundreds of billions of dollars of products from the Chinese. Just imagine what our stores would look like if we took everything that was “made in China” out of them. And after we send them giant piles of our money, we beg the Chinese to lend it back to us at ultra-low interest rates. This arrangement has allowed China to become extremely wealthy and it has allowed Americans to enjoy a massively inflated standard of living fueled by ever increasing amounts of debt.

So what happens if this relationship starts breaking down?

Without a doubt, it could potentially lead to global chaos.

So keep a close eye on this emerging division between the East and the West. It could end up being far more important than most Americans would ever dare to imagine.

This article first appeared here at the Economic Collapse Blog. Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs

22 July 2014
http://www.activistpost.com/

WAR IN UKRAINE / TRAGEDY OF FLIGHT MH 17: URGENT CALL FOR INDEPENDENT INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION

Chisinau / Vienna, 26 July 2014

In a statement issued today, the President of the International Progress Organization, Dr. Hans Koechler, who is presently on a fact-finding visit to Eastern Europe, has called for the establishment of an impartial and independent investigation of the circumstances of the crash of Malaysian Airlines 17 over rebel-controlled territory in Eastern Ukraine. Between 2000 and 2002, Dr. Koechler served as international observer of the criminal trial following the destruction of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. He was nominated by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the basis of a binding resolution of the UN Security Council.

The former UN observer explained that, because of the ongoing civil war in the eastern part of the country, the Government of Ukraine, itself a party in the conflict, is not only effectively unable to conduct an investigation, but cannot guarantee its independence and objectivity. Under these circumstances, Article 5.1 of Annex 13 (“Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation”) of the Convention on International Civil Aviation – which obliges the “State of Occurrence” to institute an investigation – is not applicable.

An investigation has to be international, Dr. Koechler explained, and it must be ensured that no party to the conflict in Ukraine is in a position to influence its outcome. This is also implied in Security Council resolution 2166 (2014), which in Par. 3 expresses support for “efforts to establish a full, thorough and independent international investigation.” Since, in this case, the Security Council has not acted on the basis of Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and has not mandated – but merely “supported” – an investigation, it is up to the countries directly affected by the tragedy to take the necessary measures. This relates to the country of registration of the aircraft, Malaysia, and to the countries whose citizens were killed in this tragedy. For the integrity and credibility of the investigation it will be absolutely essential that it is not politicized, and that officials or experts from countries involved in the political dispute in Ukraine, including from the United States, have no influence, whether direct or indirect, on its conduct. The investigation should be conducted in close co-ordination with the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) whose experts are already on site.

As regards the question of criminal responsibility, Dr. Koechler explained that the Convention for the suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of civil aviation (“Montreal Convention” of 1971) is applicable. According to Article 5(b) of the Convention, Malaysia has jurisdiction in the case. Dr. Koechler expressed his concern over the information war that is waged in the international media. As long as the facts are not fully ascertained and the collection of forensic evidence has not been completed, commentators should not jump to conclusions. Only a duly constituted court of law will be authorized to attribute guilt. The former UN observer in particular referred to the deletion, by the BBC, of a video report of BBC Russian correspondent Olga Ivshina, on 23 July 2014. In addition to statements about Russian missile launchers, the report included observations of witnesses from the crash site who said that they saw another (military) plane in the vicinity of the Malaysian airliner. The British Broadcasting Corporation will have to explain why it decided to remove that report, which was balanced and did not attribute guilt, from its Russian web site.

In a news release of 23 July 2014 from Glasgow (UK), published in many German newspapers, the German News Agency DPA has warned of the risk of politicization of the investigation into the crash of MH 17 and referred to Hans Koechler’s earlier reports on the circumstances surrounding the investigation of the crash of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. In that tragedy, 270 people perished after a midair explosion of the plane en route from London to New York on 20 December 1988. On their web sites, most German newspapers also published links to Dr. Koechler’s critical reports on the investigation and criminal prosecution after the Pan Am tragedy.

Sources:
• “Die Ukraine erlebt gerade ihr Lockerbie”: DIE WELT, Berlin, 23 July2014:
http://www.welt.de/newsticker/dpa_nt/infoline_nt/thema_nt/article130487805/Die-Ukraine-erlebt-gerade-ihr-Lockerbie.html

• Hans Koechler’s Lockerbie Trial Observer Mission:
http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie_observer_mission.htm

 

When BBC Calls, Don’t Answer..

By Richard Falk

That is, don’t answer, if you are a certified critic of Israeli policies and practices.

The siren lure of big time media is partly a romancing of the ego, partly a rare moment to intrude a moment or two of truthfulness into the endless spinning of the Israel’s narrative that stresses its extravagantly humane response to Hamas flurries of rockets and alleged human shield tactics.

Four times in the past week I have received invitations to be a guest on BBC programs dealing with Israel’s military operations in Gaza. Each time the female producer, with charming British intonation, expressed her strong interest in arranging my participation at such and such a time. And each time I agreed, although my presence in a Turkish village with limited Internet access made

it logistically awkward to do so, yet far from impossible to make the necessary arrangements, usually with the kind cooperation of a neighbor with superior digital facilities.

Each time I was ready at the appointed hour, and each time I was given a last minute explanation for why my appearance was cancelled—a couple of times I was told that I was a casualty of ‘breaking news,’ and the other two times, there was no embellishment, merely “we apologize, but we have to cancel today’s appearance.” And on each occasion, as if part of how producers are trained, I was told that those in charge of planning the program were eager to have me appear as soon as possible, and that I would hear in a day or so. On the basis of my past experience on the few occasions when such last minute news altered programming, I was shifted to later in the program or rescheduled for the next day. My BBC experience in this respect was ‘terminal’ as in disease.

Needless to say, the phone lines have been quiet since each of these ‘dumping’ incidents. I wonder why this pattern of invitation and cancellation. I am quite sure that these were quite separate programming for each of the invitations with no coordination among them. Was there some master censor at the BBC that reviewed the guest list just prior to the scheduled broadcast, somewhat in the manner that the way an ethical submarine commander might review the manifest of an enemy passenger ship in time of war? Perhaps, BBC was rightly concerned that there might be a faint and ugly stain of balance that would tarnish their unsullied reputation of pro-Israeli partisanship. I will probably be forever reliant on such conjectures.

I feel self-conscious relating this little saga at a time when so many in Gaza are dying and bleeding, and all are grieving. As I write I feel humble, not arrogant. It seems that somewhere buried in these trivial rejections there is occasion for concern that the media claim of objectivity in liberal societies is above all else a sham. That even powerful players such as BBC are secretly captive, and its reportage and commentary qualifies less as news than as Hasbara, at least when it comes to Israel-Palestine.

In any event, my advice to the media savvy, is that if you have caller ID, and you can tell that it is BBC calling, don’t bother answering. I hope I have the good sense to follow my own advice should the phone ever ring again!

Richard Falk is an international law and international relations scholar who taught at Princeton University for forty years.

26 July, 2014
Countercurrents.org

 

Open Letter by 50 Israeli Army Reservists on Why They Refuse to Fight in Gaza

Petition By Israeli soldiers and reservists

We were soldiers in a wide variety of units and positions in the Israeli military—a fact we now regret, because, in our service, we found that troops who operate in the occupied territories aren’t the only ones enforcing the mechanisms of control over Palestinian lives. In truth, the entire military is implicated. For that reason, we now refuse to participate in our reserve duties, and we support all those who resist being called to service.

The Israeli Army, a fundamental part of Israelis’ lives, is also the power that rules over the Palestinians living in the territories occupied in 1967. As long as it exists in its current structure, its language and mindset control us: We divide the world into good and evil according to the military’s categories; the military serves as the leading authority on who is valued more and who less in society—who is more responsible for the occupation, who is allowed to vocalize their resistance to it and who isn’t, and how they are allowed to do it. The military plays a central role in every action plan and proposal discussed in the national conversation, which explains the absence of any real argument about non-military solutions to the conflicts Israel has been locked in with its neighbors.

The Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip are deprived of civil rights and human rights. They live under a different legal system from their Jewish neighbors. This is not exclusively the fault of soldiers who operate in these territories. Those troops are, therefore, not the only ones obligated to refuse. Many of us served in logistical and bureaucratic support roles; there, we found that the entire military helps implement the oppression of the Palestinians.

Many soldiers who serve in non-combat roles decline to resist because they believe their actions, often routine and banal, are remote from the violent results elsewhere. And actions that aren’t banal—for example, decisions about the life or death of Palestinians made in offices many kilometers away from the West Bank—are classified, and so it’s difficult to have a public debate about them. Unfortunately, we did not always refuse to perform the tasks we were charged with, and in that way we, too, contributed to the violent actions of the military.

During our time in the army, we witnessed (or participated in) the military’s discriminatory behavior: the structural discrimination against women, which begins with the initial screening and assignment of roles; the sexual harassment that was a daily reality for some of us; the immigration absorption centers that depend on uniformed military assistance. Some of us also saw firsthand how the bureaucracy deliberately funnels technical students into technical positions, without giving them the opportunity to serve in other roles. We were placed into training courses among people who looked and sounded like us, rather than the mixing and socializing that the army claims to do.

The military tries to present itself as an institution that enables social mobility—a stepping-stone into Israeli society. In reality, it perpetuates segregation. We believe it is not accidental that those who come from middle- and high- income families land in elite intelligence units, and from there often go to work for high-paying technology companies. We think it is not accidental that when soldiers from a firearm maintenance or quartermaster unit desert or leave the military, often driven by the need to financially support their families, they are called “draft-dodgers.” The military enshrines an image of the “good Israeli,” who in reality derives his power by subjugating others. The central place of the military in Israeli society, and this ideal image it creates, work together to erase the cultures and struggles of the Mizrachi, Ethiopians, Palestinians, Russians, Druze, the Ultra-Orthodox, Bedouins, and women.

We all participated, on one level or another, in this ideology and took part in the game of the “good Israeli” that serves the military loyally. Mostly our service did advance our positions in universities and the labor market. We made connections and benefited from the warm embrace of the Israeli consensus. But for the above reasons, these benefits were not worth the costs.

By law, some of us are still registered as part of the reserved forces (others have managed to win exemptions or have been granted them upon their release), and the military keeps our names and personal information, as well as the legal option to order us to “service.” But we will not participate—in any way.

There are many reasons people refuse to serve in the Israeli Army. Even we have differences in background and motivation about why we’ve written this letter. Nevertheless, against attacks on those who resist conscription, we support the resisters: the high school students who wrote a refusal declaration letter, the Ultra orthodox protesting the new conscription law, the Druze refusers, and all those whose conscience, personal situation, or economic well-being do not allow them to serve. Under the guise of a conversation about equality, these people are forced to pay the price. No more.

Yael Even Or

Efrat Even Tzur

Tal Aberman

Klil Agassi

Ofri Ilany

Eran Efrati

Dalit Baum

Roi Basha

Liat Bolzman

Lior Ben-Eliahu

Peleg Bar-Sapir

Moran Barir

Yotam Gidron

Maya Guttman

Gal Gvili

Namer Golan

Nirith Ben Horin

Uri Gordon

Yonatan N. Gez

Bosmat Gal

Or Glicklich

Erez Garnai

Diana Dolev

Sharon Dolev

Ariel Handel

Shira Hertzanu

Erez Wohl

Imri Havivi

Gal Chen

Shir Cohen

Gal Katz

Menachem Livne

Amir Livne Bar-on

Gilad Liberman

Dafna Lichtman

Yael Meiry

Amit Meyer

Maya Michaeli

Orian Michaeli

Shira Makin

Chen Misgav

Naama Nagar

Inbal Sinai

Kela Sappir

Shachaf Polakow

Avner Fitterman

Tom Pessah

Nadav Frankovitz

Tamar Kedem

Amnon Keren

Eyal Rozenberg

Guy Ron-Gilboa

Noa Shauer

Avi Shavit

Jen Shuka

Chen Tamir

The petition for Israeli soldiers and reservists is located at Lo-Meshartot.org

26 July, 2014
Countercurrents.org