Saturday, 10 August 2019

الرابح والخاسر في لقاء المصارحة والمصالحة؟

أغسطس 10, 2019



ناصر قنديل

– من طبيعة التسويات أنها لا تمنح الأطراف المتنازعة ربحاً كاملاً لجهة وخسارة كاملة لجهة مقابلة. ومن طبيعة التسويات أن يخرج أطرافها بعد بدء مسارها بالاستعداد لكيفية مخاطبة الجمهور الذي تمّت تعبئته تحت سقوف مرتفعة وخطابات تصعيدية لتبرير القبول بالتسوية ونفي اعتبارها تراجعاً أو خسارة، لذلك ينشغل الأطراف المعنيون بتحضير الإجابات عن الأسئلة التي تنتظرهم، فينشغل الحزب الديمقراطي اللبناني بالبحث عن تفسير لقبوله بتسوية لن يكون بموجبها البند الأول على طاولة أول اجتماع حكومي إحالة حادثة قبرشمون إلى المجلس العدلي وطرحها على التصويت. وينشغل الحزب التقدمي الاشتراكي بتحضير الإجابات على أسئلة تطال ما قاله عن حرب انتقام ضده تمّ تحضيرها في دمشق ويقودها حزب الله ويشكل رئيس الجمهورية رأس حربتها، وعما قاله بحق المحكمة العسكرية والعودة لارتضائها مرجعاً مقبولاً، وترك الباب مفتوحاً لفرضية الإحالة إلى المجلس العدلي في ضوء تحقيقات المحكمة العسكرية. وسينشغل التيار الوطني الحر بالبحث عن أجوبة حول إصراره على اعتبار الحادثة كميناً مدبّراً لاغتيال رئيسه، وتفسير غياب رئيسه عن المصالحة، التي قالت إن الأزمة هي بين الحزبين الاشتراكي والديمقراطي.

– بالمقابل سيستطيع الحزب الديمقراطي القول إنه لم يصل إلى المجلس العدلي فوراً، لكنه سيصل لاحقاً، وإنه أثبت ندية موازية مقابل الحزب الاشتراكي بوجه حرب إلغاء كانت قبرشمون إيذاناً بها بينما سيستطيع الحزب الإشتراكي القول إنه نجح بتأكيد اولوية البعد السياسي على البعد القضائي للقضية وتثبيت اعتبار الحوار مدخلاً للحل السياسي في قضايا تخصه وتعنيه وفرض التشاور معه حولها من بوابة التسليم بالمصالحة مدخلاً لإنهاء الأزمة. وسيستطيع التيار الوطني الحر القول إنه ردّ الاعتبار لموقع رئاسة الجمهورية كحكم، وإسقاط الادعاءات الاشتراكية بحق الرئاسة ووزراء التيار والقضاء، بدليل قبول الاشتراكي لموقع الرئاسة حكماً سياسياً وللمحكمة العسكرية إطاراً قضائياً.

– اللبنانيّون وفي طليعتهم الحريصون على السلم الأهلي، والقلقون من التدخلات الخارجية، والمعنيّون برؤية كل تصعيد للعصبيّات الطائفية، خطراً يفتح الباب للفتن التي ينتظرها العدو الإسرائيلي للعبث بالنسيج الوطني والاجتماعي وتحضير المسرح لحرب يراهن على الفوز بها من باب التفتيت الاستباقي، هؤلاء يرون السلم الأهلي رابحاً وحيداً، والأمان الوطني بوجه التدخلات والفتن والمشاريع الأجنبية والإسرائيلية، المنتصر الوحيد، فهؤلاء كانوا يتفادون المشاركة في جوقات التصعيد، ويضعون ثقل مواقفهم مع مساعي رئيس المجلس النيابي نبيه بري الذي شكّل صمام الأمان للتهدئة وصناعة المصالحة وإغلاق الأبواب أمام مشاريع الفتن وهزّ السلم الأهلي.

– إذا كان هناك مشروع خارجي عبّر عنه بيان السفارة الأميركية، وإذا كان هناك مناخ إقليمي لاستعمال لبنان ساحة تحمية ومقايضة عشية الحسم العسكري السوري المتوقع في إدلب، فإن الخروج بتسوية سياسية لأحداث الجبل هو انتصار وطني لبناني، قال إن لا كانتونات ولا مناطق مغلقة ولا آفاق لرهانات على خارج مجرَّب لن يفعل سوى التلاعب بالأطراف المحليّة وتوريطها، وإن ضمانة الجميع هي بالجميع، وإن التسوية القائمة على تثقيل لغة الحوار والتهدئة ليست هزيمة لأحد بل هي انتصار للجميع على أنفسهم أولاً، وعبرهم على مَن يتربّصون بالبلد.

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 Empire: The Reality of the “Greater United States”

By Makia Freeman
Global Research, August 09, 2019
The US Empire is not a term you will commonly hear when people refer to the United States of America. Nor is the Greater United States, American Empire or even just Empire. There is something of a taboo quality to using the word empire to refer to the US. Yet, that is precisely what it is. With numerous territories and land acquisitions, around 1000+ military bases worldwide and the ability to project its power to influence and coerce foreign territories and nations, the USA is the biggest empire the world has ever known. Countless foreign nations, victims of US aggression and invasion, have denounced the US for its imperialism, a word with the same etymological root as empire. So why is it so strange to describe it as the US Empire?
USA: From Republic to Empire
It is a telling example that the American experiment in self-governance has turned out like this. What began as an attempt to set up one of the most limited, constrained and decentralized governments ever has transmogrified into a sprawling empire whose breadth, power and influence is unprecedented in world history. Those who believe humanity should run society without government (anarchists) based only on voluntary cooperation (voluntaryists) point to the results of the American experiment as proof that government by its very nature grows out of control. The results, they say, show that no matter what limits you attempt to put on government, they can always be undone, because politicians can simply change laws and find way to bypass constitutions once they are in power. For one example of many, look at how the US bypassed many privacy and surveillance laws in the Bill of Rights by dreaming up a new idea (terrorism), defining it in law (first international terrorists, then domestic terrorists), changing the definition to describe their political enemies (gun carriers, conspiracy theorists), then applying that by name-calling its citizens. Suddenly, the usual rules don’t apply when terrorism and the fake war on terror are invoked. All of this is gives credence to the idea that no government is better than small government in the anarchy vs minarchy debate.
US Empire Greater United States
The actual Greater United States. Image credit: Daniel Immerwahr
US Empire Land Acquisition
Right from the start, the US has always looked west. The original 13 colonies soon expanded. Just to name a few highlights, the US Republic bought Louisiana from the French in 1803, annexed Texas in 1845 and took California away from Mexico in 1848 (at the conclusion of the Mexican-American War). The US then expanded further, such that it then had a mainland of 48 contiguous states and territory beyond that. It bought Alaska from Russia in 1867 and it conquered Hawaii in 1893 after a coup by a small group of rich landowners put a gun to the head of Hawaiian Queen Liliuokalani. A watershed moment in the history of the US Empire, and its land and territory acquisition, came in 1898. At that time, the Spanish colonial Empire was falling, and Spain was having problems quelling dissent in its colonies such as Cuba. Through a false flag operation revolving around the USS Maine, the USA entered the conflict (named the Spanish-American War), defeated Spain and established itself as a new colonial and imperial power. While it was at it, it either purchased or annexed the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and Wake Island. Thus, by end of the 19th century, the US had already transformed itself into the US Empire. In this video and in his book, Daniel Immerwahr makes the point that around this time, Americans began to redraw their maps and take pride in their new status; however later on, they sought more to play down and hide their power, figuring it would serve them better to keep it concealed. At one point in the video clip, Immerwahr tells the story of an American GI soldier in the Philippines during WW2, who was told by a Filipino that the US had colonized the Philippines, but didn’t realize it. “What?” he said, thinking he was fighting in a foreign country not on US territory, “We colonized you?”
Hiding the Empire: 1000+ Military Bases
Fast forward around 120 years, and just look at the state of affairs. The US emerged as the sole world superpower after WW2, but unlike the British Empire, it decided not to outright conquer or annex territory, but rather to build military installations on virtually every continent. The US hides the official number of its military bases so as to conceal the true extent of its imperial reach, however based on the research of people like Chalmers Johnson and Nick Turse, we know that it is at least 1000 bases, and quite probably more. Johnson died in 2010, but in a talk now removed from YouTube claims that in 2004, the Pentagon’s official number was 725 (as published in the Base Structure Report). However, he acknowledged that the Pentagon disguised many of its bases and had 300+ unacknowledged ones. Turse has written many articles and books on the topic of US military bases including this 2019 one Bases, Bases, Everwhere … Except in the Pentagon’s Report:
“Officially, the Department of Defense (DoD) maintains 4,775 “sites,” spread across all 50 states, eight U.S. territories, and 45 foreign countries. A total of 514 of these outposts are located overseas, according to the Pentagon’s worldwide property portfolio. Just to start down a long list, these include bases on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, in Djibouti on the Horn of Africa, as well as in Peru and Portugal, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom. But the most recent version of that portfolio, issued in early 2018 and known as the Base Structure Report (BSR), doesn’t include any mention of al-Tanf. Or, for that matter, any other base in Syria. Or Iraq. Or Afghanistan. Or Niger. Or Tunisia. Or Cameroon. Or Somalia. Or any number of locales where such military outposts are known to exist and even, unlike in Syria, to be expanding.”
To put this number in perspective, the emerging rivals to the US Empire have barely any foreign military bases: Russia has 21 (according to this source) and China has 2.
Hallmark of the US Empire: The Projection of Power without Annexation of Territory
The rulers of the United States Inc. have done a very good job of concealing the power and reach of the US Empire. Through domestic propaganda, they have obscured the reality of the empire such that not many Americans make the connection. They have also avoided colonizing too many weaker nations, instead preferring to project power without actually annexing land. This is achieved through economic warfare such as forcing smaller nations to buy US products, or the infamous use of sanctions as accelerated by Trump against nations like Venezuela and Iran. Then there is also the method described by former economic hitman John Perkins.
But, but … the US is a Republic, Right?
Some people at this point may say, “Well, the US may be an Empire, but its form of government is still a Constitutional Republic. Therefore, the US is a Republic.” Yes, the US is a republic in the sense that it has (highly controlled) elections where (s)elected individuals ascend to power, however, despite this form of governance, the US still behaves as an imperial bully, aggressor and invader to nations outside of it. That behavior is what defines it as an empire. In this context, the word “republic” means nothing. Have you noticed the irony with which nations around the world use the word republic in their official country titles? Both of the communist totalitarian nations of China and North Korea are “republics” since they are called People’s Republic of China and Democratic People’s Republic of Korearespectively. Never mind the censorship and control via social credit. In the so-called “free” West, in the Federal Republic of Germany, if you investigate the truth about the Holocaust you can be fined or imprisoned. In the French Republic, people are so taxed to the hilt they donned yellow vests to spark a worldwide protest movement. Republic means “a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives.” Do you really think the people hold the supreme power in the US, China, North Korea, Germany or France?
Conclusion
Words have power. Propagandists and magicians alike know this, since they know words help to mold perception and create reality. This is why you “spell” words, since uttered words are like a (magic) spell. The power of the US Empire lies in its narrative control and perception control. Whoever controls words, controls narrative; whoever controls narrative, controls perception. It’s a simple formula. Orwell’s great work 1984 showed what can come from word control. The question we must ask ourselves here is this: why is it so strange, uncomfortable and unfamiliar to call a spade a spade, and to admit internally to ourselves and externally to others that the USA is an empire? Surely this uncomfortability itself is evidence of the magic of word control and propaganda. Are we so programmed and conditioned with ideas of “USA = freedom and democracy” that we can’t fathom the idea of a US Empire? If so, then it is more crucial than ever that people begin to use terms like US Empire and Greater United States to take a small yet bold step of breaking the conditioning that holds them in chains.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com. Makia is on Steemit and FB.
Sources
Featured image is from The Freedom 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!

The Hormuz Affair: Why Europe Abstained from the US Naval Mission in the Gulf?



As tensions in the Gulf heightened in recent months, the United States pressured its European allies to participate in its initiative regarding the Gulf.
Almost a third of all oil exports pass through the strait, which is located between Iran and Oman.
Washington proposed the mission earlier this month, alleging it was trying to get a coalition together to offer military escorts to commercial ships in the Gulf.
Speaking on the issue, Strategic Expert Dr. Adel Khalife shed light on the rationale behind the European nonparticipation in the international maritime mission set up by the US to provide – as it claims – maritime security.
As to why the most European countries refused to participate in the US-led flotilla in the Gulf, Dr. Khalife said that, “When the United States proposed the formation of a military coalition force to protect navigation of cargo ships in and around the strait of Hormuz, it had in mind the participation of as states involved in this crisis.”
He went on to say that, “In the meantime, Europeans countries were cautious regarding their participation in the coalition, especially France and Germany. Unlike the United Kingdom which regular follows the US and ‘Israel’ which is much interested in striking Iran”.
Meanwhile, Dr. Khalife explains that by forming this maritime coalition, “the US is trying to weaken Iran and reduce its influence”, saying that it was complying with the desires of the international community”.
Dr. Khalife explained that the US “urged the NATO and its European allies to pressure Iran and have Arabs pay, but all its attempts were fruitless.”
As to why only the UK and the “Israeli” entity participated in the maritime coalition, Dr. Khalife said, “the US was unable to persuade other countries. The Europeans prefer to maintain the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran”.
Despite US sanctions and threats on Iran, as well as the downing of an American drone by Tehran and the seizing of a British ship, Dr. Khalife shed light on the “US’ inability to reduce Iran’s influence or supervision over the strait of Hormuz; especially when it turned out that nobody wants to engage in a war, in the light of Iran’s military and political power in comparison to the helplessness of Arab states – who only provide the funds for such a coalition”.
Regarding the skirmish over oil tankers, “the Iranian response was strict and firm. Iran proved it was not afraid of escalating the situation in the region,” Dr. Khalife said, suggesting that “the most obvious solution is to return to negotiations without any conditions, as Iran wants”.
Given the facts aforementioned, it is decisive to say that Iran has gained momentum. “Iran has face the US in its utmost power, diminishing American influence in the world, specifically in the Gulf region,” Dr. Khalife said.
To this extent, “some Arab countries tried reaching out to Iran”, Dr. Khalife said, adding that “the US tried to suppress Iran, but the latter continued exporting oil outside its boundaries – asserting Iran’s regional power.”

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!

Why are Western leaders gawd awful bad and China’s so darn competent? Part II. China Rising Radio Sinoland 190807

August 08, 2019
Crosslinked with:
Pictured here: my Sun Yat-Sen hat I wear, to which I have pinned the iconic Mao Zedong silhouette badge. Below his bust is his famous mantra, “Serve the People”, written in his very recognizable calligraphic style. Many people do not notice, but on the back is the millennial governance motto, “Preserve the Peace”. Walking around the streets and in buildings here, you can see Mao’s famous calligraphic chant all over the place. Nothing has changed about governance in China for 5,000 years.
In the first part of this essay, I showed why Western leaders are generally so bad (https://chinarising.puntopress.com/2019/07/30/why-are-western-leaders-gawd-awful-bad-and-chinas-so-darn-competent-part-i-china-rising-radio-sinoland-190730/). The one sentence answer is they are almost always suborned to serve the interests of the 1% at the expense of the 99%.
There is a corollary explanation for this. European cultures and their spinoffs in the rest of Eurangloland, including Israel are founded on violence and theft. If you don’t believe this goes back to the Jewish Torah/Christian Old Testament, here is a quick review of Westerners’ predilection for killing, destroying, plundering first and asking questions later (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html and http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=21).
I created a comparative Excel table using Wikipedia’s pages on Conflicts in Europe, United States and China(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_the_United_States and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Asia#Mainland_China_(People’s_Republic_of_China). Europe’s list has 760 entries, the US’s 250 and China’s 315. Europe’s long list really starts in 1,100BC and does not include all of the genocidal horrors in the Torah/Old Testament before that. The US’s only starts in 1775, which is wishful propaganda. As Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz clearly proves in her book, A Native Peoples’ History of the United States, genocidal wars to exterminate the many millions of First Nations’ peoples started Day One with the colonial landing at Jamestown in 1607. and the killing has never stopped. China’s goes back to 2,500BC, so is over twice as long as Europe’s and compared to the US, almost ten times longer.
To sum up, Europe’s list of conflicts dates back 3,100 years and lists 760, the US’s starts 230 years ago, with 250 conflicts and China’s starts over 4,500 years ago and has 315. Interestingly, one-third of all China’s conflicts happened during its century of humiliation, 1839-1949, when the West terrorized and plundered the country, while addicting one-fourth of the people to opium, morphine and heroin.
This, while the West’s numbers are probably grossly understated, since over the centuries, it has committed thousands of government overthrows, invasions and occupations to protect colonial businesses around the world.
The above statistics speak for themselves. Eurangloland, including Israel conducts its business and trade using violence and expropriation. China, no. This contrast is even more remarkable, when looking at landmass and populations. When the Roman Empire was at its greatest expansion, 200AD, China had six times as much land and nine times as many people, but clearly was experiencing much less conflict, not nine times as much.
A picture containing object Description automatically generated
As the above chart shows, China has always had many more people than Europe, yet has lived with much less violence and plunder. This is because European cultures are founded on genocide, slavery and the violent plunder of other peoples’ natural resources. For 5,000 years, Chinese civilization has been based on agriculture, animal husbandry and mutually profitable cross border trade.
Proof of this is ample. The Chinese Asian land and African maritime Silk Roads predate Jesus Christ and they did not send out armies to rape and plunder their neighbors, like Alexander the Great, the Christian Crusades and onto modern colonialism and robber baron capitalism. The Chinese conducted state diplomacy, traded goods and technology.
If the Chinese had the same DNA for violence and theft that Westerners do, we’d all be speaking Mandarin today. The Chinese were sailing the high seas many centuries before the rest of the world and had Star Wars weapons compared to Europe and elsewhere, with advanced guns, powerful cannons, rocket propelled grenades, flame throwers, sea and land mines, not to mention chemical and biological bombs. They were so far ahead of the rest of the world in military and other technologies, that they could have easily crushed every city and people they came into contact with, like defenseless bugs. Yet, they fanned out across the planet and no one was ever attacked, unless the Chinese visitors were attacked first, which happened very rarely, given what they arrived with. They just wanted to do win-win business and exchange technology.
Westerners and Israelis can only think about other peoples in terms of war and exploitation. Since that is their world vision, they cannot assimilate the Chinese’s millennia of external non-violence and, Let’s do some business ethos. Cognitive dissonance overwhelms Euranglolanders when this is shown them and they sink into denial and self-serving mythology. They fall back on moral equivalence, Well, everybody else does it too. Not true, American Natives, Africans, and Asians (excepting the Christianized Genghis Khan family and Japan adopting the Western imperial playbook during its Meiji Restoration) have not blanketed the planet like killer locusts, devouring everything within their reach. Only Euranglolanders have done this and continue to do so.
This concept of Chinese governance and international trade goes back millennia, with the Confucist-Daoist-Buddhist concept of ren, which means forbearance, relenting and retreating. You will never begin to understand how and why the Chinese live and work, until you wrap your head around ren (忍). Ren is also the Chinese foundation for governing the country and leading the people. I highly recommend taking a few minutes to read/listen/watch these articles (https://chinarising.puntopress.com/2019/07/20/wests-hong-kong-color-revolution-still-making-a-mess-of-the-place-and-totally-backfiring-china-rising-radio-sinoland-190720/ and http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/11/10/all-the-chinese-people-want-is-respect-aretha-franklin-diplomacy-on-china-rising-radio-sinoland-171110/).
Great governments in China are the ones that have (and continue to) work for the 99%, first, second and third, maintaining social harmony, economic prosperity, securing the country’s borders and avoiding war at all cost. Avoiding war and running a lean administration meant being able to keep taxes low, in the form of grain sent to government storehouses for redistribution during droughts, so the masses had enough eat well and sell their surplus to buy household goods.
In China’s pre-liberation era, this system was feudal, meaning wealthy land owners and bourgeois gentry had to be reigned in, to not demand too much grain for land use. Thus, China’s leaders were also expected to protect the 99% from local exploitation. This of course did not always happen. There were many regional conflicts and if national or local government authority weakened or was corrupt, the landlords could plunder the peasants, as well as become warlords in their areas.
Warlords on the loose were often a harbinger of a Chinese government that had lost its Heavenly Mandate. Democracy in Chinese is very responsive to the 99%’s needs. If the leaders can’t keep the peace, harmony and maintain the territorial integrity of the nation, then the masses have the right to “grab bamboo spears”, attack government centers and demand a new administration. This happened countless times over thousands of years at the local, provincial, regional and national level.
Maybe now you can have a little appreciation for why Chinese civilization has always had “big government”, from the dynastic center down to the local villages. No leaders can hope to govern effectively for the benefit of the 99% otherwise. This is why Western elites love “small government” neoliberalism, since it gives them a license to kill and plunder at will. What is important to understand, when comparing Chinese governance to Eurangloland’s is what the expectations were and are to this day. In China, it’s taking care of the little guy. In the West, it’s serving the wealthy elites, for them to accumulate more and more money property, possessions and power.
When Admiral Zheng He sailed around the world generations before Columbus and the Europeans, his massive flotilla reportedly had an anthology of China’s great books, totaling 200,000 pages, including the art of good governance. This was to show and tell with all the different governments and peoples they met, going from port to port.
China’s magnum opus for good governance comes from the 6th century AD, during the Tang Dynasty. A young emperor at the time was Taizong. Having gained the throne after his father, and having already learned to be a successful general, he realized that running a country and keeping the 99% safe and prosperous was a huge undertaking. Thus, he decided to collect all the ancient books on good governance and peacekeeping, going back to the beginnings of Chinese literature in 2,600BC and from them, generate an anthology of the best passages. The sources included 14,000 books and 89,000 written scrolls. The result was the Qunshu Zhiyao (群书治要), which can be translated as the Compilation of Books and Writings on Important Governing Principles. It totals 500,000 words and covers sixty five categories of good governance and peacekeeping.
In the preface of this 1,400 year-old collection, one of Emperor Taizong’s compiling advisors wrote,
When used in the present, (it) allows us to examine and learn from our ancient history; when passed down to our descendants,(it) will help them learn valuable lessons in life.
Taizong himself was ecstatic about the work, saying,
The collection has helped me learn from the ancients. When confronted with issues, I am very certain of knowing what to do. This is all due to your efforts, my advisors.
A picture containing text, book Description automatically generated
Above: stylistic rendition of Tang Emperor Taizong, showing his successful military past in the background and thereafter, his forward thinking good governance and peacekeeping in the foreground.
Of course, over five millennia of civilizational history, China has had its fair share of megalomaniacs, psychopaths, corrupted and incompetents in positions of power, both government and military. But, as the Qunshu Zhiyao instructs, the ideals of good governance and peacekeeping are all about social harmony, economic prosperity and avoiding war at all cost, so politicians and leaders of this stripe are the outliers, not the mainstream, as is the case in Eurangloland. Western elites work hard to put megalomaniacs, psychopaths, corrupt and incompetent people in positions of power, since these latter can be manipulated to serve the previous’ interests. Politicians who practice ren and strive for social harmony, economic prosperity and peacekeeping are Eurangloland’s worst enemies. To wit, China’s Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, Iran’s Hassan Rouhani, DPRK’s Kim Jong-Un and every other socialist/anti-imperialist leader across the globe.
To learn more about why Chinese leaders are often so competent – yesterday, today and tomorrow – you can download below and read a book of excerpts from the Qunshu Zhiyao, put out for free by the Malaysian publishing house, Chung Hua Cultural Education Centre. Just glancing over a few of its 1,400-year-old section titles tells you that the people’s expectations of a Chinese leader are not what the 99% usually gets in the West,
Be careful of military actions
Be frugal and diligent
Be respectful of the Dao
Be sincere and trustworthy
Benevolence and righteousness
Caring about people
Character building
Correcting our own mistakes
Emulate good deeds
Exercising caution from beginning to end
Formation of cliques
Guard against greed
Heeding troubling signs
Human sentiments
Magnanimity
Paramount impartiality
Propriety and Music
Refrain from anger
Talents and virtues
Teach and transform
The livelihood of the people
Uphold integrity
Mao Zedong’s famous mottos were,
Serve the People!
Preserve the Peace!
Mao did exactly that for one-fourth of the human race and was simply living up to the expectations that the Chinese 99% have had for their leaders, going back 5,000 years. It is still ongoing with Xi Jinping and every leader in between. Euranglolanders cannot count themselves so lucky in the quality of their leaders and integrity of their governance.
The Governing Principles of Ancient China book in downloadable PDF:

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!

أمرٌ أميركي… بتفجير لبنان؟



أغسطس 9, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

السفارة الأميركية في لبنان تعرف أن بيانها الأخير الذي دعت فيه السلطات المحلية الى إبعاد التدخلات السياسية عن جريمة قبرشمون، هو أكثر من تدخل سافر في الشؤون الداخلية اللبنانية، وتعلمُ ايضاً أنه مدعاة لاستنكارات وصخب قد تدفع وزارة الخارجية اللبنانية الى توجيه اللوم للسفارة.

لكنها لا تأبه لكل هذا الضجيج لأنها أرادت إفهام تحالفاتها الداخلية المدعومة أيضاً من السعودية ان الدولة الأميركية لن تسمح بإلحاق هزيمة بهم ومن أي نوع.

هذا في الظاهر، فهل يوجد شيء مخفيّ في العمق؟

يوحي التدخل السافر للسفارة بحاجة الأميركيين لعيارات عالية من التدخل، تعيدُ لأصدقائهم في الداخل ثقتهم بالسياسة الأميركية وتجديد إيمانهم بقدرتها على إحياء العظام وهي رميم.

وهذا جانب أراده بكل تأكيد بيان السفارة التي تعرف أيضاً أن زمن السحر ولّى، ولم يعُد يكفي «بيان مسعور» لإعادة نصب حركة سياسية قوية مشابهة لـ 14 آذار، فالزمن مختلف لأن حزب الله منتصر في الخارج والداخل، ومفعول الفتنة السنية الشيعية تراجع والقوة الأساسية عند المسيحيين هي عند التيار الوطني الحر الذي يترأسه جبران باسيل.

فما الذي يريده إذاً هذا البيان الذي ما كان ليصدر لولا وجود خطة متكاملة بعنوان جنبلاطي وعمقٍ بأهداف أميركية صرفة؟ فيبدو أبو تيمور كالكرد الذين يستعملهم الأميركيون لتبرير احتلالهم لمناطق سورية وعراقية ويلفظونهم عند أوان المساومات.

ويتبين ايضاً ان البيان أكبر من كمين قبرشمون الجنبلاطي بل مقدمة لرص صفوف الجبهة الداخلية الموالية للأميركيين والسعوديين تمهيداً للتعامل مع لبنان على الطريقة الإيرانية.

لذلك يجنح الأميركيون في خطتهم الى إصدار حركة عقوبات مالية اقتصادية تؤدي إلى انهيار كامل للاقتصاد اللبناني، بما يخلقُ مناخاً داخلياً قابلاً للتمرد على من يتهمونه بالتسبب في استجلاب النقمة الأميركية.

بالتوازي يستغلّ الحزب التقدمي الاشتراكي الجنبلاطي والقوات اللبنانية والكتائب والأحرار وحزب المستقبل والريفي وسعيد هذه النقمة لإعادة رص صفوفهم وتوجيه أكبر اتهامات معاصرة لحزب الله بالتسبب في هذا الانهيار، محاولين نقل هذا التوتر المفترض من المؤسسات السياسية والإعلامية الى الشارع، عبر افتعال أحداث أمنية على غرار كمين قبرشمون.

وذلك في محاولة لاستدراج حزب الله واتهامه باحتلال لبنان.

فهل يريد الأميركيون توتراً احترابياً ينشر الفوضى الأمنية الى جانب الانهيار الاقتصادي؟

هناك ميل أميركي الى إلحاق لبنان بأزمة الخليج على شكل «أمن ملاحة خاص به» فتلعب العقوبات الاقتصادية دور مفجّر العلاقات بين الطوائف، وإضعاف الدولة سياسياً وبالتالي تحييد مؤسساتها العسكرية والأمنية بما يؤدي إلى إضعاف الدولة لفشلها السياسي والعسكري والاقتصادي.

إن هذا السيناريو المفترض يدفع نحو ولادة مناطق «الأمر الواقع» وعمليات الاغتيال والتصعيد الطائفي، وهذا يتطلب وقتاً يريده الأميركي مواكباً للتوتر في الخليج ومتزامناً معه، وقد يفضّلون استمراره الى ما بعد مرحلة الانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية في 2020.

وهذا يؤكد أن الأشهر الباقية من السنة الحالية هي مرحلة التوتير الأميركية في الشرق الأوسط وفنزويلا وبعض أنحاء آسيا وأفريقيا، تمهيداً للعودة الى سياسات الحروب بعد ستة اشهر تقريباً.

وبما أن الأميركيين يعرفون استحالة بناء قوى داخلية في لبنان تستطيع هزيمة حزب الله عسكرياً وسياسياً فلا يريدون من أعوانهم الداخليين إلا توفير الاحتراب السياسي الداخلي والانقسامات الاجتماعية العميقة، أي المناخات التي يحتاجها عدوان اسرائيلي على لبنان لن يتفاجأ أحد إذا كانت تغطيته من قوى 14 آذار اللبنانية وحلفاء «إسرائيل» في الخليج وحلف الناتو وقسم من دول أوروبا والبلدان المتسربلة بالتغطية الأميركية في أميركا الجنوبية وأفريقيا وجنوب شرق آسيا.

هذه هي الخطة الأميركية التي تبدأ بعنوان دعم جنبلاط وبيان سفارتها المؤيد له ولا تنتهي إلا بمحاولة ضرب حزب الله بخطة محبكة. فهي اذاً مشروع للعبث بالتوازنات السياسية الداخلية الناتجة من انتخابات ديموقراطية وحروب منعت «إسرائيل» من احتلال لبنان وانتصرت على الإرهاب في سورية ولبنان.

فهل هذا التخطيط قدرٌ لا يمكن مجابهته؟

يستطيع الأميركيون أن ينفذوا الجانب المتعلق بالعقوبات الاقتصادية التي لن ينجو منها أصدقاؤهم الممسكون بالتفاعلات الاقتصادية اللبنانية ومجمل اللبنانيين.

ولأن الأميركيين يعرفون أن عقوباتهم تطال كامل تنوّعات اللبنانيين الطبقية والطائفية مدركين أنها لن تطال حزب الله لذلك فهي تستهدف الشعب اللبناني بكامله ومن دون استثناء محاولين بذلك تشكيل استياء عام مناهض له، ومؤيد للاجتياح الإسرائيلي الأميركي المغطى خليجياً بالتمويل والدعاء لجهة النتائج المرتقبة لمشروع «الكاوبوي الأميركي» فتبدأ بتدحرجه القويّ نحو خسارة حربه على إيران وصعود قوة الدولة السورية، الى جانب احترافية حزب الله القادر بجهادية عالية الكعب على ردع أي مغامرة إسرائيلية في مهدها. هذه عوامل من شأنها التسبب برحيل مبكر لوليد جنبلاط الى نيويورك حسب رغبته ومعه مجموعة المهزومين في 14 آذار يقودهم الريفي وسعيد الى سوء المصير لأداء أدوار في نيويورك الى جانب رفيق الدرب أبي تيمور.

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!

America Dumps INF Treaty. Time for Russian Missiles in Latin America?



Image result for America Dumps INF Treaty. Time for Russian Missiles in Latin America?
Robert Bridge
August 9, 2019
Washington’s withdrawal from the INF Treaty is just the latest move against Russia that will serve to intensify an arms race on the European continent that is already underway. It may also force Russia to take things to the next level.
Aside from the unprecedented stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction on an epic scale, a whirlwind of regional developments are now underway that foreshadow extremely unsettling consequences. First and foremost is this month’s formal announcement by the Trump administration that it would be pulling out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty), signed into force by Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan back in 1987.
With the INF consigned to the dustbin of history, the US and Russia are free to design and produce ballistic and cruise missiles within a 500-5,500 kilometer range (310-3,420 miles). Would any NATO country be so foolish as to host these American-made weapons on their territory, thereby opening itself up to a devastating first-strike attack in some worst-case scenario? Poland is one possible candidate. After all, Polish President Andrzej Duda last year offered the United States $2 billion in financing for the construction of a permanent American base on Poland’s eastern border. While the two NATO countries are still considering the idea, it is clear that the eradication of the INF Treaty promises to ratchet up tensions between Russia and its neighbors.
Washington’s pullout from the INF did not occur in a vacuum, of course. It followed in the tank tracks of George W. Bush’s disastrous decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty, one of many opportunistic moves committed by the United States in the aftermath of 9/11. With the ABM out of the way, the United States was able to establish a missile defense shield in Romania, just miles from the Russian border. Washington’s overtures to Moscow that it would welcome Russian participation in the project were eventually revealed as a deceitful stalling tactic. Russian President Vladimir Putin was not fooled, however, and wasted no time researching and developing of a lethal array of new weapon systems, including a nuclear-powered cruise missile with unlimited range.
156 человек(а) говорят об этом
At this point in the updated ‘Great Game’ there is a temptation to say that the US and Russia have entered yet another ‘MAD’ moment, that is, ‘mutually assured destruction’ should one side or the other attempt fate with a first-strike attack. Check mate, as it were. After all, Russia has got its “unstoppable” nuclear-powered cruise missile and other fearsome hardware, while the US has its missile defense shield, as well as numerous NATO set pieces, bolted down in Europe. Everything is wonderful in the neighborhood, right? Well, not exactly.
Comparing the present standoff between the US and Russia to the Cold War realities is erroneous and dangerous for a number of reasons. First, the opportunity for some sort of mishap resulting in all-out war has never been greater. The reason is not simply due to the dizzying amount of firepower involved, but rather due to the proximity of the firepower to the Russian border.  During the Cold War standoff, Moscow, the nerve center of the Soviet empire, was well guarded by the buffer of Warsaw Pact republics. Today, that buffer has practically vanished, and NATO is not only encamped deep inside of Eastern Europe, but – in the case of the Baltic States of Estonia and Latvia – smack up against the Russian border. Although the entire concept of time, distance and space has been made somewhat redundant by the exceptional speed of modern missiles and aircraft, this has not reduced the possibility of NATO and Russia accidentally stumbling into a very bad situation.
Now with the INF Treaty out of the way there is the possibility that Washington will place intermediate-range missiles in Russia’s backyard. Such a move would flush with Washington’s revised nuclear doctrine, which not only aims for increasing its nuclear arsenal, but – in pure Dr. Strangelove fashion – lowering the threshold for which nuclear weapons may be used. To think that Russia will watch passively on the sidelines as the US disrupts the regional strategic balance in its favor would be wishful thinking.
Even as the corpse of the INF treaty was still warm, Mark T. Esper, the new US secretary of defense said he favored the deployment of new American ground-based missiles to Asia, without specifying a precise location.
“It’s fair to say, though, that we would like to deploy a capability sooner rather than later,” Esper said while en route to Australia for foreign policy meetings. “I would prefer months. I just don’t have the latest state of play on timelines.”
Meanwhile, the Pentagon is reportedly moving ahead with the development of missile systems, including a cruise missile with an expected 1,000 km range and an intermediate-range ballistic missile with a 3,000 to 4,000 km range. With the ‘shield’ of a US missile defense system already established in Eastern Europe, Russia will not sit by idly and wait for NATO’s other hand to pick up a sword.
What options are open to Russia at this point? Aside from its Russia-based defenses already mentioned, Moscow will feel very compelled to move its strike abilities closer to the United States in order to match NATO’s newfound capacity just over the Russian border.
Putin has emphasized that Russia will not deploy ballistic missiles unless the US does so first. If he were required to respond, would Russia consider a permanent missile base somewhere in Latin America, just miles from US shores, mirroring the same situation that Russia faces in Eastern Europe? Imagine a situation where ‘Trump’s Mexican Wall’ became in reality a host of Russian launch pads. Although ti would solve America’s migrant problem, it probably won’t do much to help Americans sleep better at night. Impossible to imagine, of course, yet that is the exact dire scenario Russia faces on its own border with the Baltic States.
A more likely scenario, however, is that Putin, in the event Trump ‘goes nuclear’ in Eastern Europe, will deploy round-the-clock stealth submarines armed with ballistic missiles near the American shoreline as an insurance policy. It is a dreadful new reality to consider, yet as the United States continues with its reckless treaty-trashing posture it is a reality the world will be forced to live with.

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!

New Heroic Op in WB: “Israeli” Soldier Stabbed to Death



In a new heroic operation and as part of the successive “Israeli” failures to end the Palestinian resistance, a Palestinian man was able to stab an “Israeli” army soldier to death in the West bank.
The “Israeli” army along with the Police and Shit Bet failed till now to capture the Palestinian men despite the massive manhunt.
Hebrew local media reported that there have been no arrests as of yet.
“This morning we have learned of a terrible stabbing attack,” “Israeli” PM Benjamin Netanyahu said.

‘Israel’ Concerned about More Palestinian Attacks on Settlers Planned in Gaza

As the Zionist authorities announced that a soldier was stabbed and killed in Gush Etzionin the occupied West Bank, the various media outlets in ‘Israel’ reflected the large scale case of fear and worry about the possible recurrence of the incident.
The Israeli analysts considered that the operation alarms more attacks planned in Gaza Strip, adding that all the security measures cannot prevent such incidents when they target individuals.
The Zionist media outlets recalled the abduction of  three settlers in the same area, warning against similar kidnapping incidents in the near future.
In a sign of the Israeli tension, the occupation troops got alerted at Jalemeh crossing in the West Bank when an armed Palestinian managed to cross into the territories occupied in 1948.
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!