Tuesday, 23 August 2016

Turkey on the Way to Exit NATO: No Reasons to Stay




Turkey on the Way to Exit NATO: No Reasons to Stay
PETER KORZUN | 22.08.2016

Turkey on the Way to Exit NATO: No Reasons to Stay


The question of Turkey exiting NATO is hot on the agenda. The recent emergency statement on the issue shows it’s a probable prospect.
The relationship between Turkey and the West has recently deteriorated. Turkey has been angered by what it sees as lukewarm condemnation by its Western allies of the abortive July 15-16 putsch against President Tayyip Erdogan and the Turkish government. The relationship has soured to the point when Ankara’s NATO membership is questioned. In an outburst following NATO’s perceived lack of backing after the failed coup, foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu threatened Turkey would «think of exit» if NATO did not step up to defend the country.
The latest example of deteriorating relations is the row over Turkish Vice Admiral Mustafa Zeki Ugurlu who served as assistant chief of staff, NATO’s Allied Command Transformation in Norfolk. Turkey issued an arrest warrant for Ugurlu on charges that he is affiliated with the Gulenist movement. Ankara asked NATO to terminate his posting and return him to Turkey. The Vice Admiral has applied for asylum in the United States and is now apparently missing. Turkey says Ugurlu has vital information on Gulenist subversive activities in Turkey and finds it hard to accept that he simply disappeared.
Turkey says military units that are part of NATO’s Rapid Deployable Corps-Turkey were involved in the coup attempt on July 15. It makes Ankara suspect that NATO had a role to play.
It has been reported that many officers involved had served long stints in NATO and were identified with strong pro-Western views.
Many Turkish media outlets believe that NATO was aware of the plot.
Suleyman Soylu, Turkey’s labor minister openly suggested that the US was behind the attempted takeover.
Prime Minister Binali Yidlirim put it bluntly threatening to go to war with ‘any’ country that supports Fethullah Gulen – a direct reference to the United States.
Hurriyet Daily News reported:
«Anti-Americanism and Western skepticism are common phenomena among Turks. It is not limited to certain segments of the society. One would be surprised to see the intensity of anti-Americanısm and Euroskepticism among the educated elites, even the Western educated ones.» According to the newspaper, a «surprising level of anger and frustration felt against first Americans and then Europeans by the residents of Ankara».
The recently published photo of the US Ambassador’s plot leaders, has caused great concern in Turkey. It was made a day before the coup.
Many Turks are taking the US refusal to extradite Gulen as evidence of complicity in a Gulenist insurrection plot. Muhammed Fethullah Gülen is an Islamic cleric blamed by the Turkish government for masterminding the abortive coup. Turkey has requested the United States to deport him but to no avail.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan actually gave the United States an ultimatum, demanding the extradition.
The US has repeatedly refused to hand over the cleric, saying that Turkey would need to provide «evidence, not allegations» against Gulen in order to have him extradited. Erdogan said the US would eventually have to choose between its relationship with Turkey and Fethullah Gulen.
US Secretary of State John Kerry warned that exploiting the coup to crack down on its detractors and undermine its democracy could cost Turkey its NATO membership.
If Kerry’s remarks are meant to sound a warning, they are falling on deaf ears in Turkey where a campaign against Turkey’s NATO membership is also gaining steam.
Indeed, the coup attempt has greatly complicated the Turkey-NATO ties, already aggravated by the Syrian crisis, the migrants’ problem, the differences over how to fight the Islamic State, the Kurdistan Workers Party, and the issue of human rights. The idea of NATO membership appears to lose attractiveness in Turkey.
Turkey will «conduct its own independent foreign policy», said Umit Yardim, Turkey’s ambassador to Russia, after a meeting between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg on August 9.
 «In no way can NATO limit our contacts with other countries… It means NATO has no right to dictate its terms and tell us who we should or should not meet and communicate with», the ambassador emphasized.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu pointed out that Turkey has options outside of NATO when it comes to defense cooperation.
He said that Turkey and Russia will look to establish a joint military, intelligence, and diplomatic mechanism. «Turkey wanted to cooperate with NATO members up to this point»,the minister said. «But the results we got did not satisfy us. Therefore, it is natural to look for other options».
It should be noted that Russia, not a NATO member state, was the first country to be visited by Turkish President after the failed coup.
With relations between Washington and Ankara worsening, the United States has started moving nuclear weapons from Turkey, allegedly to Romania.
During the failed coup in Turkey in July, Incirlik’s power was cut, and the Turkish government prohibited US aircraft from flying in or out. Eventually, the Turkish base commander was arrested and implicated in the coup. Now the US control over the weapons in the event of a protracted civil conflict in Turkey is questioned.
It has gone far enough to put into doubt the Lockheed Martin F-35 program.
Turkey has signed up to buy 100 of the advanced jet fighters. Losing 100 F-35 orders as well as a reasonably large industrial partner would doubtless push the costs of the F-35 program through the roof.
If Turkey leaves NATO, its security will not weaken much. Recently, Ankara has mended fences with Russia and Israel returning to the policy of zero problems with the neighbors. Exiting NATO will not give rise to any serious disadvantages. Article 5 of the Washington Treaty envisions the support of other NATO member countries in the case of external aggression. The response measures are left at the discretion of member states – it can be a mere diplomatic note of support without providing any real aid. NATO never exercised Article 5 in cases of Turkey clashing with other states, despite Turkish attempts to initiate the process. Besides, Turkey has a larger military and higher defence spending than any one of its neighbors or its NATO allies, with the exception of the US. Its defense capabilities may even increase as the country will be under no pressure to sign deals with non-NATO states to enhance them. For instance, NATO made Turkey reject a lucrative deal with China to enhance air defenses.
NATO failed to offer anything to compensate the loss.
The territorial dispute between Greece and Turkey in the Aegean Sea and Turkey’s support for Northern Cyprus has traditionally spoiled relations between Turkey and NATO. NATO countries support the Kurds in Syria and have even used the above-mentioned Incirlik airbase to support Kurdish YPG units. Turkey itself considers the YPG to be a terrorist organization. Thus, Incirlik – a Turkish military base – is used to support an organization that allegedly supports separatist movements inside Turkey.
Actually, there are no objective reasons for Turkey to remain in NATO.
If Turkey quits, the alliance will suffer as a result. As mentioned above, Turkey has the second biggest military in NATO after the US. It has commanded the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan twice and has sent thousands of troops to serve under the NATO flag in multiple military operations in the Balkans, Syria and Libya. The western Turkish port city of Izmir hosts one of the five NATO headquarters, which is responsible for coordinating major operations of land-based forces. Izmir is also hosts an important US military airport.
With no bases – five major military facilities – in Turkey, the consequences for out-of-Europe operations will be grave. NATO’s advanced radar systems in Kurecik, in eastern Turkey, deployed under its ballistic missile defense program, hardly meet Turkey’s interests, but are important for the alliance. NATO was keen to conduct military exercises in the Black Sea and was pressurizing Turkey for a permanent presence there, something Ankara opposes. The Black Sea presence concept cannot be implemented without Turkey.
Turkey serves as the linchpin to America’s security strategy in the Middle East and the Balkans based on its geography and longstanding alliance with the United States. The fight against Islamic State (IS) will become more challenging. NATO former Supreme Allied Commander James Stavridis explained in a Foreign Policy article that
Turkey has been critical to «virtually every NATO operation with significant impact: training Afghan Security Forces and leading coalition efforts in the central district, including Kabul; sending ships and aircraft to Libya; participating in counterpiracy operations; maintaining a steady presence in the security and peacekeeping force in the Balkans».
Moreover, according to Stavridis Turkey has
an «enormous ability» to influence events,«from the Islamic State to Syria; Israel to oil and gas in the eastern Mediterranean; responding to radical Islam to stability in Egypt».
All in all, it proves that Turkey is a major NATO asset; indeed, it’s been more of a benefactor than benefiter from the alliance.
If some foreign power is proven to have been involved in the attempt to overthrow the Turkish government, Ankara will be forced to radically reconsider its geopolitical alignment. Out of NATO, Turkey could play a balancing role between the Atlantic and Eurasia, arguing that it was patently clear NATO did not serve Turkey’s interests anymore. Ankara may also attempt to shift its geopolitical stance in favor of integration into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and enhanced cooperation with the Eurasian Economic Union. If one considers the two presidents’ meeting in the context of Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev’s recent visit to Ankara and the summit held between the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan, and Iran in Baku, then it is understandable that what is at stake is not merely the restoration of pre-crisis relations, but a powerful step forward towards incorporating Turkey into Eurasian integration processes and its future accession to the SCO, where Turkey already has an observer status.
Turkey is a major Eurasian power. Its integration into the Eurasian system acquires greater significance as the relations with NATO worsen. Further progress on the way to integration will facilitate the dialogue between the Eurasian powers and Turkey and strengthen Ankara’s position with regard to the West in general. One way or another, the clock appears to be ticking on the waning hours of the once great military alliance.



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 the Blog!

جبريل: سورية شوكة في حلق العدو الصهيوني



آب 22, 2016

أكّد أمين عام الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين «القيادة العامة» أحمد جبريل، أنّ المؤامرة الكونيّة والهجمة الإرهابيّة الكبيرة التي تتعرّض لها سورية منذ أكثر من خمس سنوات من دول عدّة تهدف إلى تدميرها، لأنّها «شوكة في حلق العدو الصهيوني».

وقال جبريل في مقابلة مع قناة الميادين، إنّ «المعركة في سورية ضدّ التنظيمات الإرهابيّة هي معركة حياة أو موت»، مشيراً إلى أنّ «إسقاط سورية بيدِ التكفيريّين سيؤدّي إلى حصول فتنة في المنطقة».

وأضاف جبريل، «نحن والسوريّون ننسّق معاً لتحرير مخيم اليرموك في الوقت المناسب، وندافع عن سورية ونقدّم التضحيات للحفاظ على وحدة ترابها»، لافتاً إلى أنّ الكيان الصهيوني هو «واقع القوة، بينما نحن أصحاب الحق، وفلسطين بلادنا وأرضنا»، معرباً عن أسفه لأنّ هناك شرائح عربية واسعة وفلسطينيّة تقول الآن بأنّ «إسرائيل» حقيقة.

واعتبر جبريل، أنّه «يخطئ من يعتقد أنّ تحرير فلسطين يبدأ من قطاع غزة»، مؤكّداً أنّ الطريق إلى فلسطين هو في تشكيل محور مقاومة يغيّر موازين القوى في المنطقة بمواجهة من يدعم «إسرائيل»، وهو ما سيكون بعد انتصار سورية والعراق في معركتهما ضدّ الإرهاب.

Related Videos
Related Articles
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 the Blog!

US Warns Syrian Military… Against Operating Inside Syria!

By Daniel McAdams | Ron Paul Institute | August 21, 2016


undefinedJust when you thought US foreign policy could not get more absurd. Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, who is listed as “commander of US forces in Iraq and Syria,”has issued a warning to the Syrian military that if its counter-insurgency operations on Syrian soil leave US troops on Syrian soil “feeling threatened,” the US military would “defend itself.” That needs to be broken down to even be believed.
The Syrian military is fighting an armed uprising on its own soil. The US government is training and equipping several factions of that armed insurgency, in this case the Kurdish YPG militia. The US military is also operating on Syrian soil alongside and in support of the YPG militia. Members of the YPG militia have, over the past several days, been firing on Syrian government forces. The Syrian air force returns fire on its own soil and the US military that is illegally operating on Syrian soil issues a warning to the Syrian government to stop firing on insurgents on Syrian soil!
The US government has a military “commander” commanding US forces operating illegally — according to US and international law — on a foreign country’s soil.
Logic might suggest that if the US military does not want its Special Forces to feel threatened by Syrian government counter-insurgency activities, perhaps it should remove them from that foreign territory in which they are illegally operating.
But the empire creates its own logic and it is not for we mere mortals to understand it. If the Pentagon and the military-industrial complex want to threaten war in Syria (which will be de facto war with Russia) it is not our place to question it. We just plug in to our television screens and feel that soothing sound of state propaganda telling us it’s all being done to keep us safe. There, that feels better…
photo: US DoD / Air Force Tech. Sgt. Brigitte N. Brantley
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 the Blog!

Up to 50 Airstrikes on Gaza in response to "A rocket" fired by Islamic State group, israel's friends


Israeli warplanes carried out the attacks after a rocket was fired from Gaza into Israel, causing no deaths or property damage.
People in the Palestinian Gaza Strip said that up to 50 Israeli airstrikes took place in the territory on Sunday night after a rocket was fired earlier in the day from the embattled strip, landing on the border settlement of Sderot in an open area and injuring no one. The Israeli assault, carried out via air and artillery strikes, demolished multiple sites and injured two, including a 17-year-boy, according to a Palestinian Health Ministry official.
Gazans on social media noted that airstrikes were taking place all over the strip. The Israeli military earlier confirmed it had struck two camps for the Hamas movement, which controls the strip.
“OVER 50 AIRSTRIKES ON #GAZA the WARPLANES r still bombing the worst night ever since the last war #GazaUnderAttack,” Basel Abuwarda, a doctor in Gaza, said in a tweet Sunday.
Observers said the intensity of Sunday’s attacks are part of the strategy of new Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who was appointed in May.
“Israeli new ultra-right Minister of Defense, Avigdor Lieberman, is flexing his muscles at the expense of Gaza’s residents,” Elizabeth Tsurkov, Research Fellow at the Forum for Regional Thinking, said in a tweet commenting on the recent airstrikes.
Earlier in the day, Israeli forces said aircraft and tanks had targeted two Hamas posts. Hamas controls the Gaza Strip and has observed a de facto ceasefire with Israel since a 2014 war, yet the group has accused the current Israeli administration of ratcheting up tensions.
Small armed cells – some of which have pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group – have defied the ceasefire agreement and occasionally launch rockets at Israel, incurring the wrath of the Israeli armed forces.
More than 2,100 Palestinians, mostly civilians, were killed during the 2014 Israeli attack on Gaza, while 67 Israeli soldiers and six Israeli civilians were killed by rockets and guerrilla attacks by Hamas and other Palestinian nationalist groups.

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 the Blog!

US "Colour Revolution" Haunts Cambodia

August 16, 2016 (Joseph Thomas – NEO) – Washington’s friends in Southeast Asia, with only a few exceptions, have had a difficult time in recent years. Their favourite billionaire-politician Thaksin Shinawatra has been repeatedly ousted from politics in Thailand, Anwar Ibrahim now resides in jail in Malaysia and prospective friends in The Philippines and Indonesia appear more interested in doing business, or at least in smoothing over relations with Beijing, than investing too deeply in Washington’s various and risky regional projects.

Washington’s Man (Sometimes) in Phnom Penh
Then there is opposition leader Mr. Sam Rainsy of Cambodia. The US State Department’s VOA (Voice of America) media platform describes him as “self-exiled.” He has been an opposition politician in Cambodia for decades, and in between inciting unrest and subsequently fleeing abroad to France before being regularly pardoned and allowed to return home, he has served as a constant contributing factor to the nation’s instability.
Rainsy plays a balancing act between tapping into Cambodian nationalism, thus co-opting popular government stances such as cultivating greater ties with China, as well as seeking Western backing to weaken, even topple the government to pave his own way into power.
VOA’s recent article on Rainsy, “Cambodian Opposition Leader Says Europe Considering Sanctions,” does much in explaining the vector he serves through which pressure is exerted upon the ruling circles in Phnom Penh by the West.
The article claims:
Self-exiled opposition leader Sam Rainsy is lobbying the European Parliament (EP) to impose measures on Cambodia in the wake of a concerted government crackdown on dissent and the murder of a prominent government critic last week.
For a political leader to seek foreign sanctions against his own nation, especially in light of the demonstrable damage they have incurred elsewhere around the world, seems to indicate Rainsy’s motivation is less in serving the Cambodian people, and more in serving himself. For the Cambodian voters he seeks to court in upcoming elections, the fact that he has attempted to seek favour among the nation’s former colonial rulers in order to place economic pressure on the nation in a bid to place himself into power, seem to chaff against his own previous attempts to use nationalism politically.
In particular regards to “the murder of a prominent government critic,” VOA admits it is only “believed” to be a government-sponsored killing.

The Guardian in an article titled, “Cambodian PM orders ‘vigorous’ investigation into critic’s killing,” reported:
Kem Ley, a 46-year-old grassroots campaigner, was shot three times at a petrol station in Phnom Penh on Sunday while drinking his morning coffee. His attacker, arrested by police shortly afterwards, was filmed confessing and said the high-profile activist had failed to repay a US$3,000 (£2,322) loan.
It also reported that:
 Large crowds gathered at the petrol station on Sunday to accompany his body, covered by the Cambodian flag, through the streets of Phnom Penh, the capital.
It is curious that the opposition gathered at the crime scene so quickly, and with equal haste, turned his death into a public spectacle, all but preventing a proper forensic investigation from taking place.
That the opposition consisted of members of the National Rescue Party, headed by Rainsy himself, suggests at the very least, crude political opportunism at work, and at worst, invites much more sinister theories surrounding the possible role of the opposition itself in Kem Ley’s death, side-by-side theories promoted by VOA against Cambodia’s sitting government.
Triggering a Colour Revolution 
Prime Minister Hun Sen has recently made comments regarding what he called “colour revolutions,” or, instability orchestrated by Washington across  MENA (Middle East and North Africa). It may have been a hint toward his own suspicions that similar manoeuvres are now being aimed at Southeast Asia and Cambodia itself.
These colour revolutions in the MENA region usually reached critical mass after particularly dramatic developments which included, in Tunisia the self-immolation of a street vendor, or sniper fire targeting demonstrations as was the case in Egypt, Libya and Syria.
Sam Rainsy, currently lobbying the European Union for support, which includes measures as drastic as sanctions, along with street demonstrations seeking critical mass, may be further warning signs of a planned colour revolution in the making, and one Prime Minister Hun Sen himself seems to allude to as being driven by the US.
Of course, protesters in the streets are only one element of any potential colour revolution. Armed elements are the other. These elements are usually prepared and deployed covertly, acting as snipers to escalate street protests into increasingly violent confrontations with government security forces until finally, these armed elements can pose as “armed resistance” fighting against government violence they themselves provoked.
For Southeast Asia whose economic rise is rooted in relative regional stability, Cambodia’s political crisis transforming into such a “colour revolution” would jeopardise peace and prosperity for both itself and its neighbours. It would also greatly complicate the developing row between Beijing and Washington, which has so far been neutralised by nations like Cambodia who have refused to side with Washington and drag Asia into a costly conflict with China. Many suspect this is one of the primary driving factors behind the West’s support of opposition figures like Rainsy and various attempts to put protesters in the streets.
However, as has been seen elsewhere around the world, if the opposition can be thoroughly exposed in both means and motivation, and violent elements quickly identified and neutralised before such a “revolution” begins, the destructive destabilisation Prime Minister Hun Sen referred to in recent comments, which consumed the Middle East, can be avoided in Southeast Asia and in Cambodia in particular.
Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

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 the Blog!

Yemen Ready to Open Bases to Russia to Fight Terrorism

Yemen’s former President Ali Abdullah Saleh said the new government in the country is ready to cooperate with Russia against terrorism by allowing Russian access to Yemeni military bases.
Former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh and Russian President Vladimir Putin
“Russia is the closest to us and we extend our hand to Russia to cooperate in the field of combating terrorism,” Saleh said in an interview with state-run Russia 24 TV channel on Sunday.
He said Yemen was ready to open the country’s military bases to Russia.
“We provide all the facilities in our bases, airports and sea ports. We are ready to provide all facilities to the Russian Federation,” he said.
He said, however, that such cooperation would not mean Russia would be fighting alongside Yemeni forces against Saudi forces waging war on Yemen.
Furthermore, Saleh rejected claims that Iran is interfering in Yemen’s internal affairs.
He said Saudi Arabia had launched the war on Yemen under the pretext of defending Saudi national security against Iran, emphasizing that the pretext is “baseless.”
“Iran has no presence in Yemen at all,” he said, adding that, “The international intelligence services know that Iran is not present in Yemen.”
“We are not against Iran; Iran is an Islamic brotherly country. We don’t have any agreement or coalition with it currently,” he said, referring to Iran.
Yemen has seen almost daily military attacks by Saudi Arabia since late March 2015, with internal sources putting the toll from the bloody aggression at about 10,000.
In late July, Yemen’s Ansarullah movement and Saleh’s General People’s Congress party decided to establish the Supreme Political Council to run the country. It was formally launched on August 6, when Ansarullah and Saleh’s faction announced that they both had an equal share in the 10-member body.
Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team 
22-08-2016 | 15:21

Related Articles
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 the Blog!

Monday, 22 August 2016

China’s Pivot to World Markets, Washington’s Pivot to World Wars…

Global Research, August 20, 2016

And the Debacle of the Latin American Left


USA China
China and the United States are moving in polar opposite directions: Beijing is rapidly becoming the center of overseas investments in high tech industries, including robotics, nuclear energy and advanced machinery with collaboration from centers of technological excellence, like Germany.
In contrast, Washington is pursuing a predatory military pivot to the least productive regions with collaboration from its most barbaric allies, like Saudi Arabia.
China is advancing to global economic superiority by borrowing and innovating the most advance methods of production, while the US degrades and debases its past immense productive achievements to promote wars of destruction.
China’s growing prominence is the result of a cumulative process that advanced in a systematic way, combining step-by-step growth of productivity and innovation with sudden jumps up the ladder of cutting edge technology.
China’s Stages of Growth and Success
China has moved from a country, highly dependent on foreign investment in consumer industries for exports, to an economy, based on joint public-private investments in higher value exports.
China’s early growth was based on cheap labor, low taxes and few regulations on multi-national capital.  Foreign capital and local billionaires stimulated growth, based on high rates of profit.  As the economy grew, China’s economy shifted toward increasing its indigenous technological expertise and demanding greater ‘local content’ for manufactured goods.
By the beginning of the new millennium China was developing high-end industries, based on local patents and engineering skills, channeling a high percentage of investments into civilian infrastructure, transportation and education.
Massive apprenticeship programs created a skilled labor force that raised productive capacity.  Massive enrollment in science, math, computer science and engineering universities provided a large influx of high-end innovators, many of whom had gained expertise in the advanced technology of overseas competitors.
China’s strategy has been based on the practice of borrowing, learning, upgrading and competing with the most advanced economics of Europe and the US.
By the end of the last decade of the 20th century, China was in a position to move overseas. The accumulation process provided China with the financial resources to capture dynamic overseas enterprises.
China was no longer confined to investing in overseas minerals and agriculture in Third World countries.  China is looking to conquer high-end technological sectors in advanced economics.
By the second decade of the 21st century Chinese investors moved into Germany, Europe’s most advanced industrial giant.  During the first 6 months of 2016 Chinese investors acquired 37 German companies, compared with 39 in all of 2015.  China’s total investments in Germany for 2016 may double to over $22 billion dollars.
In 2016, China successfully bought out KOKA, Germany’s most innovative engineering company.  China’s strategy is to gain superiority in the digital future of industry.
China is rapidly moving to automate its industries, with plans to double the robot density of the US by the year 2020.
Chinese and Austrian scientists successfully launched the first quantum-enabled satellite communication system which is reportedly ‘hack proof’, ensuring China’s communications security.
While China’s global investments proceed to dominate world markets, the US, England and Australia have been trying to impose investment barriers. By relying on phony ‘security threats’, Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May blocked a multi-billion dollar Chinese investment-heavy nuclear plant (Hinckley Point C). The pretext was the spurious claim that China would use its stake to “engage in energy blackmail, threatening to turn off the power in the event of international crises”.
The US Committee on Foreign Investment has blocked several multi-billion dollar Chinese investments in high tech industries.
In August 2016 Australia blocked an $8 billion-dollar purchase of a controlling stake in its biggest electricity distribution network on specious claims of ‘national security’.
The Anglo-American and German empires are on the defensive.  They increasingly cannot compete economically with China, even in defending their own innovative industries.
In large part this is the result of their failed policies.  Western economic elite have increasingly relied on short-term speculation in finance, real estate and insurance, while neglecting their industrial base.
Led by the US, their reliance on military conquests (militaristic empire-building) absorb public resources, while China has directed its domestic resources toward innovative and advanced technology.
To counter China’s economic advance, the Obama regime has implemented a policy of building economic walls at home, trade restrictions abroad and military confrontation in the South China Seas – China’s strategic trade routes.
US officials have ratcheted up their restrictions on Chinese investments in high tech US enterprises including a $3.8 billion investment in Western Digital and Philips attempt to sell its lighting business.  The US blocked ‘Chen China’s planned $44 billion takeover of Swiss chemical group ‘Syngenta’.
US officials are doing everything possible to stop innovative billion dollar deals that include China as a strategic partner.
Accompanying its domestic wall, the US has been mobilizing an overseas blockade of China via its Trans-Pacific-Partnership, which proposes to exclude Beijing from participating in the ‘free trade zone’ with a dozen North America, Latin American and Asian members.  Nevertheless, not a single member-nation of the TPP has cut back its trade with China.  On the contrary, they are increasing ties with China – an eloquent comment on Obama’s skill at ‘pivoting’.
While the ‘domestic economic wall’ has had some negative impacts on particular Chinese investors, Washington has failed to dent China’s exports to US markets.  Washington’s failure to block China’s trade has been even more damaging to Washington’s effort to encircle China in Asia and Latin America, Oceana and Asia.
Australia, New Zealand, Peru, Chile, Taiwan, Cambodia and South Korea depend on Chinese markets far more than on the US to survive and grow.
While Germany, faced with China’s dynamic growth, has chosen to ‘partner’ and share, up-scale productive investments, Washington has opted to form military alliances to confront China.
The US bellicose military alliance with Japan has not intimidated China.  Rather it has downgraded their domestic economies and economic influence in Asia.
Moreover, Washington’s “military pivot” has deepened and expanded China’s strategic links to Russia’s energy sources and military technology.
While the US spends hundreds of billions in military alliances with the backward Baltic client-regimes and the parasitical Middle Eastern states, (Saudi Arabia, Israel), China accumulates strategic expertise from its economic ties with Germany, resources from Russia and market shares among Washington’s ‘partners’ in Asia and Latin America.
There is no question that China, following the technological and productive path of Germany, will win out over the US’s economic isolationist and global militarist strategy.
If the US has failed to learn from the successful economic strategy of China, the same failure can explain the demise of the progressive regimes in Latin America.
China’s Success and the Latin American Retreat
After more than a decade of growth and stability, Latin America’s progressive regimes have retreated and declined.  Why has China continued on the path of stability and growth while their Latin American partners retreated and suffered defeats?
Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Ecuador, for over a decade, served as Latin America’s center-left success story.  Their economies grew, social spending increased, poverty and unemployment were reduced and worker incomes expanded.
Subsequently their economies went into crisis, social discontent grew and the center-left regimes fell.
In contrast to China, the Latin American center-left regimes did not diversify their economies:  they remained heavily dependent on the commodity boom for growth and stability.
The Latin American elites borrowed and depended on foreign investment, and financial capital, while China engaged in public investments in industry, infrastructure, technology and education.
Latin American progressives joined with foreign capitalist and local speculators in non-productive real estate speculation and consumption, while China invested in innovative industries at home and abroad.  While China consolidated political rulership, the Latin American progressives “allied” with strategic domestic and overseas multi-national adversaries to ‘share power’, which were, in fact, eagerly prepared to oust their “left” allies.
When the Latin commodity based economy collapsed, so did the political links with their elite partners.  In contrast, China’s industries benefited from the lower global commodity prices, while Latin America’s left suffered.  Faced with widespread corruption, China launched a major campaign purging over 200,000 officials.  In Latin America, the Leftignored corrupt officials, allowing the opposition to exploit the scandals to oust center-left officials.
While Latin America imported machinery and parts from the West; China bought the entire Western companies producing the machines and their technology – and then implemented Chinese technological improvements.
China successfully outgrew the crisis, defeated its adversaries and proceeded to expand local consumption and stabilized rulership.
Latin America’s center-left suffered political defeats in Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay, lost elections in Venezuela and Bolivia and retreated in Uruguay.
Conclusion
China’s political economic model has outperformed the imperialist West and leftist Latin America.   While the US has spent billions in the Middle East for wars on behalf of Israel, China has invested similar amounts in Germany for advanced technology, robotics and digital innovations.
While President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s “pivot to Asia” has been largely a wasteful military strategy to encircle and intimidate China, Beijing’s“pivot to markets” has successfully enhanced its economic competitiveness.  As a result, over the past decade, China’s growth rate is three times that of the US; and in the next decade China will double the US in ‘robotizing’ its productive economy.
The US ‘pivot to Asia’, with its heavy dependence on military threats and intimidation has cost billions of dollars in lost markets and investments.  China’s ‘pivot to advanced technology’ demonstrates that the future lies in Asia not the West. China’s experience offers lessons for future Latin American leftist governments.
First and foremost, China emphasizes the necessity of balanced economic growth, over and above short-term benefits resulting from commodity booms and consumerist strategies.
Secondly, China demonstrates the importance of professional and worker technical education for technological innovation, over and above  business school and non-productive ‘speculative’ education so heavily emphasized in the US.
Thirdly, China balances its social spending with investment in core productive activity; competitiveness and social services are combined.
China’s enhanced growth and social stability, its commitment to learning and surpassing advanced economies has important limitations, especially in the areas of social equality and popular power.  Here China can learn from the experience of Latin America’s Left.  The social gains under Venezuela’s President Chavez are worthy of study and emulation; the popular movements in Bolivia, Ecuador and Argentina, which ousted neo-liberals from power, could enhance efforts in China to overcome the business- state nexus of pillage and capital flight.
China, despite its socio-political and economic limitations, has successfully resisted US military pressures and even ‘turned the tables’ by advancing on the West.
In the final analysis, China’s model of growth and stability certainly offers an approach that is far superior to the recent debacle of the Latin American Left and the political chaos resulting from Washington’s quest for global military supremacy.
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 the Blog!

Israel plans to expand new settler units in West Bank


A picture taken in the West Bank city of al-Khalil (Hebron) on July 6, 2016 shows a view of the Kiryat Arba Jewish settlement (in the background) on the outskirts of the Palestinian city. (AFP photo)
A picture taken in the West Bank city of al-Khalil (Hebron) on July 6, 2016 shows a view of the Kiryat Arba Jewish settlement (in the background) on the outskirts of the Palestinian city. (AFP photo)

The Israeli regime authorities have granted preliminary permission for the planning of new illegal settler units in the occupied West Bank in defiance of international calls to end such unauthorized activities in the Palestinian territories.
COGAT, an Israeli military body, confirmed on Monday that permission had been given for planning new units for settlers in the occupied West Bank city of al-Khalil (Hebron).
Hagit Ofran of Israeli anti-settlement Peace Now group said that the land was taken from the Palestinian-run municipality for military use and will be converted to residential application.
According to Israeli media reports, the expansion is still in early stages of planning and has yet to pass through administrative stages ahead of construction.
About 1,000 settlers live in al-Khalil among Palestinians behind barbed-wire, observation towers, heavily fortified enclaves and under Israeli army protection.
On June 16, the Israeli regime approved USD 18 million in extra funding for the illegal settlements across the occupied Palestinian territories.
The funds were allocated by the cabinet for settlement-related spending in the occupied West Bank.
Israeli media outlets said the sum is to supplement a budget of about USD 88 million agreed upon last year.

Israeli soldiers patrol the immediate vicinity of the
Kiryat Arba settlement
on July 7, 2016 in the West Bank city of al-Khalil (Hebron).
(AFP photo)

The presence and continued expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestine has created a major obstacle for the efforts to establish peace in the Middle East.
Over half a million Israelis live in more than 230 illegal settlements built since the 1967 Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank including East al-Quds.
All Israeli settlements are illegal under the international law. Tel Aviv has defied calls to stop the settlement expansion in the occupied Palestinian territories.
A recent report by the Quartet on the Middle East – comprising the UN, the US, Russia and the European Union – called on the Israeli regime to halt its illegal settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories, saying the settlement expansion, the demolition of Palestinian homes and the expropriation of land were “steadily eroding the viability” of a solution to their conflict.

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 the Blog!