Archive for the ‘USA’ Category

History of USA Funding Al Qaeda

April 12, 2013

History of USA Funding Al Qaeda http://www.kosovaonline.info/?page=1%2C3%2C26534

PRISTINA – Wikileaks cables revealed by “Wikileaks” show for a while, at least in the years 2001-2002, Osama Bin Laden had his people in Kosovo, KTV reports. ”Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation” was the financial arm for terrorist activities Al-Qaeda anywhere in the world, and has its head office in Indonesia.

From there and in many branches around the world, including such in the U.S., “Al-Haramain,” except humanitarian activities for orphans, to recoup millions had intended to leave the other orphans.

In January 2003, the then Secretary of State, Colin Powell, widely reported to finance the “Al-Qaeda” and the fact that many organizations raise funds for humanitarian guise terrorist activities. Report Poweel secret CIA sent him, the Department of Commerce, Department of Treasury, Department of Defense, Government of Israel, the Government of Jordan and the Government of Saudi Arabia.

At one particular sector of activity dedicating Balkans and the “Al Haramain” in this region. ”Documents seized in the Balkans show that workers” Al Haramain “in Albania, Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo, supporting” Al – Qaeda “and groups related to it. Individuals in these offices or work financed by bin Laden. E-mails of members of “Al-Qaeda” found in 2002 in the seized computers in the offices of “Al – Haramian” in Travnik Croatia, contained instructions to attack an SFOR base in Tuzla, “wrote Powell . Secretary of State told the officials attempt to “Al-Haramain” in Kosovo to hide their illegal activity. ”After the September 11 terrorist attacks, officials of the” Al-Haramain “in Kosovo destroyed all documents can bind the organization with militant or terrorist activities.

At the end of 2001 officers “Al Haramain” decided to temporarily reduce the level of activities before they continue illegally, “Powell wrote. ”Al-Haramain Foundation” was created in Saudi Arabia and in 2004 was declared a terrorist organization with links to the U.S. and its activity was banned by the Committee of the Security Council of the UN. officials had planned her unsuccessfully killing American officials in Nairobi, Kenya in 1997 .

A year later, more than 200 citizens, including dozens of Americans were killed in terrorist attacks in Kenya and Tanzania. An official “Al-Haramain” Was Convicted Perouz Sedaghaty was sentenced to 33 months in prison in the U.S. in 2011 , after being found guilty lied to funds that were dedicated to religious extremists in Chechnya.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

What is the real American game in Syria?

April 11, 2013
 

US Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey (R) and Turkish Chief of Staff General Necdet Ozel inspect a guard of honour in Ankara on September 17, 2012.

US Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey (R) and Turkish Chief of Staff General Necdet Ozel inspect a guard of honour in Ankara on September 17, 2012.
Tue Apr 9, 2013 9:33AM GMT
 
My bet is that all of these carefully played cards are a set up for two things, one of which is already in motion. Enough arms and ammo have been prestaged to back a final push to collapse Assad.
General Dempsey was in the news this week with his very sensible comments about the spiraling down Syrian debacle, whose vortex may catch those who don’t expect it, but might be most deserving.

Seasoned observers are quite used to seeing mixed messages in diplomacy, especially when they are used as a tactic of war. If you take a variety of positions, even if a disaster does happen you can whip out an archive statement where you said this or that, but no one would listen to you.

As the Prussian military theorist Karl von Claueswitz said, “War is the continuation of diplomacy by other means.” America seems to have chosen this war diplomacy policy for Syria while pretending not to be responsible.

This murky policy gets further complicated when you actually have competing factions within an administration, where verbal sniping and even verbal car bombs can be used to remind the opposing side that your views have to be taken into consideration.

Because General Dempsey is so highly respected across many divides in America his every word is absorbed and analyzed for both obvious and hinted meanings. If an administration wanted to send a message of a sincere potential policy shift, Dempsey would be the gold plated messenger.

But herein we must go into the historical closet where an event happened which is referred to in casual Intel talk circles as “’pulling a Colin Powell” on them, regarding how he was used to justify the Iraq attack for bogus WMD. The current military brass are well aware of this bear trap, and I would bet that Dempsey would not be played for a chump. He’s way too smart for that. Powell was not Bush’s top military adviser, like Dempsey is to Obama.

Let’s review some of who said what and when, and then try to figure out why. The Sunday April 7th Press TV report had the startling Dempsey headline quote, “Syria could become another Afghanistan”. He continued, “I have grave concerns that Syria could become an extended conflict”, that drags on for many years.

These were not off the cuff statements. They aired on a US funded Arabic satellite TV channel. Every word was pre-scripted. In the analysis business we often refer to this as ‘a card being played’. So task number two is to figure out what is it really for.

Digging back to a March 18th Dempsey talk to a Washington think tank, “I don’t think at this point I can see a military option that would create an understandable outcome…and until I do, it would be my advice to proceed cautiously.”

But we knew from our own sources and later published ones that a big covert arms push was already in process, flowing into various rebel staging areas as preparation for a sustained final push to topple Assad.

We know the CIA coordinated the operation with Jordan and Turkey logistically involved and the Saudis and Qatar paying the bills. This is what the Obama administration calls not providing lethal aid…proxies do it.

Dempsey is on record having favored arming the rebels for a quicker overthrow to avoid a drawn out contest which would risk leaving the Syria in ruins. Obama objected back then…but not now. They are doing it under the radar, sort of.

When Dempsey was asked if anything short of military intervention might be contemplated he gave a prepared, and what we know now to be a partially honest answer, that any such opportunities would be led by U.S. Allies. 

He played another prepared card, “We very much do believe that the answer to Syrian is through partners, because…they’ll understand the complexities better than we would.”

I could only wish to have been able to ask the general if he was so concerned about the 100 ring circus of rebel and insurgent groups operating against Assad, then would he like to address the Saudis providing bases, training, funding and arming of a new generation of Jihad fighters, even in northern Iraq. The Saudis are even running terror operations against Iraq now to keep them back on their heels.

Dempsey has to be aware of this. Any statements of America not arming these Syrian insurgent groups is duplicitous because we know that the Saudis are. They are supporting the Wahhabi extremists, who are taking heads as I write. Dempsey has to understand that when headhunters are loose on the land the Syrian Army and their militias are going to fight to the death.

We picked up a leak that an arms push would be coming soon by a ‘card’ Dempsey played during an airborne press interview. He said he would potentially consider arming the insurgents directly to end the fighting sooner and preserve the country’s institutions from being destroyed in an uncivil war of attrition.

Dempsey acknowledged the obvious even back then that the end game of increased armaments could contribute to a more violent new civil war among the various groups after the fall of Assad. The Balkans analogy has been widely used in the media to describe it. Lots of heads got chopped of there, too.

All of these card clues are what we call psyops… ‘preparing the minds’ of the public for things you have in the works to test their reaction. This as standard ‘game theory warfare’. Senator John ‘Cowboy’ McCain even has an acting roll, asking for bombing of Syria now which makes the covert arming of the rebels look like the non wild, cautious approach.

My bet is that all of these carefully played cards are a set up for two things, one of which is already in motion. Enough arms and ammo have been prestaged to back a final push to collapse Assad. The Syrian army counter strategy can clearly be seen to breakup up the rebel forward positions, find their hideouts and get their weapons caches. Press TV has photos of these operations all the time.

But if the Jihadis look like they could be the dominant force in an overthrow then the U.S. would come in with major arms supplies, but only for certain groups who would not only fight the Syrian army, but also the Wahhabis.

What kind of weapons are we talking about here? Start with longer range anti-armor and add ground to air missiles. I would bet that selected insurgents have already been trained in these weapons and are waiting for the right time to be deployed.

The Arab League seems to already know the general plan. You can look back now and see their violating their own charter to pre-empt the outcome by giving one faction of the rebels the Syrian seat. This was their assigned role in this slow motion train wreck.

And I predict some of them will regret setting this precedent.

But there is a wild card…the Russians, Chinese and the Iranians. The Russians man the Syrian air defenses, and they are not going to quietly sit by while the walls come tumbling down around them. If the U.S. felt that a ‘deteriorating situation’ justified intervention to ‘save the country’…then other parties would thereby have permission to do the same.

I don’t think they are going to just sit back and watch the carving up of their own ally and the threat that would pose to them not only in loss of face, but in future aggression. A failed intervention would be a huge blow to imperial militarism, as would the supplemental war bills that would be hitting the steps of Congress, requiring more red ink to fund.

Assad was correct when he stated, “If the unrest in Syria leads to the partitioning of the country, or if terrorists take control…the situation will spill over into neighboring countries and create a domino effect throughout the Middle East and beyond.”

Some of you can dismiss this as a self serving statement, but I will pose one scenario for you. If there is an intervention where American weapons are used against the Jihadis, how long, how many days do you think it would take to see them with advance weapons themselves, like the very good Russian anti-tank one, and then ground to air defense missiles popping up out of thin air. Are they already there, and being saved?

The West killed any negotiated settlement with the big March arms push. They seem to be going for a military settlement, but one where a mess could be laid on someone’s doorstep. But we all know the rebel groups will not negotiate because they feel they have the West behind them and time is on their side.

We have the blind leading the blind here in a situation which could trigger an even larger blood bath. So far the main beneficiary with virtually nothing to lose, once again, is Israel. The Israeli role seems now to keep banging the attack Iran war drum. John Kerry made a fool of himself on his Israeli visit with the silly ‘all options on the table’ substitute for a real policy. I can’t think of a more stupid way to convince other nations that they need a nuclear deterrent.

Dempsey was right about not seeing ‘an understandable outcome’. What the Western dummies and their proxies are doing is tossing a live hand grenade around in a circle. The outcome of that does not require a genius, or even an analyst…just someone who isn’t crazy.

JD/MA

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

China will keep supporting North Korea against US

April 11, 2013
 
 

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un uses binoculars to inspect a live-fire drill using self-propelled drones at an undisclosed location in North Korea, March 20, 2013.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un uses binoculars to inspect a live-fire drill using self-propelled drones at an undisclosed location in North Korea, March 20, 2013.
Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:40AM GMT
 
Although there have been some claims in Western media that China could be having second thoughts on maintaining its support for North Korea, the truth is that the latter remains a key Chinese ally. Most Chinese think that the links with North Korea, despite all the difficulties and disagreements, remain useful for China. The Chinese leadership is probably conscious that Washington, in order to advance its own strategy, would like to see a rift between both traditional allies.”
On April 3, Chinese officials called for calm in Korea as Washington announced that it would deploy missiles and more troops to East Asia, the island of Guam, Australia and the West coast of the US territory amid a crisis over North Korea’s nuclear program.

Shortly before, Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister Zhang Yesui expressed his country’s “serious concern” over the Korean stand-off in two meetings with the US and South Korean ambassadors. He also appealed to both sides to exercise restraint and avoid provocations which might lead to an unwanted conflict.

For its part, the US has been deploying nuclear-capable bombers, warships and other military systems. The Pentagon has sent two F-22 Stealth fighters to the Osan Air Base and a B-2 stealth bomber on a round-trip training mission over South Korea. It has also positioned two guided-missile destroyers in the waters near the Korean Peninsula.

According to USA Today, the American B-1 bomber pilots at the Dyess Air Force Base in Texas have changed their training programs to focus on flights towards East Asia, instead of missions to the Middle East and Afghanistan.

US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced that the number of antimissile interceptors in Alaska and California will increase to 44 – 14 more than the current number. Although he claimed that this move was a response to Pyongyang’s “irresponsible and reckless provocations”, the plan to boost these systems had been in consideration for months.

At the same time, Washington has stepped up its threats against Pyongyang. US Secretary of State John Kerry said the US “will not accept North Korea as a nuclear state.” US Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, who recently visited Beijing, asked Chinese leaders to use their economic and political influence over Pyongyang to persuade the North Korean government to renounce its nuclear and missile programs. Given that Pyongyang has no intention to destroy its small nuclear arsenal, the statements by both American top officials sounded certainly threatening.

The US is also selling more military systems to South Korea and Japan, two main rivals of China in the region having two right-wing and nationalist governments headed by Japanese Premier Shinzo Abe and South Korean President Park Geun-hye respectively. The US Defense Department approved on April 3 the sale of 60 fighters – F-15 or F-35 – to South Korea.

The US Administration wants to use the Korea crisis to show South Korea and Japan that they can rely on the US nuclear umbrella. In Seoul and Tokyo, some media and political circles have been calling on their governments to develop nuclear weapons. The US rejects this idea alleging that it would lead to wider proliferation of nuclear weapons. However, the real reason of this opposition is that Washington wants to perpetuate these countries’ military dependency on the US.

A strategy against China

However, Washington is not only deploying these forces as a result of the tensions in the Korean Peninsula but as a part of its strategy to maintain its predominance in East Asia. China is becoming the most powerful country in the world and is blocking, alongside with Russia, US global plans to achieve global hegemony. It is also holding massive US debt and blocking US actions seeking to justify wars against Syria and Iran. It has also been one of the founders of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS group, which challenge US and Western hegemony and promote a multipolar world.

Washington has been enhancing its military ties and alliances throughout the region to contain and encircle China. In this sense, the target of the US deployments is not only North Korea but mainly China. In fact, USA Today already mentioned the training shift towards the Asia-Pacific region at Dyess in an article published in August 2012. The article added that the new strategy, which was announced in January 2012 by President Barack Obama, sought to “counter the rising power of China”.

Moreover, during a recent meeting of Obama with Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in Washington, the US president announced the sending of more US warships to the area of the Malacca Strait, a waterway that connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans and is critical to Chinese energy imports and trade.

Warmongering Senator John McCain of Arizona has also used the Korea crisis to attack China. “Chinese behavior has been very disappointing, whether it be on cyber security, whether it be on confrontation in the South China Sea, or whether it be their failure to rein in North Korea,” he said.

For his part, James Hardy, the Asia-Pacific editor for Jane’s Defense Weekly – also thinks that Washington “is using the existence of this crisis as an excuse to ramp up its missile defenses in Asia.” He pointed out that this move is related to Washington’s plans for hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region.

For its part, China is logically concerned by the deployment of these military systems near its borders. Chinese leaders have also seen the deployment of missile defense systems as a threat for their country. They have openly criticized the US for announcing a large increase in its anti-missile interceptors based in Alaska. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei warned that “strengthening anti-missile systems will intensify antagonism”.

Both China and Russia oppose the US deployment of these systems in Asia and Europe, which are not mainly aimed at Iran and North Korea, as Washington claims, but at undermining Chinese and Russian nuclear capacity. The ability to destroy missiles would allow the US to launch a “first nuclear strike” against China or Russia while avoiding a retaliation attack against its territory. As a response, Moscow and Beijing have already started to develop their military capacities, including the manufacture of new state-of-the-art nuclear missiles being capable of overcoming any anti-missile defense system.

No second thoughts on North Korea

Although there have been some claims in Western media that China could be having second thoughts on maintaining its support for North Korea, the truth is that the latter remains a key Chinese ally. Most Chinese think that the links with North Korea, despite all the difficulties and disagreements, remain useful for China. The Chinese leadership is probably conscious that Washington, in order to advance its own strategy, would like to see a rift between both traditional allies.

According to the Chinese publication Global Times, the economic importance of China-North Korea ties has grown in recent years. In terms of China’s total economic activity, it is still small, but in terms of Northeast China, it has gained importance.

On the other hand, “the strategic considerations that have kept China involved in the Korean Peninsula for hundreds of years have not suddenly disappeared”, wrote the Global Times. In this sense, North Korea is China’s sole ally in East Asia and a buffer state facing hostile powers as the US, Japan or South Korea. It is worth recalling that the Chinese army intervened in the Korean War in 1950 to prevent the occupation of North Korea by US and South Korean forces. Thus, it prevented the creation of a pro-US state directly on China’s border and a future US invasion of China itself.

Unlike Western countries, China has not blamed only North Korea for the current crisis but it has also criticized the US, Japan and South Korea’s hard-line positions and confrontational policies towards Pyongyang. Chinese media dismiss the idea that North Korea should eliminate its nuclear weapons, as the US demands. Actually, with examples such as Libya (denuclearized completely in accordance with US demands but subjected to US-backed regime change anyway), the North is not going to abandon its program because it is its best guarantee of survival.

Moreover, North Korea has already gone through a bitter experience over its negotiations with the US. In the 1990s and 2000s, Pyongyang sought to normalize its relations with Washington in exchange for putting an end to its nuclear program. In 2007, it shuttered the Yongbyon reactor, its sole one producing plutonium as a result of a nuclear disarmament agreement with the US. However, shortly after the deal collapsed and North Korea has just announced that the reactor will be restarted and used to produce more nuclear weapons from now on.

Therefore, China understands that it cannot abandon North Korea from a strategic perspective especially at a time when it has become the target of a policy of containment and strangulation by the US and its allies. Beijing can only go so far as to do “soft criticism” but not “hard criticism” of North Korean actions. Both countries have a common objective: opposing US-sponsored military alliances and deployments in the region, which are not just aimed at North Korea, but at China as well. Therefore, China’s policy of support for North Korea will continue.

YF/HSN

 

<!–

–>

Yusuf Fernandez is a journalist and the secretary of the Muslim Federation of Spain. He started to work for Radio Prague. He has been editor of several Islamic sites in Spanish and English and is currently editor of the Spanish site of Al Manar. He has also published articles in leading Spanish newspapers. More articles by Yusuf Fernandez

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

UN REPORT HIGHLIGHTS FLOW OF WEAPONS FROM LIBYA, ACROSS TURKEY TO SYRIA

April 11, 2013

Posted on April 10, 2013 by

UN Report Stresses Flow of Weapons from Libya to Terrorists in Syria across Turkey and Northern Lebanon

Apr 10, 2013

UNITED NATIONS, (SANA)- In a new proof added to the group of media reports which unveiled the involvement of Arab and foreign sides in arming the terrorist groups in Syria, a UN report stressed that Libya had become a key source of weapons in the region.

The report, which was made by the UN Security Council’s group of experts, who monitor an arms embargo imposed on Libya in 2011, stressed that the arm shipments which had been organized from various locations in Libya, including Misrata and Benghazi, were transferred to Syria via Turkey and northern Lebanon.

The report said that the significant size of some shipments and logistics involved suggest that representatives of the Libyan local authorities might at least have been aware of these shipments, if they were not directly involved, Reuters stressed according to the UN report published on Tuesday.

The report added that weapons spreading from Libya at an “alarming rate” fueling the war in Syria, Mali and other countries and enhancing the arsenals of extremists and the criminal gangs in the region.

‘Illicit flows from Libya are fuelling the existing conflicts in Africa and the Levant and enhancing the arsenals of a huge number of non-state groups, including terrorist groups”, the report said.

In the same context, several media reports unveiled operations on supplying terrorist groups in Syria with weapons to hinder the political solution based on dialogue, among which what the American republican senator Rand Paul has admitted last February on sending a shipment of weapons from Libya to Syria under US supervision.

Some reports stressed that the Croatian capital, Zagreb had turned into a crossing to the weapons and arms to the terrorist groups in Syria.

Another reports held Washington and its allies responsible for training terrorists in camps in Jordan.

H. Zain/ R. Milhem
 

ALSO SEE:


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

World Alarmed over N.Korea Missile Launch, Pyongyang Slams Seoul Policies

April 11, 2013
Local Editor
 
North Korea kept the world on edge Thursday over an expected rocket launch, as Pyongyang said that Seoul’s confrontation policies were responsible for the closure of Kaesong joint industrial zone.
South Korean intelligence says the North has prepared two mid-range missiles for imminent launch from its east coaNorth Koreast.

Although Pyongyang has not announced any launch, many observers expected it will take place during the build-up to the April 15 birthday for late founder Kim Il-Sung.

State media said foreign delegations had already begun arriving in Pyongyang for the event, which is one of the most important dates on the North’s calendar.
The missile launch may also coincide with some high-profile visits to South Korea, with both US Secretary of State John Kerry and NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen in Seoul on Friday.

Yonhap news agency quoted military sources as saying the North was moving multiple missiles around in an apparent bid to confuse outside intelligence-gatherers about its intentions.

INTERNATIONAL ACTIONS

“North Korea… with its bellicose rhetoric, its actions, has been skating very close to a dangerous line,” US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Wednesday.

“Our country is fully prepared to deal with any contingency, any action that North Korea may take or any provocation that they may instigate,” Hagel added.

The South Korea-US Combined Forces Command has raised its “Watchcon” status from 3 to 2 to reflect indications of a “vital threat”, while the South’s national police force has also beSouth Korea USen placed on “heightened terror alert.”

The North last week told foreign diplomats in Pyongyang they had until April 10 to consider evacuation, and followed that with a similar warning to foreigners in South Korea to get out ahead of a possible “thermo-nuclear” war.

The European Union said the seven EU countries with embassies in North Korea saw no need to leave, and added that it saw no risk to EU citizens in the South.

“If foreigners plan to visit this country… they will meet no problems whatsoever,” said South Korean foreign ministry spokesman Cho Tai-Young.

For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned against heating up the crisis, and stressed that Moscow and Washington were cooperating closely.

“On North Korea we have no differences with the United States,” Lavrov told journalists after meeting John Kerry on the sidelines of a G8 foreign minister’s meeting in London.

“One just shouldn’t scare anyone with military manoeuvres and there’s a chance that everything will calm down,” Lavrov said.

“CONFRONTATION POLICIES”

Meanwhile on Thursday, North Korea renewed a threat to permanently close its Kaesong joint industrial zone with South KorNorth Korea South Koreaea, blaming the “confrontation” policies of the South’s new president, Park Geun-Hye.

“Needless to say Kaesong industrial district will cease to exist should the Park Geun-Hye regime continue pursuing confrontation,” the North’s Bureau for Central Guidance to the Development of the Special Zone said.
“The current powerholder in the South can never be able to shake off responsibility for having Kaesong, which survived even the traitor Lee Myung-Bak’s term in office, all but closed,” a bureau spokesman said.

Pyongyang announced the withdrawal of its 53,000 workers and the suspension of operations at Kaesong at the beginning of this week, as military tensions on the Korean peninsula soar.

President Park, who was sworn in at the end of February, described the move as “very disappointing” and warned the North it would severely impact the trust of future investors.

Source: Agencies
11-04-2013 – 13:37 Last updated 11-04-2013 – 13:37

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Holy Syrian blood cleanses the world

April 10, 2013


الدم السوري المقدس يطهر العالم


‏الأربعاء‏، 10‏ نيسان‏، 2013

أوقات الشام

ناجي الزعبي

الصمود السوري , وخيارات التصدي , والمقاومه , كالماء المقدس الذي اخذ يطهر جسد العالم من الشرور , والاثام التي عانت منها شعوب الارض عبر عقود ممتدة من الهيمنة الامبريالية الاميركيه , وفي مقدمة ذلك تطهر الجسد السوري والعربي الذي تخلص من ادران المزيفين والانتهازيين والخونه . سوريه تخوض حربا بالنقاط وهي تستعد لتسديد الضربة القاضيه, والمشهد يرسم الان ونقرأه كما يلي :

تفقد سوريه مقعدها في جامعة انظمة النعاج , ويُمنح المقعد للمعارضه , وفي الوقت نفسه يرفض المسلحون تسمية رئيس حكومة المعارضه ويعتبرونه خائنا”, ويعلنون بانهم لن يسمحوا ان يكون له سلطة او نفوذ في المناطق التي قد يسيطرون عليها, وينسحب اثنى عشر عضوا ” من ألأئتلاف المعارض فيستقيل معاذ الخطيب لعجزه عن قيادة الأئتلاف , ويرسل رسالة لأمير قطر يؤكد فيها على استقالته .
تتوقف القاعدة في المغرب العربي عن ضخ المقاتلين الى سوريه , وتعلن ان الاولوية للجهاد في مالي وليس سوريه , ثم تتراجع بريطانيا , وفرنسا , والاطلسي عن تسليح المعارضه , ويرفض الاتحاد الاوروبي تسليحهم ايضا” , مما سيُحدث تبدل نوعي في موازيين القوى .
الاتفاق المبرم بين اردوغان واوجلان ” حزب العمال الكردي ” , هو اشارة لوهن حكومة اردوغان , وعجزها عن اداء الدور الذي كان عليها ان تؤديه في سوريه , والبحث عن اخماد مصادر القلق التركي الداخلي بما فيها المعارضه , أنكفاء وممر اجباري , فدورها كرأس حربة تسبب لها بأزمات لا حصر لها , وفي مقدمتها الازمة الاقتصاديه , فقد فقدت العملة التركيه 60% من قيمتها , والنمو الاقتصادي الذي بلغ 7% في ال 2010 يصبح , 2,2 في ال 2012 , ويهبط تصنيفها الأئتماني من 1 أ الى 3 ,ب , وقد منح صندوق النقد الدولي اليونان 4 نقاط تحسن , مقابل نقطة واحده لتركيا .
اغلق بشمركه اقليم كردستان الحدود في منطقة القامشلي , الى الحدو مع تركيا في وجه المسلحين ومنعوهم من الدخول لسوريه , واغلقت الحدود التركيه في وجه تدفق المسلحين بقرارا من مجلس الامن القومي التركي فُرظ على اردوغان بسبب سيطرة القاعده على مناطق في الداخل التركي .
.اطراف المؤامره تستنزف اوراقها قبل التفاوض الاميركي , الروسي في حزيران , ففي الوقت الذي تعطى فيه المعارضه مقعد سوريه في الجامعه العربيه على مستوى القمه العربيه , يعلن كيري مع امير الحرب التركي اوغلو عن فشل الحل العسكري ,و يوجه بيريز دعوه للانظمة العربيه لارسال قوات للتدخل في سوريه اشارة للعجز الصهيوني , والتركي , والاطلسي , والاميركي , ونحن نعي تماما العجز العربي , فلم يمض وقت طويل على اعلان النظام الرسمي العربي عن نفسه بانه مجموعة من النعاج ! .
استقالة ميقاتي استباق للمفاوضات الاميركيه الروسيه , وسوريه ستستعيد احتضانها للحياة السياسيه بلبنان . اغتيال الشيخ البوطي , واعطاء مقعد سوريه في الجامعة العبريه للمعارضه , هو لهاث اميركي وسباق مع الزمن , واستنفاذ لكل ما تحتويه جعبة اطراف المؤامره , انظمة قطر, السعوديه , الرجعية العربيه , الاتحاد الاوروربي , تركيا , اميركا , وتأكيد للوهن والعجز الاميركي عن اسقاط سوريه والذهاب الى طاولة المفاوضات .
سوريه تدير الصراع بعقل بارد ورؤيا استراتيجيه واطراف المؤامره استهلكت ادواتها فما الذي تبقى غير طاولة المفاوضات ؟ المواجهه في حلب بدات تاخذ منحى جديد وينابيع المسلحين تنضب ومسلحي المغرب العربي الذين كانوا يشكلون 70 % من المسلحين في سوريه انحسر منذ 15 يوما بقرار من القاعده في الغرب التي اعلنت ان الاولوية هي مالي وان النصر في سوريه سيكون نصرا للاطلسي , وقد اتضح ذلك ميدانيا فداريا تتطهر خلال ساعات ان لم تكن قد تطهرت والبقية تأتي .
عالم جديد يتشكل وانف اميركا يتمرغ بوحل آثامها فالزعيم الكوري الشاب الذي لم يبلغ الثلاثين يدب الرعب في الاوصال الامبرياليه عبر تهديده بقصف هاواي والقواعد الاميركية في مشيخات النفط , فتهبط قيمة الاسهم اليابانيه وتغلق المعامل الكورية الجنوبيه , ويهرع وزير الحرب الاميركي الى الصين للتفوض بشأن التهديد النووي الذي تعلم الولايات المتحدة مدى جديته فهي على يقين بان كوريا قد اجرت تجارب اطلاق صورايخ نووية اصابت اهدافها بنجاح
كوريا ستسترد موقعها في الامم المتحده وسيهتز عرش اميركا التي تملك ال 380 قاعده عبر العالم و8000 طائره ونصف مليون جندي ويتمرغ انفها بتراب آثامها وشرورها
اميركا تعجز عن تحييد الملف الكوري و البند الاول في القمه الصينيه الروسيه للرئيس الصيني الجديد هو بناء مصادر القوه من اجل اعادة انتاج نظام عالمي جديد , ورفض عسكرة الازمه السوريه , ثم تخرج قمة بريكس ببند يتعلق بالازمة السوريه ويليها التهديد الكوري , ثم تعلن روسيا عن انها ستبعث سفن انزال لميناء طرطوس منتصف نيسان الحالي , ويقرا الاميركي الرساله الروسية , الصينيه المعززه بالمناورات الروسيه في البحر الابيض ,والاسود لتستعيد روسيا مكانتها ومصادر قوتها في المنطقه , فيزداد هلع اميركا مع اقتراب موعد المفاوضات واقتراب موعد الانسحاب من افغانستان الذي سبقه الانسحاب من العراق ثم اخلاء اوراسيا تماما من الدنس الامبريالي الاميركي وترك شعوب المنطقة دون هيمنة وسرقة وقتل واستبداد اميركي.
سوريه لم تستخدم اسباب قوتها بعد , في ذات الوقت التي احرق به الجميع اوراقهم , والان بدأت حرب سوريه , ولحضة الاستسلام الاميركي تدنو , وسوريه تفرض قواعد اللعبة , ولغة الغد .
حزب الله يملك مقاليد المبادره العسكريه , والقدره على خوض الحرب وحيدا فقد اعلن نصرالله بمصداقيته المجربه عن جاهزيته لمجابهة العدوالصهيوني , وقدرات ايران تزداد قوه وتستثمر عناصر القوه السوريه اقليميا ودوليا وقد ارسل المرشد الاعلى رسالة واضحة للعدو الصهيوني مهددا بازالة حيفا ويافا لو قام بالعدوان على ايران .
على المنخرطين بالمؤامره الترجل من قاطرة التآمر , او تحسس رؤوسهم .

Top of Form

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Shoving Israel in the discourse will get your attention … regardless!

April 8, 2013

FLC

 
Rephrasing: The US & allies’ actions in Syria threaten the security of Israel!
“… This is hardly a new phenomenon. In the early 1980s, the US and its Arab allies supported the Taliban and al-Qaeda as they took up arms against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Although this strategy may have yielded short-term successes, the US had an opportunity to recognize their mistake after al-Qaeda perpetrated the attacks of September 11, killing thousands of innocent civilians. I am confident that the US and its allies are repeating the same mistake,In the midst of that chaos, it would also become likely that the trend of the al-Qaeda school of thought would swoop in and seize a “golden opportunity” to cleanse the country of non-Sunnis — Twelver Shiites, Alawites, Christians, Jews, Druze and any other heterodox or non-Muslim communities. Even if the bulk of Salafi ire has been directed at Shiites, this expansion of the zone of terror against nonconformists to the Salafi order would ultimately threaten Israel….”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Interview of Vladimir Putin to the German TV station ARD

April 8, 2013

 

This interview touches upon various important topics but it is particularly valuable because it set the record strait about the Western propaganda about the Russian government’s “crackdown” on NGOs such as these from the BBC:

Needless to say, the Western media will not change its tune. Still, for those few who will see/listen/read this interview it will become apparent that this is really a non-story.

The Saker
——-

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN (retranslated): Good evening, Mr President,

Germany and Russia enjoy special relationship and, economically speaking, they are a good match. However, there exist certain difficulties from the political viewpoint. Quite a number of Germans keep track of the raids in the Russian offices of German funds with great concern. The Russian public must be frightened. Why do you act like this?

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: It is you who are scaring the German public instead. There is nothing like this going on here, do not scare the public, please. The media should cover the events objectively. And what does it mean, objectively? The new law adopted late last year in Russia stipulates that non-governmental organisations engaged in Russia’s internal political processes and sponsored from abroad must be registered as foreign agents, that is organisations which participate in our country’s political life at the expense of foreign countries. This is not an innovation in international politics. A similar law has been in force in the United States since 1938.

If you have any additional questions, I would be pleased to answer them in order to clarify the situation to you and your or, in this case, our viewers.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Mr President, I am not aware of any similar confiscations or raids carried out in the United States. In our opinion, the term ‘foreign agent’, as these organisations are to be called, sounds something like cold war.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Then let me explain. First of all, the United States adopted a similar law, which has been in effect ever since. And our, Russian, organisations have followed the same practice that was established in that country decades ago.

I am going to show you a paper in which, not long ago, the United States Department of Justice requested a non-governmental organisation to submit documents confirming that its activities were to be financed from abroad; the list is very long.

We have adopted a similar law that prohibits nothing; let me stress it, the law does not prohibit anything, nor does it limit or close down anything. Organisations financed from abroad are not forbidden to carry out any type of activities, including internal political activity. The only thing we want to know is who receives the money and where it goes. I repeat: the law is not some sort of innovation of our own.

Why do we consider it so important today? What do you think is the number of Russia-sponsored non-governmental organisations functioning in Europe? Any ideas?

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: I am afraid I cannot assess the situation, Mr President.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Let me tell you. One such organisation operates in Paris, another one – in North America, it is registered in the USA. And this is it. There are only two of them – one in the United States and another one in Europe.

There are 654 non-governmental organisations operating in the Russian Federation, which are funded, as it has turned out, from abroad. 654 organisations make quite a network nationwide, the Russian regions included.

Over the four months alone that followed the adoption of the law in question, the accounts of these organisations augmented by… How much money do you think they received? You can hardly imagine; I did not know the figure myself: 28.3 billion rubles, which is almost $1 billion. 855 million rubles via diplomatic missions.

These organisations are engaged in internal political activity. Should not our society be informed of who gets the money and for what purposes?

I would also like to stress – and I want you to know this, I want people in Europe, including Germany, to know this – that nobody bans these organisations from carrying out their activities. We only ask them to admit: “Yes, we are engaged in political activities, and we are funded from abroad.” The public has the right to know this.

There is no need to scare anyone saying that people here get rounded up, arrested, have their property confiscated, although confiscations could be a reasonable thing if those people break the law. Some administrative sanctions are envisaged in these cases, but I think all this falls under rules commonly accepted in a civilised society.

Now let us look at the documents that our organisations in the US are required to provide. Note who asks for these documents, signed at the bottom of the page. The Counterespionage Section. Not the Office of Attorney General, but the Counterespionage Section of the US Department of Justice. This is an official document that the organisation received. And note the number of questions they pose. Is this democratic?

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Mr President, we will examine this document. I do not know if any such searches took place in the US.

I would like to ask you once again: we understand democracy as the coexistence of the state and opposition. Political competition is an integral part of it. Does Russia need a strong opposition?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Certainly. We do need it to say the least. I believe that without competition no development in either economy, or in politics is possible today, and we want to ensure this development for our country and our people. Without this competition we would not be able to make effective, sound and justified decisions. Which is why we will undoubtedly strive to make the competition a cornerstone of every sphere of our society’s life, including politics.

But this does not mean that opposition should be financed from abroad, don’t you think? Or do you have a different opinion?

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Does this imply that the opposition can freely participate in demonstrations?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Absolutely, as long as they abide by the law. There are certain rules that provide for various forms of political activity. Voting means publicly expressing your opinion, as does participating in demonstrations. There is law. Good or bad, it can be changed democratically, but it must be abided by. Ordnung muss sein. It is a well-known rule. It is universal and applicable in any country. There must be order, and there must be no chaos. Northern Africa is a vivid example of what chaos leads to. Does anybody want that?

As for the activities of the opposition, I would like to draw your attention to the following fact. Just recently, a political party was required to have at least 50 thousand members to be registered. We have radically reduced this number: now one only needs 500 members to register a party and engage in legal political activities. 37 parties have already been registered, and, I think, several dozen more have filed their applications. This is how it is going to be, we will encourage this political competition.

We have changed the procedure for the election of members of the upper chamber of the Russian Parliament, the Federation Council; now they are elected by secret ballot by citizens of corresponding regions. By the way, I do not think that the upper chamber of the German Parliament is elected this way: if I am not mistaken, its members are elected by their respective landtags.

In this regard, we have gone further; I refer to the election of heads of the Russian regions that I reintroduced. We have returned to direct voting by secret ballot. Germany elects heads of its regions through landtags. Many of our political actors thought that we should go back to forming the Parliament through a mixed election system with simple majority rule nominations and strict party-list nominations. We have arrived at this mixed system, so we are moving, we are looking for those forms of our society’s political organisation that would be most suitable for us at this stage and would satisfy the requirements and aspirations of our people. This, of course, concerns political parties as well. Naturally, we want competition.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: You are going to Germany for a major trade fair. The economic relations between our countries are important for you, I believe. Are you worried that the issues we have just discussed may cast a shadow over your visit?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: No, on the contrary, I am very glad about it. And I am glad about our today’s interview too because this gives us an opportunity to clarify the situation, to explain what is actually happening and what guides us. Now, what was your first question? About searches and arrests. What searches? What arrests? Who has been arrested? Can you give me at least one name? This is not true. Don’t make anything up.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: I didn’t say anything about arrests. I spoke about searches.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: It sounds alarmist: “Hey everyone! Look! Terrible things are happening here!” Well, yes, there is the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation that is obliged to ensure that the laws adopted in the Russian Federation are respected. And all the citizens, all organisations, all individuals and legal entities operating in Russia must take this into account and have due respect for Russian law.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: What are you expecting from your visit to Germany in terms of economy? I assume you are going to encourage the Germans to invest. What exactly are you expecting?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Russia and Germany are very important partners for each other. This is really so. The EU countries and the EU itself are our major commercial partners. They account for over 50 percent of our turnover. Well, the figure can fluctuate a bit: a little over 50, a little under 50 percent due to the economic difficulties faced by the Eurozone and the EU. It is under 50 at the moment, I believe, but it is still a lot. In absolute numbers it amounts to over $430‑450 billion. We are EU’s third major commercial partner after the US and China, and the difference is not very big. If our total turnover with Europe amounts to some $430-450 billion, the turnover for the US is a little over $600 billion and $550 billion for China. So as you can see, not that big of a difference.

Germany is our primary European partner. Our turnover amounts to $74 billion and it continues to grow no matter what difficulties there might be. To make it clear for both Russian and German citizens, I need to say that these are not just numbers; there are jobs behind these numbers, there are cutting edge technology behind them, moving in both directions.

By the way, as far as Germany is concerned, the trade pattern is not only in line with its economic capabilities but also in line with its interests since the emphasis in trade and economic cooperation with Germany is put on the industrial production. And behind this – let me stress this once again – there are thousands if not tens of thousands of jobs, and the incomes of Russian and German families. Besides, Russia supplies 40 percent of all natural gas and 30 percent of all oil consumption in Germany.

We are expanding our cooperation in high technology sectors, aviation, engineering, including transport engineering, nanotechnologies, and next-generation physics engineering. This is a very diverse, interesting and promising cooperation.

Germany is one of our major investors with $25 billion in accumulated investments. Last year alone their amount increased by as much as $7.2 billion. This means that Germany invests rather actively in the Russian economy. I would like to stress again that all this is important, interesting and promising.

We are going to have six pavilions [at the trade fair], large ones. They are all united by a single slogan – the industrial production, in which Germany has always been strong, and which is of interest to us. Over a hundred large Russian companies will be exhibiting in those pavilions.

I invite you and all our friends in Germany to visit the 2013 Hannover Messe and Russia’s pavilions there.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: You’ve spoken about 27 billion of German direct investment in Russia. I would now like to touch upon the Cyprus issue. A lot of Germans realised for the first time how much Russian money is there in Cypriot banks and are now wondering why German businesses have to make investments while you pull your money out of Russia?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Don’t you see all the absurdity of your question? Just please don’t get me wrong. What does Russia have to do with Russian investors in one of the EU countries? The more you “pinch” foreign investors in the financial institutions of your countries, the better for us because the affected, offended and frightened (not all of them but many) should, so we hope, come to our financial institutions and keep their money in our banks.

Why, at some point, many Russian investors moved their funds to zones such as Cyprus? Because, frankly speaking, they did not feel they could rely on the Russian financial system. And, indeed, it was not reliable. Just recall the year 1998 – an economic collapse, or the year 2000 (and that was already our common problem) – again there were widespread fears regarding the future of the financial system. But in 2008, when the new crisis hit, we not only managed to preserve the integrity of our financial system, we strengthened it without letting a single financial institution collapse. There were problems, of course, but we did not allow any of the financial institutions to abandon their customers. Of course, people went through a lot of hardships during the crisis but we arranged the work of our banking system in a way that made it possible not only to support but also to strengthen it while taking some measures to carefully restructure it, again in order to strengthen it. And I hope that people today will understand that.

Forfeiture of investors’ funds, including of Russian origin, wherever it happens, in Cyprus or in other places, undermines credibility of the banking system of the entire Eurozone.

Now regarding the issue of whether to provide support or not and who is to blame. Is that fair, that people invested their funds, merely deposited their money with banks without breaking any laws, whether the laws of Cyprus or those of the European Union, just to see 60 percent of their deposits forfeited? They did not violate any rules. As to the allegations that Cyprus was, as they say in the financial community, a laundry for dirty money, they have to be supported with hard facts. One of the basic rules that we all are supposed to know and observe is the rule of the presumption of innocence. A person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can we ignore that? How can we accuse all people concerned of being crooks? Then anybody can be declared a crook.

Did we create that offshore zone? No, we didn’t. It was the European Union that created it. Or, rather, it was created by the Cyprus authorities with the connivance of the European Union. And is it the only such zone created by countries of the European Union? Are we not aware of offshore island zones in Great Britain or of other such zones? They do exist. If you consider such zones a bad thing, then close them. Why do you shift responsibility for all problems that have arisen in Cyprus to investors irrespective of their nationality (British, Russian, French or whatever else).

I have met with senior officials of the European Commission. We have very good personal relations, though we disagree on many issues. Is it Russia’s fault that Cyprus is now facing problems? Indeed, incoming investors are a positive factor as they support the banking system and the entire economy of the host country with their funds and their trust.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: You are angry that the European Union did not ask you for help and that many Russian nationals were affected, are you?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Of course, not. On the contrary I am even glad, to some extent, because the events have shown how risky and insecure investments in Western financial institutions can be. By the way, our tax regime in that context is also more favourable than yours. The income tax rate for individuals in Russia is only 13 percent. What about Germany? How much do you pay?

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: It would be great if we paid only 13 percent. Of course, it would be great. Fight against tax increases is a hot topic during the election campaign.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: So, fight for tax cuts.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Mr President, I would like to touch upon the issue of euro. You spoke about the European financial system. Russia holds more than 40 percent of its currency reserves in euro, which makes you keenly interested in euro. Do you still trust euro?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: First, I would like to say it outright: yes, we trust euro. We also trust the economic policy of major European countries, including, in the first place, the economic policy of the government of the Federal Republic of Germany. We are fully aware of various opinions on that issue, including on aspects, such as economic development, maintenance of economic growth and ensuring monetary stability. I agree with the opinion that, before pumping liquidity, it is necessary to address the root causes of crises.

But I wouldn’t like to go into detail now and discuss the issue that has no direct bearing on us as that is the prerogative of the leaders of the European countries themselves.

However, judging by what we hear and see, what our colleagues are doing in the leading economies of the Eurozone, what the European Commission itself is doing, – and I would like to repeat that we do not agree on many issues and we do argue – we believe that fundamentally they are moving in the right direction. It gives us confidence that we have made the right choice having decided to keep such a large share of our gold and currency reserves, of our reserves in general in the European currency. I am confident that if the situation continues to develop the same way, our colleagues and friends in Europe will overcome the difficulties they are facing today.

And our reserves are rather substantial: the Central Bank reserves worth $534 billion, another $89 billion representing one of the Russian Government’s reserve funds, another $87 billion (a third fund) representing the second government fund, the National Welfare Fund. So, this is a rather substantial amount of money.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Mr President, our time is almost up, but I would like to draw your attention to another crisis area that raises great concerns in Germany – that is Syria. Hundreds of people die there every day. Your stance and the stance of the West in the UN Security Council obviously differed.

I would like to ask you the following. How do you see the opportunities for stopping the bloodshed? What are the Russian authorities doing, what is the Russian Government doing to finally put an end to this bloodshed?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I think that we should seek an immediate cessation of hostilities, of shelling from both sides, and a cessation of arms supplies.

We often hear: “Russia is supplying arms to Assad.” First of all, there are no bans on arms supplies to incumbent legitimate governments. Secondly, only recently the opposition has received 3.5 tons of arms and munitions through the airports near Syria. This is the information published by the American media, I believe, by The New York Times. It has to be stopped.

However, – I would like to stress once again and I believe it is extremely important, – there is international law. There are international legal norms stating that it is inadmissible to supply arms to the armed groups that strive to destabilise the situation in a certain country with the use of arms. Such norms exist and they remain in force; nobody abolished them. So, when they say that Assad is fighting against his own people, we need to remember that this is the armed part of the opposition. What is going on is a massacre, this is a disaster, a catastrophe. It has to be stopped. It is necessary to bring all the warring parties to the negotiation table. I believe that this is the first step that has to be done, and then it is necessary to elaborate further steps during a discussion, which is important in our view.

I have already said it in public and I would like to tell you this, so that your viewers also know about our real position. We do not think that Assad should leave today, as our partners suggest. In this case, tomorrow we will have to decide what to do and where to go. We have done it in many countries. To be precise, our Western partners have. And it is unclear where Libya will go. In fact, it has already split into three parts. We do not want to have the situation of the same difficulty as we still have in Iraq. We do not want to have the situation of the same difficulty as in Yemen, and so on.

Therefore, we believe that it is necessary to bring everyone to the negotiation table so that all warring parties could reach an agreement on how their interests will be protected and in which way they will participate in the future governance of the country. And then they will work together on the implementation of this plan with due guarantees of the international community.

By the way, at the recent forum in Geneva (a few months ago) an agreement was reached on this issue, but later our Western partners unfortunately went back on these agreements. We believe that it is necessary to work hard and search for mutually acceptable solutions.

Recently, we have received Mr Hollande, President of the French Republic. I think he has some interesting ideas that can be implemented, but it requires some diplomatic work. We are ready to support these ideas. We need to try and put them into practice.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Mr President, at the end of our interview I would like to go back to the topic that we have started with. Democracy is a very controversial issue. I would like to quote your Prime Minister. Mr Medvedev said that the democratic changes in Russia can be assessed only in 100 years. In our view, this is not very ambitious.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: It may be a translation issue. Could you tell me again what he said exactly?

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: In essence, Russia’s Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that “development of democracy in Russia can be assessed no earlier than in 100 years.” My question is whether there are truly no ambitions about it.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: To be honest, I have not seen or heard of Prime Minister saying that, and it is always necessary to consider the context which I am lacking now.

It is obvious that we have made a decisive choice for democracy and we cannot imagine any other way of development. It is also obvious that certain standards used in some countries are difficult to implement or apply elsewhere. I think it is quite clear. We need to develop tools based on the fundamental principles of democracy that would allow for the vast majority of people in our country to influence domestic and foreign policy. It is the majority that must have such an influence, but the majority should also respect the opinion of the minority and consider it. If our domestic policy and public institutions are fully based on such fundamental principles, then it seems to me, we will be able to talk about the success of democracy in Russia. Nevertheless, it is obviously the path that Russia has chosen, the path that it follows. Just compare the situation in the Soviet Union and in modern Russia in terms of development of economy, political sphere, and all other areas associated with democracy. There is a very significant difference. It took other countries 200, 300, 400 years to achieve this goal. Do you expect us to cover this distance within two decades? Of course, we are gradually taking all the necessary steps. We know our destination, and will not abandon this path.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: In conclusion, I shall try to ask you a personal question.

You were President for eight years, and then you became Prime Minister. You will be President for the next six years. Do you have a personal plan? Do you want to be President as long as you are elected? Or may be you have some plans about your life afterwards?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Every normal person tries to look some distance ahead. Moreover, I am far from being the longest serving politician. There are people in leading positions in European politics who have worked there much longer than me, both in Europe and in North America, Canada actually. However, I do expect that after my retirement from political life and public service I will have an opportunity to busy myself with other things and challenges. I like jurisprudence and literature, and I do hope I will have a chance to occupy myself with these without any link to my public service duties. May be, I will look into other issues. It can be social life, sports, etc.

JÖRG SCHÖNENBORN: Thank you very much for the interview, Mr President.

source: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/5216

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

US Postpones Missile Test to “Avoid Misperception” with North Korea

April 7, 2013


 
Local Editor
 
The United States delayed intercontinental ballistic missile test to avoid stoking tensions with North Korea after Pyongyang repeatedly threatened an all-out war against Washington and its ally, Seoul.
The Pentagon said it would reschedule the intercontinental missile test due in California next week.North Korea US flags

A US defense official said Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel postponed the Minuteman 3 test at Vandenberg Air Force Base until next month due to concerns it “might be misconstrued by some as suggesting that we were intending to exacerbate the current crisis with North Korea”.

“We wanted to avoid that misperception or manipulation,” the US official told AFP. “We are committed to testing our ICBMs to ensure a safe, secure, effective nuclear arsenal.”

North Korea, incensed by UN sanctions following its nuclear and missile tests and by South Korean-US military drills, has issued a series of apocalyptic threats of nuclear war in recent weeks.

FOREIGN DIPLOMATS’ SAFETY

Foreign diplomats in Pyongyang huddled at the weekend to discuss a warning from the North’s authorities that their safety could not be guaranteed after April 10 if a conflict broke out.
Most of their governments have made it clear they have no immediate plans to withdraw personnel, and some suggested the advisory was a ruse to fuel growing global anxiety over the crisis on the Korean peninsula.

The top national security adviser to South Korea’s President Park Geun-Hye said Sunday the warning was another ploy to force the South and the United States to reach out to the North with face-saving concessions.

“We believe the North is trying to turn the situation around by making the US send a special envoy, the South to offer dialogue and China or Russia to act as a mediator,” Kim Jang-Soo said.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said China opposes “provocative words and actions” from any party in the region and would “not allow troublemaking on China’s doorstep”, in sharply worded comments Saturday to UN chief Ban Ki-moon.

For its part, Britain urged calm over the issue, saying that Pyongyang had shown no signs of repositioning its armed forces despite its “paranoid rhetoric”.

“We haven’t seen the repositioning of forces or the redeployment of ground forces that one might see in a period prior to a military assault or to an all-out conflict,” Hague told BBC television.

“That’s why I say it’s important to keep calm as well as to be firm and united about this,” he added.

Source: AFP
07-04-2013 – 13:23 Last updated 07-04-2013 – 13:23

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Playing the North Korea Card

April 7, 2013



by Stephen Lendman

My PhotoFor decades, North Korea’s wanted normalized relations with Washington. It’s been repeatedly rebuffed. Promises made were broken. America needs enemies.

North Korea’s straight from central casting. Media scoundrels take full advantage. On April 2, Washington Post editors headlined “Answer North Korea with financial sanctions,” saying:
Kim Jong Un “managed to concoct a fresh provocative announcement aimed at Washington.” He declared both Koreas “were back to a ‘state of war.’ ”

“Could this untested, 30-year-old dictator be preparing to start a war with the United States or South Korea? The worrying reality is that it is virtually impossible for outsiders to know for sure.”
Most likely he’s “rally(ing) support behind the regime and to pressure the United States and its allies into opening negotiations.”

“As previous US administrations have learned the hard way, answering provocations with diplomacy will not lead to concessions by North Korea – only to another round of provocations.”

Hit ‘em again harder, urge Post editors. Pile new sanctions on current ones. Escalate tensions higher. Play the blame game. Denounce Pyongyang for Washington’s bellicosity and provocations. Point fingers the wrong way.

Wall Street Journal editors headlined “Calling Kim’s Bluff,” saying:

He’s “manufacturing a crisis to secure high-level talks with the US, as his father and grandfather did.”

“The wonder is that the North’s bluster-for-cash strategy still gets taken seriously.”

“The Obama Administration has so far avoided the Bush-Clinton negotiations trap, and we hope that continues. While an accident or miscalculation could restart the Korean War, there are also reasons to think the North’s acting up is all a bluff.”

Washington “efforts pressure Kim into better behavior will come to nothing if it caves now and grants formal talks. (It’s) no time to go wobbly.”

Journal editors omitted demands for more sanctions. Otherwise, they marched in lockstep with Post ones. Blame North Korea for Washington’s imperial aims.

Hold it responsible for acting in response to justifiable fears. Increase America’s regional presence. Prioritize gunboat diplomacy. Intensify saber rattling. Escalate tensions. Avoid dialogue. Show Pyongyang Washington won’t be bullied. It’s standard media scoundrel policy.

North Korea poses no threat. It wants normalized relations. America needs enemies. Pyongyang’s used for that purpose.

“It’s North Korea, Again,” headlined The New York Times.

“Recent weeks of saber-rattling and military escalation have affirmed a harsh truth: North Korea – which is much closer to putting a nuclear warhead on a missile than Iran and has threatened to strike the United States and its allies – is the more urgent challenge. The major powers still haven’t figured out how to solve it.”

“The Obama administration was prudent to bolster its forces in the region.”

“….Washington has an obligation (to) defend the homeland (and) reassure South Korea and Japan that America’s defense commitments remain firm.”

As usual, Times editors twisted truth. North Korea threatens no one. It wants peace, not war. It wants its sovereign rights respected. It wants US provocations to stop.

It opposes Obama’s Asia pivot. It does so for good reason. America’s greater military presence threatens its security. It compromises regional peace.

Gunboat diplomacy escalates tensions. It’s done for that purpose. It causes instability. It creates problems. It doesn’t solve them.

North Korea’s justifiably concerned. America’s military presence is menacing. Its exercises are provocative. Key Resolve began in February. It’s now completed. Eagle Fold runs through April 30.
Overall, around 13,000 US forces and 200,000 South Korean ones are involved. So are nuclear capable B-2 stealth bombers, F-22 stealth fighters, and B-52s. San Diego-based USS Decatur was heading home. It was re-missioned. It’s on alert in western Pacific waters.

Pentagon spokesman George Little said a second guided missile destroyer, the USS John McCain, was deployed. It arrived at a “pre-determined location.” It’s positioned off the Korean peninsula.
Both ships are prepared “to perform a missile defense operations as assigned by our combatant commander. (They’re) poised to respond to any missile threats to our allies or our territory.”

Missile defense systems will be installed in Guam. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said it’s to defend it from a “real and clear danger” from North Korea. Others were installed in Alaska and America’s west coast.

Pyongyang raised concerns. It said “North-South relations will be entering a state of war and all issues raised between the North and the South will be handled accordingly.”

“The long-standing situation of the Korean Peninsula being neither at peace nor at war is finally over.”

If Washington and/or Seoul attack, conflict “will not be limited to a local war. (It will) develop into an all-out war, a nuclear war.”

It bears repeating. North Korea wants peace, not war. Conflict assures losers, not winners. Heated rhetoric hopes to get America’s attention.

It bears full responsibility for rising tensions. According to Russian former chief of staff General Yuri Baluyevsky, Washington and NATO may preemptively attack Russia and China.

Nuclear weapons may be used. NATO’s missile shield intends to protect against retaliatory strikes.
“They expect that their opponents will respond with up to 100 missiles, not with 1,500 or 2,000. They are dreaming of being able to intercept the whole bulk of a hundred missiles and make themselves invulnerable after their first strike,” he added.

Little wonder North Korea expresses concerns. Normalized relations could have been restored decades ago. Instead, Pyongyang’s used as Washington’s regional punching bag.

At issue is justifying Obama’s Asia pivot. It involves advancing America’s military footprint. It targets China and Russia.

North Korea’s a convenient pretext. If it didn’t exist, it’d be invented. Claiming it threatens South Korea and Japan doesn’t wash. Washington’s the sole regional menace. It’s greater presence bodes ill.

Last June, then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said around 60% of US naval forces will be based in the Pacific by 2020.

Strengthening America’s presence is part of its new imperial strategy. Challenging China is prioritized. At issue is isolating Beijing regionally and undermining its influence. It’s a recipe for heightened tensions and potential confrontation.

Comparable Chinese or Russian presence in US waters would be pretext for war. So would their bases in neighboring regional countries.

America believes global territories and waters are its own. It works because other nations don’t object. Japan and South Korea go along. They accept what they should reject.

Last May, Obama met with then Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda in Washington. Strengthening strategic ties and boosting military activities were discussed.

A joint statement pledged to “further enhance our bilateral security and defense cooperation.” A commitment was affirmed to “US strategic rebalancing to the Asia Pacific.”
Plans are to establish “a more geographically distributed and operationally resilient force posture in the region.”

Washington has been “rebalancing” in East Asia for years. Strategy calls for strengthening military, economic, and political ties with Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Myanmar, Singapore and Vietnam.

China and Russia are targeted. Doing so risks potential confrontation. Beating up on North Korea increases the possibility. Conflict isn’t likely now. Ahead, anything is possible.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!