Posts tagged ‘Russia’

‘US thinks rules are for inferior nations, it’s in their DNA’ – ex Australian PM …..

The Ukraine Crisis and Vladimir Putin: A New Financial System Free from Wall Street and the City of London? …..

http://www.sott.net

Approximate Transcript of Interview

The Ukrainian crisis? It is basically the opposite of what the media and politicians keep repeating both in the US and Europe. They say that the so-called International community have isolated Russia and Vladimir Putin.

In fact it is the real sponsors of the coup d’état and the violence in Ukraine who are isolated not only morally but also strategically.

And it is Putin, the first leader who resisted and defeated the strategy of world domination, who is enjoying the enthusiastic support of his people and the growing admiration of the world. The well financed media and politicians do not want to hear this, but this is the reality. Without exaggeration, one can compare this resistance to that against Napoleon and Hitler…

Only few know precisely how dangerous the situation has been. How close to a real war.

The incompetent representatives of the ‘international community’ lost any sense of reality and deployed the weapons of social destabilization, armed insurrection, assassination by snipers, a fascist March on Kiev reminiscent of Mussolini’s March on Rome, targeting of the Russian population.

They intended to give Russia the Libya treatment, and they did not make a secret of it.

After the assurances given by George H W Bush to Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO couldn’t be used for a push toward East, successive US governments did exactly that. Their objective is to surround Russia. With the smiling hypocrisy of hyenas, they made clear that there was no alternative but to surrender to the military power and propaganda capabilities of NATO.

No compromise, no negotiations. Or better when negotiations took place like on Feb 21, the neo-Nazi gangs in Kiev were incited to escalate the armed violence and take over the Parliament and Government buildings, beating and intimidating whoever did not agree.

The Western “diplomats” immediately recognized the neo-Nazi coup d’état as the legitimate government. Yatsenyuk, the candidate of Victoria Nuland, declared himself Prime Minister while members of the parliament were brutally beaten in the street, their houses invaded and violated, their families terrorized… to ensure their support for the democratic process…

These criminal politicians even pushed the situation close to a real nuclear war. Putin made clear that Russia – which had lost a large percentage of its population in the war against Nazism and accepted to see Moscow in flames in order to defeat the superior forces of Napoleon – was not going to surrender. That moment was more dangerous than the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Putin called their bluff… Then, while the Crimean (and not only Crimean) population asked for protection against the NATO-supported armed gangs, the propaganda machine went into full speed in the West, but it was too late. In this sense Putin not only saved Russia, but gave a chance to the whole of Europe… like in WWII

The fascist armed insurrection and the Kiev coup were not simply a war against Russia, they were also a war against Europe. Not the EU bureaucracy in Brussels, whose loyalty lies with the big financial institutions, but the Europe of the various countries reduced to misery and despair by austerity measures and the economic looting of Wall Street and the city of London.

Ukraine has been destabilized in order to make sure that Europe would be in a perennial war with Russia.

In fact, both, the interests of Europe and that of Russia, lie in a common economic plan for the development of the whole area. This is what was proposed by Putin and by several leaders such as former German chancellors Helmut Kohl and Gerhard Schroeder. This is exactly what had to be prevented with the Victoria Nuland $5 billion ‘to help democracy.’ And now, despite all the noises and rhetoric, this is the most obvious direction to go.

The most important point to understand is that this war and looting policy is not in the interest of the Europeans or even of the Americans.

This is the big secret that now cannot be covered anymore. The governments of the US and the European countries are NOT independent entities, they are not sovereign. They do not have the will or even the ability to act on behalf of their people. They are controlled by powerful banking interests. They have been taken over by two financial centers that do not care for the real economy. They pursue only speculation and looting.

In response on March 4th the economic adviser to Putin, Sergey Glazyev declared openly that if the financial vultures persisted, Russia would create on the spot an independent financial system which is separate from that of the US Dollar.

Glazyev explained to the vampires:

‘We have wonderful economic and trade relations with our Southern and Eastern partners. We will find a way not just to eliminate our dependence on the US but also profit from these sanctions….If sanctions are applied against Russia’s state structures we will have to move into other currencies and create our own settlement system. We will be forced to recognize the impossibility of repayment of the loans that the US banks gave to Russian state structures. Indeed, sanctions are a double-edged weapon, and if the US chooses to freeze our assets, then our equities and liabilities in dollars will also be frozen…’

This strategy is known as the Financial Nuclear Option. It could lead to the end of the predatory looting system of Wall Street.

The ‘Southern and Eastern partners’ Glazyev is talking about are clearly the members of the BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, the sane part of the world economy, the future.

And it is exactly what the official spokesman of the Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov indicated in an interview to the BBC:

“Sanctions against Russia could be the final trigger that will force many countries to create a new independent financial system based on the real economy. The world is changing rapidly. How many civilizations grew and died in the course of history? Who will be able to resist the pressure of dying systems and indicate to the people the road toward the future?”

The possibility of a new financial system independent from the collapsing dollar empire, as consequence of anti Russia sanctions was also emphasized by an authoritative the Russian media including RT. (See:http://rt.com/op-edge/russia-switches-to-brics-sanctions-357/)

…Western sanctions might push Russia to deepen cooperation with BRICS states, in particular, to strengthen its ties with China, which will possibly turn out to be a big catastrophe for the US and the EU some time later.

On March 18, the spokesperson for the Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, stated that Russia would switch to new partners in case of economic sanctions being imposed by the European Union and the United States. He highlighted that the modern world isn’t unipolar and Russia has strong ties with other states as well, though Russia wants to remain in good relations with its Western partners, especially with the EU due to the volume of trade and joint projects.

Those “new partners” are not really new since Russia has been closely interconnected with them for almost 13 years. This is all about the so-called BRICS organization, consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. BRICS represents 42 percent of the world’s population and about a quarter of the world’s economy, which means that this bloc of states is an important global actor.

The BRICS countries are like-minded in regard to supporting the principles of international law, the central role of the UN Security Council and the principles of the non-use of force in international relations; this is why they are so actively performing in the sphere of settling regional conflicts. However, the cooperation between Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa goes beyond political aspects and is also demonstrated by dynamic trade and multiple projects in different areas.

Today, in total, there are more than 20 formats of cooperation within the BRICS which are being developing. For example, in February the member-states came to an agreement about 11 possible projects of scientific and technical cooperation, from aeronautics to bio- and nanotechnology.

In order to modernize the global economic system, at the center of which stand the US and the EU, the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa have created the BRICS Stock Alliance and are creating their own development bank to finance large infrastructure projects. On the whole, despite fierce criticism of BRICS as an organization with no future, it is developing and increasing cooperation with its members and, in fact, BRICS is showing pretty good results.

With the suspension of Russia’s participation in G8 and the strengthening of economic sanctions against Russia, specific industries may be targeted, including limits on imported commodities.

While the West seeks to hit Russia hard, it is important to notice that Russia is ready to switch to other markets, including BRICS, with a view to expanding its trade.

The following are excerpts from a March 19 2014 interview with Umberto Pascali, Macedonian TV program, “The People’s Voice” directed by Slobodan Tomic.

.

Stratfor Founder Admits Ukraine Is U.S. Regime Change Puppet ……..

Startfor Wiki page here

This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

Russia: US, EU violate commitments under 1994 “Budapest Memorandum”…..

http://inserbia.info

Western actions during the Ukrainian crisis run counter to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

moscow-foreign-ministry

“The US and EU actively encouraged the coup d’etat in Kiev, acting against the political independence and sovereignty of Ukraine in breach of their obligations under the Budapest Memorandum,” the ministry said in a commentary posted on its website on Wednesday.

In the context of the situation in Ukraine, some of Moscow’s partners did not fail to point out to Russia its obligations under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the ministry said.

“In view of this we would like to remind them what these obligations are and who exactly is responsible for honoring them. In the Budapest Memorandum, Russia, the US and the United Kingdom committed to act as guarantors of the rights inherent to Ukraine’s sovereignty,” the ministry said.

“We would like to ask: how do the threats to impose sanctions on the Ukrainian authorities made repeatedly by the US and EU during the riots in Kiev fit into these guarantees? What is it, if not an economic coercion with respect to a sovereign state? How should one regard, for example, the almost continual patrolling by Western envoys in “Maidan”?” the commentary said.

“How should we qualify the US and EU statements that they are no longer regard the legally elected head of state as a legitimate partner, unlike the new leaders appointed in the square in a breach of all the constitutional procedures?” the document said.

.

Videos from Ukraine that the US/EU Mass Media will never show you ….

Note

this first video i found on twitter (thanks to aboriginalnewswire.tumblr.com

Anti-Russians display controversial KKK/US Confederate flag in Kiev

and than i found more

scgnews.com

Videos from Ukraine that the US/EU Mass Media will never show you ….

Post starts here

Video of Right Wing Extremists In Ukraine Committing Violence

The Sugar coated story that the U.S. media has been feeding the public is completely out of sync with the events unfolding on the ground in Ukraine. Here are six videos that you’ll never see aired on the mainstream news.

1.

Ukrainian “protesters” setting police officers on fire

Video here

2.

“Freedom fighters” brutally beat man with batons while he’s laying on the ground

Video here

3.

Literal Neo-Nazis openly marching through Kiev displaying their emblems

Video here

4.

Alexander Muzychko vows to fight “against Jews communists, and Russian scum” for as long as he lives.

Video here

5.

Muzychko brandishing an Ak-47 in parliament and letting them know who is in charge

Video here

Part translation from Video 5:

“The Right Sector was armed and will be armed till the time when it will be necessary, You did not give us this weapon and you will not take it away. Who wants to take away my machine gun, my pistol, my knives?”

6.

Right sector members saluting Nazi style and shout nationalist slogans like “Glory to the nation! Death to enemies!” “Ukraine for Ukrainians.”

Video here

———————–

Sources

Neo-Nazis at the heart of the conflict in Ukraine: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/29/ukraine-fascists-ol…

Extreme right emerging as the dominant voice in Ukraine: http://scgnews.com/the-extreme-right-emerging-as-the-dominant-voice-in-u…

Washington’s connection to the Neo-Nazi’s in Ukraine: http://scgnews.com/washingtons-role-in-the-ukrainian-coup-how-it-may-spi…

Far right asserts that this is a nationalist revolution and that joining the EU is out of the question: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/23/ukrainian-far-right-groups-…

.

Breaking: Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and Catherine Ashton discuss Ukraine over the phone ……

smiley-wb-make-up-your2.jpg

Officers of Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) loyal to the ousted President Viktor Yanukovich have hacked phones of Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs Urmas Paet and High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton and leaked their conversation to the web. The officials discuss their impressions of what’s happening in the country after the revolution. The gist of it is that Ukrainian people have no trust in any of the leaders of Maidan.
However the most striking thing of all is the fact which concerns the use of force during the revolution, particularly the snipers who killed both protesters and officers of the riot police. Mr. Paet reveals astonishing information (at 8.20 min.) which confirms the rumours that the snipers were employed by the leaders of Maidan.

.

Putin speaks Ukraine, Yanukovich, Maidan, Crimea …..

Hungary tells the Rothschild BanksTo Vacate Country.

End Rothschild

Hungary is making history of the first order along with Iceland & Russia.

Not since the 1930s in Germany has a major European country dared to escape from the clutches of the Rothschild-controlled international banking cartels. This is stupendous news that should encourage nationalist patriots worldwide to increase the fight for freedom from financial tyranny.

Already in 2011, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán promised to serve justice on his socialist predecessors, who sold the nation’s people into unending debt slavery under the lash of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the terrorist state of Israel.

Those earlier administrations were riddled with Israelis in high places, to the fury of the masses, who finally elected Orbán’s Fidesz party in response.

According to a report on the German-language website “National Journal,” Orbán has now moved to unseat the usurers from their throne.

The popular, nationalistic prime minister told the IMF that Hungary neither wants nor needs further “assistance” from that proxy of the Rothschild-owned Federal Reserve Bank.

No longer will Hungarians be forced to pay usurious interest to private, unaccountable central bankers

Instead, the Hungarian government has assumed sovereignty over its own currency and now issues money debt free, as it is needed. The results have been nothing short of remarkable.

The nation’s economy, formerly staggering under deep indebtedness, has recovered rapidly and by means not seen since Germany.

 

The Hungarian Economic Ministry announced that it has, thanks to a “disciplined budget policy,” repaid on August 12, 2013, the remaining €2.2B owed to the IMF—well before the March 2014 due date.

Orbán declared: “Hungary enjoys the trust of investors,” by which is not meant the IMF, the Fed or any other tentacle of the Rothschild financial empire. Rather, he was referring to investors who produce something in Hungary for Hungarians and cause true economic growth.

This is not the “paper prosperity” of plutocratic pirates, but the sort of production that actually employs people and improves their lives.

 

With Hungary now free from the shackles of servitude to debt slavers, it is no wonder that the president of the Hungarian central bank, operated by the government for the public welfare and not private enrichment, has demanded that the IMF close its offices in that ancient European land.

In addition, the state attorney general, echoing Iceland’s efforts, has brought charges against the last three previous prime ministers because of the criminal amount of debt into which they plunged the nation.

The only step remaining, which would completely destroy the power of the banksters in Hungary, is for that country to implement a barter system for foreign exchange, as existed in Germany under the National Socialists and exists today in the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, or BRICS, international economic coalition.And if the United States would follow the lead of Hungary, Americans could be freed from the usurers’ tyranny and likewise hope for a return to peaceful prosperity.

American Free Press

Cyprus crisis deepens: Bailout rejected, banks may not reopen ………..

Hasan Mroue / AFP – Getty Images

Cypriot protestors outside the parliament in the capital, Nicosia, on Tuesday.

By Alastair Jamieson, Staff writer, NBC News

Cypriot leaders held crisis talks on Wednesday to avert financial meltdown after rejecting the terms of a controversial European Union bailout, turning instead to Russia for help.

Banks on the Mediterranean island may never reopen, Germany warned after lawmakers late Tuesday turned down a $12.9 billion deal that would have seen Cypriots lose up to 10 per cent of their bank deposits.

Thousands of Cypriots withdrew savings over the weekend fearing the deal might pass, emptying ATMs and sending global money markets into a steep dive.

Banks were ordered to remain closed after finance officials predicted a run on savings and a huge outflow of capital if they were to reopen.

Alexander Nemenov / AFP – Getty Images

Cypriot Finance Minister Michael Sarris outside the Russian Finance Ministry in Moscow on Wednesday.

 Germany’s finance minister, Wolfgang Schaeuble said major Cypriot banks were “insolvent if there are no emergency funds,” according to a BBC report, meaning savers might lose all their money if no deal was reached.

Greek media reports suggested the Cyprus Popular Bank had been sold to Russian investors, but the Cypriot government denied such a deal, Reuters said.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the ball was now in Cyprus’ court. “I regret the vote of the parliament yesterday,” she told reporters. “But of course we respect it and will now look to see what proposals Cyprus makes.

“From a political point of view, I say that Cyprus needs a sustainable banking sector. Today’s banking sector is not sustainable,” she added.

Even before the deal was rejected, Cypriot Finance Minister Michalis Sarris was already in Moscow working on an alternative plan to extend loans by using the island’s natural resources as a guarantee, according to English-language Cyprus Mail newspaper.

The crisis leaves the 17-nation Euro currency zone in uncharted territory: Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italy have all accepted austerity cuts in return for aid.

Cyprus’ parliament rejected the deal late Tuesday when 36 lawmakers voted unanimously against it and the ruling party abstained, Reuters reported. Outside the parliament, hundreds demonstrated, chanting: “They’re drinking our blood.”

“The voice of the people was heard,” jubilant 65-year-old retiree Andreas Miltiadou told Reuters after the vote.

To help pay for the $13 billion European bailout, the government plans to take up to 10 percent from all savings accounts, angering those who say they aren’t responsible for the economic crisis. CNBC’s Sue Herera reports.

President Nicos Anastasiades was due to meet party leaders Wednesday morning, the BBC said.

Ivan Tchakarov, chief economist at Renaissance Capital, told CNBC that Russia, which was enraged by the unexpected European deal, could step in to save Cyprus from total financial collapse.

“This situation presents a fantastic opportunity for Russia and even President Putin to take moral high ground and to extend another loan to Cyprus and to become a savior of Europe,” he told CNBC in Moscow.

“At the end of the day we’re only talking about an additional seven to eight billion dollars of additional money that is needed to have a complete package for Cyprus, this is small change for Russia.”

Russian citizens account for the majority of the billions of euros held in Cypriot banks by foreign depositors.

Russia wasn’t the only critic of the deal, which was greeted with widespread dismay among global money markets. In an editorial, Bloomberg said it was the “worst” decision of the entire regional financial crisis, while the Economist panned it as “unfair, short-sighted and self-defeating.

Reuters contributed to this report.

.

WW3 Russia China Iran Send 90,000 Troops To Syria ………………..

http://beforeitsnews.com

Pussy Riot – The Secret History ……………….

http://networkedblogs.com

Two years’ sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For much milder anti-Jewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence offenders to two-to-five years of prison for the first offence. The Russians applied hate crime laws to offenders against Christian faith, and this is probably a Russian novelty. The Russians proved that they care for Christ as much as the French care for Auschwitz, and this shocked the Europeans who apparently thought ‘hate laws’ may be applied only to protect Jews and gays. The Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians, while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.”

 

By Israel Shamir

Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not.  A British journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien, nothing. How can they be described as “artists”? This was a severe test for their supporters, but they passed it with flying honours: that famous lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.

We are able to stomach obscenity and blasphemy; I am great admirer of Notre Dame de Fleurs by Jean Genet, who combined both. However the PR never wrote, composed or painted anything of value at all. Chris Randolph defended them in Counterpunch by comparing them with “the controversial Yegor Letov”. What a misleading comparison! Letov wrote poetry, full of obscenity but it still was poetry, while the PR have nothing but Public Relations.

Hell-bent on publicity, but artistically challenged, three young women from Russia decided ­ well, it sounds like a limerick. They stole a frozen chicken from a supermarket and used it as dildo; filmed the act, called it “art” and placed it on the web. (It is still there) Their other artistic achievements were an orgy in a museum and a crude presentation of an erect prick.

Even in these dubious pieces of art their role was that of technical staff: the glory went to a Russian-Israeli artist Plucer-Sarno of Mevasseret Zion, who claimed the idea, design and copyright for himself and collected a major Russian prize. The future PR members got nothing and were described by Plucer as “ambitious provincials on the make”, or worse.

Lately they have tried to ride a bandwagon of political struggle. That was another flop. They poured a flood of obscene words on Putin – in Red Square, in subway (underground) stations – with zero effect. They weren’t arrested, they weren’t fined, just chased away as a nuisance. And they did not attract attention of people. It is important to remember that Putin is an avowed enemy of Russian oligarchs, owners of the major bulk of Russian media and providers of the Moscow literati, so they print on daily basis so much of anti-Putin invectives, that it’s lost its shock value. You can’t invent a new diatribe against Putin ­ it has been already said and published. And Putin practically never interfered with the freedom of the press.

 

My foreign journalist friends are usually amazed by unanimity and ferocity of anti-Putin campaign in Russian media. It can be compared with the attacks on G W Bush in the liberal papers in the US, but in the US, there are many conservative papers that supported Bush. Putin has practically no support in the mainstream media, all of it owned by media barons. A valuable exception is TV, but it is expressly apolitical and provides mainly low-brow entertainment, also presented by anti-Putin activists like Mlle Xenia Sobtchak. So PR failed profoundly to wake up the beast.

Eventually the young viragos were mobilised for an attack on the Church. By that time they were willing to do anything for their bit of publicity. And the anti-Church campaign started a few months ago, quite suddenly as if by command. The Russian Church had 20 years of peace, recovering after the Communist period, and it was surprised by ferocity of the attack.

Though this subject calls for longer exposition, let us be brief. After collapse of the USSR, the Church remained the only important spiritual pro-solidarity force in Russian life. The Yeltsin and Putin administrations were as materialist as the communists; they preached and practiced social Darwinism of neo-Liberal kind. The Church offered something beside the elusive riches on earth. Russians who lost the glue of solidarity previously provided by Communists eagerly flocked to the alternative provided by the Church.

The government and the oligarchs treated the Church well, as the Church had a strong anti-Communist tendency, and the haves were still afraid of the Reds leading the have-nots. The Church flourished, many beautiful cathedrals were rebuilt, many monasteries came back after decades of decay. The newly empowered church became a cohesive force in Russia.

As it became strong, the Church began to speak for the poor and dispossessed; the reformed Communists led by the Church-going Gennadi Zuganov, discovered a way to speak to the believers. A known economist and thinker, Michael Khazin, predicted that the future belongs to a new paradigm of Red Christianity, something along the lines of Roger Garaudy’s early thought. The Red Christian project is a threat to the elites and a hope for the world, he wrote. Besides, the Russian church took a very Russian and anti-globalist position.

This probably hastened the attack, but it was just a question of time, when the global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs, big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.

This offensive against the Church began with some minor issues: media was all agog about Patriarch’s expensive watch, a present from the then President Medvedev. Anti-religious fervour went high among liberal opposition that demonstrated against Putin before the elections and needed a new horse to flog. A leading anti-Putin activist Viktor Shenderovich said he would understand if the Russian Orthodox priests were slain like they were in 1920s. Yet another visible figure among the liberal protesters, Igor Eidman, called to “exterminate the vermin”- the Russian Church ­ in rudest biological terms.

The alleged organiser of the PR, Marat Gelman, a Russian Jewish art collector, has been connected with previous anti-Christian art actions which involved icon-smashing, imitation churches of enemas. His ­ and PR problem was that it was difficult to provoke reaction of the Church. The PR made two attempts to provoke public indignation in the second cathedral of Moscow, the older Elochovsky Cathedral; both times they were expelled but not arrested. The third time, they tried harder; they went to St Savior Cathedral that was demolished by Lazar Kaganovich in 1930s and rebuilt in 1990s; they added more blasphemy of the most obscene kind, and still they were allowed to leave in peace. Police tried their best to avoid arresting the viragos, but they had no choice after the PR uploaded a video of their appearance in the cathedrals with an obscene soundtrack.

During the trial, the defence and the accused did their worst to antagonize the judge by threatening her with the wrath of the United States (sic!) and by defiantly voicing anti-Christian hate speeches. The judge had no choice but to find the accused guilty of hate crime (hooliganism with religious hate as the motive). The prosecution did not charge the accused with a more serious hate crime “with intent to cause religious strife”, though it could probably made stick. (It would call for a stiffer sentence; swastika-drawers charged with intent to cause strife receive five years of jail).

Two years’ sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For much milder anti-Jewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence offenders to two-to-five years of prison for the first offence. The Russians applied hate crime laws to offenders against Christian faith, and this is probably a Russian novelty. The Russians proved that they care for Christ as much as the French care for Auschwitz, and this shocked the Europeans who apparently thought ‘hate laws’ may be applied only to protect Jews and gays. The Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians, while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.

The anti-Putin opposition flocked to support the PR. A radical charismatic opposition leader, the poet Eduard Limonov wrote that the opposition made a mistake supporting the PR, as they antagonise the masses; the chasm between the masses and the opposition grows. But his voice was crying in the wilderness, and the rest of the opposition happily embraced the PR cause, trying to turn it into a weapon against Putin. The Western media and governments also used it to attack Putin. The Guardian editorial called on Putin to resign. Putin called for clemency to the PR, and the government was embarrassed by the affair. But they were left with no choice: the invisible organisers behind PR wanted to have the viragos in jail, and so they did.

Commercially, they hit jackpot. With support of Madonna and the State Department, they are likely to leave the jail ready for the world tour and photo ops at the White House. They registered their name as a trade mark and began to issue franchises. And their competitors, the Femen group (whose art is showing off their boobs in unusual places) tried to beat the PR by chopping down a large wooden cross installed in memory of Stalin’s victims. Now sky is the limit.

In August, vacation season, when there is not much hard news and the newspaper readers are at the seashore or countryside, the PR trial provided much needed entertainment for man and beast. Hopefully it will drop from the agenda with the end of the silly season, but do not bet on it.

Israel Shamir reports from Moscow, his email is adam@israelshamir.net

.

Moscow Warns West of ‘Big War’ in Syria ………………………

 http://en.rian.ru

Protests in Syria

Protests in Syria

© AFP/ SHAAM NEWS NETWORK

17:38 05/07/2012
MOSCOW, July 5 (RIA Novosti)

Moscow lashed out on Thursday at the Western position on Syria, saying it could aggravate the situation to the point of war.

“Their [Western] position is most likely to exacerbate the situation, lead to further violence and ultimately a very big war,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.

The West has also distorted the Russian position on Syria by suggesting Moscow should offer Syrian President Bashar al-Assad asylum, he said.

“This is either an unscrupulous attempt to mislead serious people who shape foreign policy or simply a misunderstanding of what is going on,” Lavrov said.

He also warned that Russia will reject any UN Security Council peace enforcement resolution on Syria, since that would be “nothing but intervention.”

The minister also said representatives of the Syrian opposition will visit Moscow next week.

On Wednesday, Moscow urged Syrian opposition groups to unite to find a peaceful solution to the ongoing crisis.

The UN estimated in May that some 10,000 people have been killed in Syria since the beginning of a revolt against President Bashar al-Assad in March 2011. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a London-based organization with a network of activists in Syria, revised the death toll to 16,500 on Monday. Of those, some 5,000 were government troops and army defectors, the group said. June had been the bloodiest month of the conflict so far, with around 100 deaths every day, it said.

The UN Security Council has so far failed to find a way to settle the conflict. Russia and China have refused to support any plans for outside interference in Syria.

.

On the Right Side of History ………..

Voltaire Network | Moscow (Russia) | 16 June 2012
by Sergey Lavrov

Western propaganda continues to distort Russia’s position in respect of the Syrian crisis. It accuses Moscow of supporting Damascus for profit motives, or even criminal solidarity. In this piece, Sergey Lavrov does not expound on his country’s strategic choices, but rather on the principles that underpin his diplomacy. He responds imperturbably to the inanities spouted by Western media, underscoring Moscow’s commitment to international law and its pledge to support people. Lavrov counterpoints the massive popular support enjoyed by President al-Assad and the illegitimacy of the sectarian armed opposition, sponsored from abroad.

JPEG - 134.6 kb

Over the last year or a year and a half, the events unfolding in North Africa and the Middle East have come to the forefront of the global political agenda. They are frequently referred to as the most remarkable episode in the international life of the new 21st century. Experts have long spoken about the fragility of authoritarian regimes in Arab countries and possible social and political shocks.

However, it was difficult to predict the scale and pace with which the wave of change would sweep over the region. Alongside the manifestations of crisis in the world economy, these events have clearly proved that the process leading to the emergence of a new international system has entered a zone of turbulence.

The more large-scale social movements appeared in the countries of the region, the more urgent became the issue of what policy should be pursued by external actors and the entire international community. Numerous expert discussions on that matter and subsequent practical actions of States and international organizations have outlined two main approaches: either to help the Arab peoples determine their own future by themselves, or to try to shape a new political reality to one’s taste while taking advantage of the softening of state structures that had long been too rigid. The situation continues to evolve rapidly, which makes it important for those who have the biggest say in the matters of the region to finally consolidate their efforts rather than continue to pull in different directions like the characters of a fable by Ivan Krylov.

Let me sum up the points that I have repeatedly made in relation to the evolving situation in the Middle East. First of all, Russia, in common with the majority of countries in the world, encourages the aspirations of the Arab peoples for a better life, democracy and prosperity, and stands ready to support these efforts. This is why we welcomed the Deauville Partnership initiative at the G8 summit in France. We firmly oppose the use of violence in the course of current transformations in Arab States, especially against civilians. We are well aware of the fact that the transformation of a society is a complex and generally long process which rarely goes smoothly.

Russia probably knows the true cost of revolutions better than most other countries. We are fully aware that revolutionary changes are always accompanied by social and economic setbacks as well as by loss of human life and suffering. This is exactly why we support an evolutionary and peaceful way of enacting long-awaited changes in the Middle East and North Africa.

The point is, what should be done if the showdown between the authorities and the opposition does assume the form of violent, armed confrontation? The answer seems obvious -external actors should do their best to stop the bloodshed and support a compromise involving all parties to the conflict. When deciding to support UN Security Council Resolution 1970 and making no objection to Resolution 1973 on Libya, we believed that these decisions would help limit the excessive use of force and pave the way for a political settlement. Unfortunately, the actions undertaken by NATO countries under these resolutions led to their grave violation and support for one of the parties to the civil war, with the goal of ousting the existing regime – damaging in the process the authority of the Security Council.

People versed in politics need not be told that the devil is in the detail, and tough solutions implying the use of force cannot produce a lasting long-term settlement. And in the current circumstances, when the complexity of international relations has increased manifold, it becomes obvious that using force to resolve conflicts has no chance of success. Examples are abundant. They include the complicated situation in Iraq and the crisis in Afghanistan, which is far from being over. There are many indications that things are far from being good in Libya after the ousting of Muammar Gaddafi. Instability has spread further to the Sahara and Sahel region, and the situation in Mali was dramatically aggravated.

Another example is Egypt, which is still far from the safe shore even though regime change was not accompanied by large outbreaks of violence and Hosni Mubarak, who had ruled the country for more than thirty years, left the presidential palace voluntarily shortly after public protests began. We cannot but be concerned, among other issues, with the reports of growing religious clashes and abuse of the rights of the Christian minority.

Thus, there are more than enough reasons for taking the most balanced approach to the Syrian crisis that represents the most acute situation in the region today. It is clear that after what had happened in Libya it was impossible to go along with the UN Security Council taking decisions that would not be adequately explicit and would allow those responsible for their implementation to act at their own discretion. Any mandate given on behalf of the entire international community should be as clear and precise as possible in order to avoid ambiguity. It is therefore important to understand what is really happening in Syria and how to help that country to pass though this painful stage of its history.

Unfortunately, qualified and honest analysis of developments in Syria and their potential consequences is still in short supply. Quite often it is replaced by primitive images and black-and-white propaganda clichés. For several months major international media outlets have been reproducing reports about the corrupt dictatorial regime ruthlessly suppressing the aspiration of its own people to freedom and democracy.

JPEG - 233.1 kb

It seems, however, that the authors of those reports did not bother asking themselves how the government could manage to stay in power without public support for more than a year, despite the extensive sanctions imposed by its main economic partners. Why did the majority of people vote for the draft constitution proposed by the authorities? Why, after all, have most Syrian soldiers remained loyal to their commanders? If fear is the only explanation, then why did it fail to help other authoritarian rulers?

We have stated many times that Russia is not a defender of the current regime in Damascus and has no political, economic or other reasons for becoming one. We have never been a major trade and economic partner of that country, the government of which has communicated mostly with the capitals of Western European countries.

It is no less clear to us than to others that the main responsibility for the crisis that has swept over the country lies with the Syrian government, that has failed to take the course of reform in due time or draw conclusions from the deep changes unfolding in international relations. This is all true. Yet, there are other facts as well. Syria is a multi-confessional state: in addition to Sunni and Shia Muslims there are Alawites, Orthodox and other Christian confessions, Druzes, and Kurds. Over the last few decades of the secular rule of the Ba’ath party, freedom of conscience has been practiced in Syria, and religious minorities fear that if the regime is broken down this tradition may be interrupted.

When we say that these concerns should be heard and addressed, we are sometimes accused of taking positions amounting to an anti-Sunni and, more generally, anti-Islamic stance. Nothing could be further from the truth. In Russia, people of various confessions, most numerous among them being Orthodox Christians and Muslims, have lived together peacefully for centuries. Our country has never waged colonial wars in the Arab world but has on the contrary continuously supported the independence of Arab nations and their right to independent development. And Russia bears no responsibility for the consequences of colonial rule marked by the changes in social structures that brought about the tensions which still persist.

The point I want to make is different. If some members of society are concerned about potential discrimination on the grounds of religion and national origin, then necessary guarantees should be provided to those people in accordance with generally accepted international humanitarian standards.

Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms has traditionally been, and continues to be, a major problem for the States of the Middle East, and was one of the main causes of the “Arab revolutions”.

However, Syria has never ranked low on that list, with its level of civil freedoms immeasurably higher than that of some of the countries who are now trying to give lessons in democracy to Damascus. In one of its recent issues, the French magazine Le Monde Diplomatique presented a chronology of human rights abuses by a big State in the Middle East, which contained, inter alia, the execution of 76 death sentences in 2011 alone, including for those accused of witchcraft. If we truly wish to promote respect for human rights in the Middle East, we must state this goal openly. If we proclaim ending the bloodshed as our primary concern, we should focus precisely on that; in other words, we must press for a ceasefire in the first place, and promote the start of an inclusive all-Syrian dialogue aimed at negotiating a peaceful crisis settlement formula by the Syrians themselves.

Russia has been sending these messages since the first days of unrest in Syria. It was quite clear to us and, I guess, to everyone who has sufficient information on that country, that pressing for an immediate ousting of Bashar al-Assad, contrary to the aspirations of a considerable segment of Syrian society that still relies on this regime for its security and well-being, would mean plunging Syria into a protracted and bloody civil war. Responsible external actors should help Syrians avoid that scenario and bring about evolutionary rather than revolutionary reform of the Syrian political system through a national dialogue rather than by means of coercion from the outside.

JPEG - 184.9 kb

Taking into account today’s realities in Syria, reliance on one-sided support for the opposition, particularly for its most belligerent part, will not lead to peace in that country anytime soon and will therefore run counter to the goal of protecting the civilian population. What seems to prevail in that option are attempts to bring about regime change in Damascus as an element of a larger regional geopolitical game. These schemes are undoubtedly targeting Iran, since a large group of States including the USA and NATO countries, Israel, Turkey and some States of the region appear to be interested in weakening that country’s regional positions.

The possibility of a military strike against Iran is a much-debated topic today. I have repeatedly stressed that such an option would lead to grave, catastrophic consequences. An attempt to cut the Gordian knot of long-standing problems is doomed to failure. We may recall in this regard that the US military invasion in Iraq was once considered to be a “golden chance” to change the political and economic realities of the “greater Middle East” in a quick and decisive manner, thus turning it into a region which would follow the “European pattern” of development.

Irrespective of the situation concerning Iran, however, it is evident that fuelling intra-Syrian strife may trigger processes that would affect the situation in the vast territory surrounding Syria in the most negative way, having a devastating impact on both regional and international security. Risk factors include loss of control over the Syrian-Israeli border, a worsening of the situation in Lebanon and other countries in the region, weapons falling into the “wrong hands,” including those of terrorist organizations, and, perhaps the most dangerous of all, an aggravation of inter-faith tensions and contradictions inside the Islamic world.

* * *

Back in the 1990s in his book The Clash of Civilisations, Samuel Huntington outlined the trend of the increasing importance of identity based on civilisation and religion in the age of globalization; he also convincingly demonstrated the relative reduction in the abilities of the historic West to spread its influence. It would definitely be an overstatement if we tried to build a model of the modern international relations solely on the basis of such assumptions. However, today it is impossible to ignore such a trend. It is caused by an array of different factors, including more transparent national borders, the information revolution which has highlighted blatant socio-economic inequality, and the growing desire of people to preserve their identity in such circumstances and to avoid falling into the endangered species list of history.

The Arab revolutions clearly show a willingness to go back to the roots of civilisation that reveals itself in broad public support for the parties and movements acting under the flag of Islam. This trend is apparent not only in the Arab world. Let us mention Turkey, which is more actively positioning itself as a major player in the Islamic space and the surrounding region. Asian states, including Japan, are more boldly declaring their identity.

Such a situation is further proof that the simple (if not simplistic) binary construction of the Cold War period, described in the paradigms of East-West, capitalism-socialism, North-South, is being replaced by a multidimensional geopolitical reality that does not allow for the identification of a single dominating factor. The global financial and economic crisis drew a line under discussions on whether one system can dominate in any area whatsoever, be it economy, politics or ideology.

JPEG - 172.7 kb

There is no doubt left that within the broad framework that defines the development of most States and is characterized by democratic governance and a market economy, each country will independently choose its own political and economic model with due regard to its own traditions, culture and history. This is likely to result in a greater impact on international affairs of the factor of identity based on civilisation.

In terms of practical politics, these conclusions can only suggest one thing: attempts to impose one’s own set of values are totally futile and may only lead to a dangerous aggravation of tensions between civilisations. This certainly does not imply that we must completely renounce influencing each other and promoting the right image of our country in the international arena.

However, this should be done employing honest, transparent methods that will foster the export of national culture, education and science while showing full respect for the values of other peoples’ civilisations as a safeguard for the world’s diversity and esteem for pluralism in international affairs.

It seems evident that hopes to apply cutting edge information dissemination and communications technologies, including social networks, in order to change the mentality of other peoples, thus creating a new political reality, are bound to fail in the long run. The current market for ideas is far too manifold, and virtual methods would only bring about a virtual reality – provided, of course, that we do not resort to George Orwell’s Big Brother mentality, in which case we can give up on the whole idea of democracy, not only in countries that are subjected to such influence but also in those that are exercising it.

Developing a universal scale of values and morals becomes a big political issue. Such a scale could serve as the foundation for a respectful and fruitful dialogue between civilisations based on a common interest in reducing the instability which accompanies the creation of a new international system and aimed at eventually establishing a solid, efficient, polycentric world order. And here, we can only ensure success if we rule out black-and-white approaches, whether we tackle exaggerated concern for the rights of sexual minorities or, on the contrary, attempts to elevate to the political level narrow concepts of morale that would satisfy one group and violate the natural rights of other citizens, particularly of those who belong to other confessions.

* * *

There is a certain limit reached by crises in international relations that cannot be overstepped without causing damage to global stability. That is why work aimed at putting out regional fires, including intrastate conflicts, should be carried out as considerately as possible, with no double standards applied. Using a ’sanctions bat’ leads to dead-end at all times. All parties involved in internal conflicts should be convinced that the international community will form a united front and act in accordance with strict principles in order to stop violence as soon as possible and to reach a mutually acceptable solution through comprehensive dialogue.

Russia is guided only by such principles with regard to intrastate crises, which explains our position on what is happening in Syria. That is why we have offered full and sincere support for the mission of the UN/Arab League Special Envoy Kofi Annan, aimed at finding a mutually acceptable compromise as soon as possible. UN Security Council Presidential Statements and UN Security Council Resolutions in this regard reflect the approaches that we have promoted from the very beginning of the unrest in Syria; these ideas are also reflected in our joint statement with the League of Arab States adopted on March 10, 2012.

If we were successful in making these approaches work in Syria, they could become a model for international assistance in resolving future crises.

JPEG - 126.6 kb

The essence of Kofi Annan’s “six principles” is to ensure an end to violence regardless of where it comes from and to start a Syrian-led political dialogue which should address the legitimate concerns and aspirations of the Syrian people. It should result in a new political configuration in Syria that will take into account the interests of all groups in its multi-confessional society.

It is necessary to encourage the preparation and implementation of agreements aimed at settling the conflict without taking sides, to reward those who respect them and to clearly name those who oppose the peace process. To achieve this, an unbiased monitoring mechanism is needed, and such a mechanism was set up in accordance with UN Security Council Resolutions 2042 and 2043. Russian military observers are part of the international monitoring team.

Unfortunately, the process of implementing Kofi Annan’s plan in Syria is proceeding with great difficulty. The world was appalled by massacres of unarmed civilians, including the tragedy that happened in the village of Houla on May 25, 2012 and the subsequent bloody violence in the vicinity of Hama. It is necessary to clarify who is responsible for this and to punish the perpetrators. No one has the right to usurp the role of judge and to use these tragic events to achieve their own geopolitical goals. Abandoning such attempts will make it possible to stop the spiral of violence in Syria.

Those who say that Russia “is saving” Bashar al-Assad are wrong. I would like to reiterate that it is the Syrian people themselves who choose the political system and leadership of their country. We are not trying to whitewash the multiple mistakes and miscalculations made by Damascus, including the use of force against peaceful demonstrations at the beginning of the crisis.

For us, the issue of who is in power in Syria is not the major one; it is important to put an end to civilian deaths and to start a political dialogue in a situation where the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the country will be respected by all external actors. No violence can be justified. The shelling of residential areas by government troops is unacceptable, but it cannot be viewed as an indulgence for terrorist acts in Syrian cities, for murders conducted by insurgents opposed to the regime, including those of Al-Qaida.

The logic that dictates the need to break the vicious circle of violence has manifested itself in the unilateral support that members of the UN Security Council have given to the Annan Plan. We are upset by the claims and actions of some actors involved in the Syrian situation that manifest their stake on the failure of the Special Envoy’s efforts. Among them, are the calls of the Syrian National Council (SNC) leadership for foreign intervention. It is unclear how such claims would help SNC sponsors to unite the Syrian opposition under its umbrella. We stand for the integration of the Syrian opposition only on the platform of preparedness for political dialogue with the government – in exact accordance with the Annan Plan.

Russia keeps working with the Syrian authorities almost every day urging them to fully comply with the six points proposed by Kofi Annan and to resolutely abandon their delusion that the internal political crisis in Syria will somehow go away. We also work with representatives of almost all branches of the Syrian opposition. We are sure that if all our partners work in the same concentrated manner without any hidden motives or double standards, there is a chance for a peaceful settlement of the situation in Syria. We need to bring all the weight to bear on both the regime and the opposition and make them cease fighting and meet at the negotiating table. We consider it important to urgently take collective effort to this end and to convene an international conference of the States directly involved in the crisis in Syria. With that goal in mind, we maintain close contacts with Kofi Annan and other partners.

Only by acting in this way we can keep the Middle East from sliding into the abyss of wars and anarchy and thus stay, as it has become fashionable to say, on the right side of history. We are sure that other formulas that involve external intervention in Syria – ranging from blocking TV channels that do not satisfy someone, to increasing arms supplies to opposition groups, to airstrikes – will not bring peace either to that country or to the region as a whole. And that means that those formulas will not be justified by history.

Sergey LavrovSergey Lavrov Foreign Minister of Russia.

Statement by Sergey V. Lavrov at 66th UN General Assembly
Voltaire Network
Voltaire, international edition

.

 

The lies of those unable to destroy the Syrian strength ……………….

http://www.voltairenet.org

JPEG - 120.9 kb

News Analysis

The lies of those unable to destroy the Syrian strength
By Ghaleb KANDIL

Syria was never the center of the universe as much as it is today. All around the world, hundreds of pieces of information and thousands of reports, rumors, fabricated pictures and made up news are emerging via media networks that are shedding light on contradictory positions and statements of senior Western officials. At this level, the Russian government is finding itself forced to issue quasi daily statements to deny many rumors and clarify the falsification affecting the positions of its officials.

Firstly, the American empire is doing its best to push the bitter cup away from it, i.e. the recognition of its defeat in the face of the Syrian state. Indeed, it is aware of what this recognition will generate in terms of the total collapse that will affect the governments collaborating with it in the region, and the repercussions whose prices will be paid by those involved in the global war it is leading against the Syrian national state and against a resisting liberation leader who defied American arrogance back when the whole world was under its control. Today, this leader’s status is similar to that of Fidel Castro in the fifties and sixties of last century. Despite the opportunity offered by Russia to the US to indirectly recognize the defeat, the American empire deployed all its efforts to sustain the violence on the ground, and exploited the Syrian state’s cooperation with Annan’s initiative to obstruct its effects via the Gulf and Turkish governments, Al-Qaeda, and other formations linked to that alliance such as the Lebanese Future Movement.

Secondly, the Western propaganda machine is spreading a massive amount of lies in regard to the Syrian situation, with the main goal of generating a climate that would compensate for the state of impotence endured by the Americans and all the NATO member states, in light of the regional and international balances and equations that are providing Syria with immunity. The first lie is the promotion of a settlement allowing President Bashar al-Assad to step down. At this level, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov exposed the rumor surrounding the existence of Russian-American negotiations over what is dubbed by the West “Syria in the post Al-Assad stage.” In reality, the American planners among others know that president Bashar al-Assad enjoys wide support in the ranks of the Syrian people and that this support has increased in light of the crisis sweeping the country, as well as its repercussions which are making the Syrians feel as though they and their country are being subjected to a foreign attack led by the Americans against the state. Hence, according to his people, President Bashar al-Assad is the head of the national state, the advocator of a pan-Arab resistance project and the symbol of Syrian nationalism and the resistance option in the face of the foreign attack which features a global alliance aiming at destroying the Syrian strength and at strengthening the gangs of mercenaries, intelligence agents and extremists. The inhabitants of the Syrian countryside have discovered that the latter could not be farther from the slogans of freedom and dignity, and that they have started to introduce foreign murderers by the hundreds, professional intelligence elements and extremist groups whose presence and role had always been rejected by Syrian society.

Thirdly, the second lie being promoted by the American propaganda is related to the claim that what is happening in Syria might slide towards civil war. The Western propaganda at this level was launched in the form of warnings against the threat of civil war, at a time when all the Western, Turkish and Gulf efforts have been pushing in that direction since the beginning of the incidents, through repeated attempts to depict the events as being a sectarian conflict and the adoption by the West and its agents in the region of the MB group and the gangs of takfir to which they offered all possible financial, military and media facilitations and assistance. The Syrian people on the other hand proved to be immune against these attempts, while the Syrian national state was able to maintain a wide base of popular support, to embrace its army and its national choices and engage in a battle to defend the country and the unity of the people alongside Syrian political and religious leaders.

Fourthly, the third lie was the claim that the conflict between the Syrian state and the terrorist gangs was revolving in a vicious circle and that it would be impossible to settle this confrontation. However, the reality which was confirmed by the events is that this issue is primarily linked to the approach adopted by the Syrian state in dealing with the strongholds of the armed men, through an insistence on sparing the Syrian people as many losses as possible. Hence, just like the situation was settled in Baba Amr based on the state’s decision and timing, the situation was settled in the town of Al-Haffa and the action is ongoing to liquidate the remaining strongholds and dens in the city of Homs. In the meantime, the Syrian Arab forces achieved decisive progress in the border regions with Turkey and Lebanon where the armed gangs tried to impose their control. This reveals that the issue is not about the Syrian state’s ability, but about the timing it chooses and the issuance of the orders to the army which has not yet used even a portion of its strength in crushing the armed rebellion. These efforts eventually aim at reaching disarmament, after the state gave the armed men all possible opportunities to surrender their weapons peacefully and offered incentives which pushed thousands among them to cooperate with the governmental calls during the last couple of months since the launching of Annan’s missions.

Fifthly, the fourth lie which was recently promoted focused on the attempt to revive the illusion regarding the possibility of launching war on Syria through the presentation of scenarios for military strikes carried out by the American troops and NATO following the collapse of other deceptive tales about direct Turkish war against Syria. At the level of this scenario, all the strategic facts that have become known stress that such an adventure could lead to a great confrontation around the world and in the region, which could cause Israel to pay the price. In the meantime, the new international balances and the aggressiveness of the Russian-Chinese performance are acquiring credibility, to the point where Henry Kissinger assured that an attack on Syria could trigger a global war in which no one in the West can engage and whose consequences would be extremely difficult to bear for a thousand and one reasons.

Lies are the American tools in the context of the psychological war to compensate for the inability of the colonial alliance to confront the resistance launched by Syria, as a population, an army and a state led by Al-Assad to defend its freedom and independence. It would be enough to look at the Istanbul council, i.e. the collaborating front that has no political slogan but the call for NATO’s occupation of Syria, along with the gangs, that include thieves, murderers and thugs. In the meantime, reform which is led by the Syrian state is proceeding in accordance with the project that is open to dialogue with all the opposition movements under the auspices of President Al-Assad.

The tendency

Egypt and the ongoing political turmoil

Regardless of the results of the Egyptian presidential elections which will be held on Saturday and Sunday between MB candidate Mohammad Morsi and former Prime Minister under Mubarak’s rule Ahmad Shafik, it is clear that the American engineering of the balances requires the obstruction of the rise of the Egyptian strength and the renewal of the pressures aiming at sustaining political turmoil for as long as possible. In case the MB candidate wins, the confrontation will continue in the context of the conflict over power between the MB organization and the military institution. The arena of the conflict will be the drafting of a new constitution, and this was clear in light of the determination of the military institution to open the door before the reorganization of the legislative elections via a decision by the Supreme Court to annul the membership of one third of the members of the recently elected People’s Assembly.

In case Shafik is elected president, he will be the military council’s ally, and will practically lead to the renewal of the popular actions under the slogan of preventing the return of the former regime. The MB command’s inclination to monopolize power and engage in deals with the Americans in regard to the protection of the Camp David accord, rendered it impossible to form a wide scale political alliance that would allow Morsi to earn the support of the influential popular bloc whose real size emerged in the first round of the presidential elections, via the votes acquired by the nationalist candidates and especially candidates Hamdin Sabahi and Abdul Monem Abu al-Foutouh. This is why the call for a partnership appeared to be a request for a full assignment and full submission to the MB.

The MB organization is trying to get the support of the popular blocs looking for change, by borrowing and summoning the slogans of the revolution, at a time when suspicions are surrounding the positions and choices of the MB leaders within the organization itself. At this level, the last few months revealed the dubious character of the policy advocated by the MB leaders, in light of the adoption of political recipes and action plans going against the slogans which characterized Morsi’s electrical campaign. Moreover, the MB command used a thousand pretexts to justify its commitment to the protection of Camp David and its attempt to reach a deal with the Americans who drew up plans aiming at maintaining the Egyptian political scene within the context of the army-MB duo. Clearly, the popular weight of the so-called remnants of the regime is not to be taken lightly, and this was revealed by the votes earned by Shafik and Amr Moussa. Hence, the confrontation between these two main directions is keeping the game within the general restraints that are taking into account the American interest in preventing the emergence of a new political reality at the level of the Egyptian state headed by the national wing, one which was represented in the presidential elections by more than one candidate during the first round and whose weight was clearly greater – by comparison – than the support earned by the MB organization.

Morsi, is not distant from the bloc which includes the military council and the influential bureaucratic groups in the Egyptian state, usually dubbed the remnants. Indeed, a recent American report revealed that throughout five years under Mubarak’s rule, Morsi was in charge of coordination between the MB command and the state security apparatus. On the ground, the American arrangement is that in case Shafik is elected, he would coexist with the MB’s role at the People’s Assembly, the government and the Constituent Assembly tasked with the drafting of the constitution, based on the understandings secured by the American officials with the International Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood and the ongoing wager on the activation of Turkish-Qatari influence over the group’s leaders in Egypt. But if Morsi wins, the staging of the People’s Assembly elections – according to all experts- will introduce new balances with the emergence of the bloc led by Shafik and Amr Moussa as a power which the Americans and their allies in the region are trying to transform into a political party that would be a partner in the Egyptian equation and in the competition against the MB in any upcoming legislative elections.

The confrontation in Egyptian society is ongoing between three main blocs. There is the MB organization which is characterized by an opportunistic behavior practiced by its political command in order to reach power at whichever price, while willing to conduct all the required tradeoffs for that end. There is also the state bureaucracy led by the military council. This bloc enjoys wide influence in society through a base of millions of employees in the various state apparatuses, including the judges who are being polarized under the slogan of Egypt’s non-surrender to the MB and the sustainment of a political approach based on the protection of the relations with the West and the Arab states affiliated with Western influence in the Gulf. As to the third bloc, which is still un-organized until now and is facing the challenge of becoming a unified political power, it includes all the popular nationalistic and revolutionary forces that are adopting the option of social and political change, resistance against Western colonial hegemony over Egypt, the toppling of the camp David accord and the ending of the siege on Gaza. The Egyptian presidential elections will not settle the conflict over power, rather constitute one of the stops along its course. Egypt’s future will thus witness more battles between the three main blocs that are acting on the ground and at the level of the institutions, ones which will witness labors, changes and ongoing dismantlement and construction in the context of a change process in which the Egyptian street will play a decisive role to determine the political outcome.

A large part of this outcome will also depend on Hamdin Sabahi’s and Abdul Monem Abu al-Foutouh’s ability –following the second round of the presidential elections- to develop the change project and organize their political ranks in the context of one popular front which is able to secure the right size and role that go in line with the wide popular credit revealed by the ballot boxes at the end of May.

The ministers of superpowers

When the spokeswoman for US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton comes out to say that the secretary had launched serious talks with her Russian counterpart over Syria in the post Al-Assad stage, and when she is followed by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius who issues similar statements, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is forced to hold a press conference and announce that both ministers are lying and that the Russian political approach completely opposed such discussions since it was based on the rejection of foreign tutelage.

Lavrov, who is mad about the decadence featured in the statements of America’s and France’s foreign ministers, conveyed the extent of the trust in political clarity and morals at the level of diplomatic action, at a time when neither Clinton nor Fabius enjoy political clarity or diplomatic manners. The reason for that is the fact that Lavrov is reassured by the course of the events in Syria where the ally is strong, where the thwarting of the Western project is still ongoing and where the opponents are confused, spreading lies to conceal their impotence and giving those who wagered on them false illusions. Those relying on the West are reaping illusions based on lies, while those relying on the strength of their army and their president’s steadfastness are reaching victory on the field and sustaining reliable allies.

Arab File

Syria

On the security level, the armed terrorist groups continued their attacks in more then one Syrian region, at a time when the security apparatuses were able to cleanse the Al-Khalediya and Bab Sebaa neighborhoods in Homs from the terrorist remnants. They also stormed many dens in which the armed terrorist groups were hiding, found several explosive substances and weapons in numerous areas and thwarted a number of suicide operations.

In the meantime, the Syrian television aired a phone call between two individuals, one of them using a Turkish phone chip and another called Ghayth Mohammad Sadek Kilia, who were preparing to commit a massacre against the population in Al-Haffa and the village of Tfil in Rif Latakia. One of the callers said to the other: “Slaughter the hostages and prisoners we are holding in Tfil and put their pictures online to make it appear as though a massacre committed by the regime had taken place. Let our men manipulate the media a little.” At the same time the American Department of State mentioned it feared the perpetration of massacres in the city of Al-Haffa in Latakia.

On Wednesday, Damascus assured that the country was not witnessing civil war and was rather fighting terrorism, in response to the statements of UN under-Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations Herve Ladsous, in which he said that Syria was now facing civil war.

On Saturday, the UN observers’ mission to Syria suspended it activities due to the mounting violence. Major General Robert Mood thus said that the escalating bloodshed was threatening the lives of the three hundred unarmed observers deployed in the Syrian cities.

Saudi Arabia

_On Saturday, the Saudi royal court announced the death of Crown Prince Nayef Bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud in Geneva where he had been receiving medical treatment. The prince died eight months after having succeeded to his older brother Sultan, which paved the way before countless speculations in regard to who will be the next in line for succession. Defense Minister Prince Salman is the most likely to become the crown prince since he enjoys seniority after the late Nayef. The latter was openly opposed to King Abdullah’s reforms in the kingdom while Salman – who has been serving as Riyadh’s governor for five decades – is believed to be closer to the current monarch’s inclinations.

Egypt

The Egyptian parliament elected the Constituent Assembly which includes one hundred figures, amid withdrawals from underneath parliament’s dome by civilian parties and independent deputies in protest against what they considered to be “the control of the Islamic wing over the assembly.” Some even threatened to resort to the judiciary to annul this election. The supreme constitutional court issued a sentence in regard to disbandment of parliament and the rejection of the political isolation law.

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces assured that the second round of the presidential elections will be held on time on Saturday and Sunday and that there was no change at this level. For their part, political forces expressed their disgruntlement towards both rulings, saying they will bring Egypt back to the climate that prevailed before the January 25 revolution, while other forces called for the respect of these judicial sentences.

Israeli File

The issues tackled by the Israeli newspapers issued this week were quite numerous. However, the most prominent one was the warning addressed by Israeli experts against the possibility of seeing the eruption of a third Palestinian uprising in case the settlement policy is sustained in the West Bank regions and in case the violence adopted by the Israeli settlers against the Palestinian citizens is upheld.

On the other hand, the papers shed light on the statements issued by Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya’alon and in which he said “if we’ll have to choose between a strike and an Iranian bomb, we’ll choose a strike.” Alongside Ya’alon’s statement, the papers criticized and analyzed the report on the interception of the international flotilla which was heading to Gaza in 2010, but also the process launched by the immigration authority to deport the South Sudanese infiltrators. They also tackled the medal received by Peres, i.e. the presidential freedom medal, which is the highest granted by the US to figures who contributed to world peace.

For its part, Haaretz pointed to the announcement made by the MB members of the Egyptian parliamentary delegation regarding the fact that they will not participate in the meeting which was supposed to be held next week at the American capital Washington and was organized by the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

Lebanese File

The Wadi Khaled region in the Akkar valley witnessed mutual kidnapping operations against political sectarian backdrops between the citizens, as well as armed deployment and the erection of checkpoints. In light of this escalation, contacts were launched and involved official leaders and dignitaries from Akkar and Wadi Khaled, resulting in the release of the kidnapped from both sides. In the meantime, the Bab Tebanne-Jabal Mohsen axis has been witnessing stability following the recent tensions.

On June 11, dialogue was held in Baabda and resulted in the Baabda Declaration, which stressed civil peace and warned against the use of arms and the slide towards strife. According to the same declaration, this required all the political and intellectual leaders to distance themselves from any acute political or media statements and fromanything which might provoke disputes, tensions and sectarian and denominational instigation. The Baabda Declaration also provided a real cover for the Lebanese army and stressed the insistence on the Taif accord and Lebanon’s distancing from the regional and international axes policy and the negative repercussions of the regional tensions and crises. Dialogue was held in the absence of Saad al-Hariri and finance minister Mohammad al-Safadi and was boycotted by Samir Geagea.

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah assured in an interview on an Iranian television channel that the party’s current military capabilities could not be compared to its capabilities during the previous stage. He said: “The resistance missiles are now able to reach all the vital targets inside Israel,” pointing to Israel’s recognition of the party’s deterrence capabilities. He then cautioned against the attempts deployed by the US and its agents to thwart the revolutions and Islamic awakenings in the region, assuring on the other hand: “The occupation entity is weaker than ever before and its threats to strike Iran fall in the context of a psychological war and constitute an attempt to blackmail the international community.”

Source
New Orient News (Lebanon)

.

Russia Slams Saudi Arabia, Qatar For Funding Syria Terrorists ( filed under : Waging War without declaring War )……………….

http://dprogram.net

June 10th, 2012

See Also: (PressTV) – Iran Among Top Missle Powers In the World – Read More Here

Also: (PressTV) – Israel Sending Weapons to Syria Through Iraq: Sources – Read More Here

(PressTV) – The Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin has slammed Saudi Arabia and Qatar for funding and supplying weapons to armed Syrian opposition groups.

Press TV – “We hear Saudi Arabia and Qatar openly speaking about their financing of the armed opposition and supplying weapons to the armed opposition… So, we do not like that,” Churkin said on Thursday.

Churkin also voiced concern regarding the latest massacre in Syria’s Hama Province in which tens of “people on the side of the [Syrian] government were killed by opposition.”

The Russian ambassador then expressed opposition to the US and its allies for attempting to sideline Iran, adding that Tehran should be included in efforts to peacefully resolve the crisis in Syria.

This is while joint UN-Arab League envoy to Damascus Kofi Annan has highlighted the role of Iran in helping to end the crisis. He also warned against foreign intervention in Syria, saying such a move would only intensify the violence.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also urged the opposition to stop killing Syrian civilians.

About two weeks ago, 108 people were killed in a massacre in the town of Houla, in the volatile central province of Homs.

A Syrian government investigation into the massacre states that anti-Damascus armed groups were responsible for the massacre.

The head of the inquiry, Brigadier General Qassem Jamal Suleiman said that between 600 and 800 armed terrorists used heavy machinery to carry out the attacks.

The Syrian president has also described the Houla massacre as an “ugly crime.”

Also on Wednesday in the central village of al-Qubeir in the Hama Province, a second massacre took place. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has put the civilian death toll at about 55, down from the foreign-based Syrian National Council’s claims of 100 dead.

Syria has rejected a report by the opposition council that alleges security forces killed dozens of people in Hama.

“What a few media have reported on what happened in al-Qubeir, in the Hama region, is completely false,” the Syrian government said in a televised statement on Thursday.

Hundreds of people, including many members of the Syrian security forces, have been killed in the unrest that began in Syria in March 2011. Damascus says foreign-sponsored “saboteurs and terrorists” are responsible for the killings.

Source: Press TV

.

%d bloggers like this: