Connexion
aimed directly at at China. The US and the collective West are not going to for one moment accept equality and multipolarity with the ultimate guide of the UN Charter as legal guidance. They will fight until they get annihilated or until they annihilate. This is not a task that anyone wants to take on, or something anyone wants to do with any amount of relish. Then again nobody wants to kill the whole of Gaza and yet it is happening in front of our eyes.
China never called America the “greatest enemy” or the “biggest threat.” China didn’t build military bases around the US. So, Americans start the trade war, Americans start the tech war, Americans start the propaganda war… but eventually China is the evil one! The atrocity and other propaganda is in full swing.
Those of us who watch China are identifying the process of setting up proxies and the preparations for either a hot war with China or using proxies to create a situation that can’t easily be managed – the old chaos routine. We see that in the Ukraine today. The more the war cannot come to an end, the more chaos there is. It does not matter that Russia won the Ukraine war and the US ran out of Afghanistan and we know the very poor history of the US and the collective West not having won a peer war in their natural lives. I always get a little hot under the collar if that is used as a method to disrespect the US. It is what they want people! They are successful in their objectives. Who says they are interested in winning peer wars? It is too difficult and too expensive and people must actually die. They are only interested in war by recruiting proxies and having the proxies die for them. This takes shapes from color revolutions to the currently increasing meddling in Latin America and what we are talking about here, the increasing assault on China. Why proxies? They don’t want anyone to know what they are doing. They cloak their nefarious activities in a bright light show of being the ‘do-gooder’. “What about our freedom and democracy? We are simply working for it.” This preparation of the potential of the China theater is in full swing now. You may tell me these are empire fever dreams. It does not negate the fact that it is in preparation and just that alone must be evidence that there are plans on the drawing board. What is also evidence, is China’s growth of its military potential. If one does not feel under threat, one doesn’t build out your armed forces massively.
Yes, we know that it is said that it is a war against Belt and Road or kickback against BRICS and all of this may be true. These are simply manifestations that we can get our thinking and our arms around the various empire activities and break them down into bite-sized pieces, empire having a liability against joining or building a peaceful world and active everywhere. Their lands, their country, and their people are built to make war via proxy, and their systems are designed to hide this. This is the massive secret that broke loose and gained prominence in our world in the last number of months and a few years. More and more I see that they are going to require a kick up the yahoo right back to their borders for the rest of the world to have an opportunity to build out that ‘shared future for mankind’.
It is not such a bad vision, no? The Head of the SVR Sergey Naryshkin considers 2024 as “the year of geopolitical awakening.”
China still speaks softly and with respect. But militarily, they are growing at the fastest rate since World War II. http://eng.mod.gov.cn/xb/News_213114/NewsRelease/16275286.html
Proxies that are being prepared right now: Berletic and Guiliani talk about the US using Myanmar and the Philippines to encircle and contain China’s and Asia’s Rise. To those two countries, we have to add South Korea. (Nation-size human shields, Berletic aptly calls these countries.)
So, the US is going up the escalation ladder with each of its proxies.
US is destabilizing Myanmar and backing militants physically attacking the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure while using its political capture of the Philippines to transform the nation into a Ukraine-style battering ram against China;
Along with a large and growing US military presence in Asia and other forms of political interference in the region, the US seeks to create a united front against China or destabilize the region to deny China’s and Asia’s continued rise;
Current US foreign policy regarding the containment of China is a continuation of a decades-long policy articulated in US memos, cables, and documents stretching back to the end of WW2;
The US is not building up its “partners” in Asia-Pacific, but rather preparing them to suffer a similar fate to that of Ukraine in Eastern Europe;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlHa0xwlq1c
Despite empty diplomatic rhetoric, everything (including the recent “defense” budget) the US is doing indicates it continues down the path of military aggression against China in Asia-Pacific within and along China’s borders, especially in regards to China’s island province of Taiwan
S 2024 Defense Bill: Major Highlights
Total Budget: An eye-opening $886 billion approved by Congress for 2024! Awaiting President Biden’s signature.
Key Points to Note:
Pacific Strategy: A substantial $14.7 billion dedicated to the ‘Pacific Deterrence Initiative’ against China.
Supporting Allies: Enhanced training for Taiwan and a significant $300 million annual aid to Ukraine until 2026, with added oversight.
Under Wraps: $11.5 billion earmarked for mysterious “defense-related activities.”
Nuclear Capabilities: Navy’s Sea-Launched Cruise missile nuclear program receives funding.
Arming Up: Expanded munitions procurement and arms supply to include Israel and Taiwan.
—
Russian President Putin also said a few days ago that “we see attempts by the West to shift NATO activities to Asia and towards Asia, which clearly go beyond the charter goals of this organization.”
Mao Ning from the Chinese Foreign Office commented as follows: “NATO’s attempt to make eastward inroads into the Asia-Pacific is not consistent with its mandate as a regional defensive organization and will only bring bloc confrontation into Asia and sabotage regional peace and stability. The China-Russia relationship rises above the model of military and political alliance in the Cold War era and is fundamentally different from the exclusive groupings and bloc confrontation practiced by NATO.”
So, here we see that Russia and China are fully aware of what is happening here. Besides being aware, what can they do?
Triggers
– The US officially recognizes China’s sovereignty over Taiwan through its “One China” policy, yet unofficially undermines it at every juncture; – Upcoming elections in Taiwan are subject to US political interference, which is extensive and undermines claims of Taiwan’s “political independence;” – Taiwan’s economy depends heavily on the rest of China for continued prosperity and future opportunities the US is incapable of providing alternatives to; – China is exercising patience to prevent conflict and the destruction of Taiwan which is an admitted objective of US foreign policy;
The US is provoking China over the island province of Taiwan by placing troops on the island, arming the administration in Taipei, and increasingly encouraging separatism;
The US officially recognizes China’s sovereignty over Taiwan through its “One China” policy, yet unofficially undermines its at every juncture;
Upcoming elections in Taiwan are subject to US political interference, which is extensive and undermines claims of Taiwan’s “political independence;”
Taiwan’s economy depends heavily on the rest of China for continued prosperity and future opportunities the US is incapable of providing alternatives to;
China is exercising patience to prevent conflict and the destruction of Taiwan which is an admitted objective of US foreign policy;
A Very important thread was published by Graham Allison – the legendary Harvard professor who coined the “Thucydides trap” which was not really applicable – where he lambasts “the current demonization of China”. He says he is “convinced that the current demonization of China confuses more than it clarifies” because the result is that “Americans [do not] understand our competitor as it is”. He gives as an illustration of this demonization effort the recent utterly ridiculous – and anonymous! – Politico piece (https://politico.eu/article/chinas-paranoid-purge-xi-jinping-li-keqiang-qin-gang-li-shangfu/) that claims that “China’s Xi goes full Stalin with purge”, which is filled with demonstrable falsehoods and fear-mongering fabulations (some of which Allison lists in his thread). There is an absolute IMMENSE gap between China depicted in the media and the reality, so much so that most people outside China have almost zero understanding of the country. The China they have in their mind is a mirage that bears almost no resemblance to reality. Why? Why do we systematically see coverage like this Politico piece on China? Some comments from various commentaries on Allison’s thread: “Why here on Twitter are accounts like
that systematically peddle fake news on China so popular? Or Serpentza and Laowhy86 on Youtube? I think a lot of it has to do with human nature, we kind of need a “bad place” to feel reassured we live in the “good place”. So we’re naturally attracted to stories that confirm this. And given the fact that China is so unknown to people to begin with, they have no intellectual baggage that enables them to understand they’re fed nonsense. And if you add racism bias on top of it – the infamous “yellow peril” – it makes it even easier for people to believe the wildest stuff.
This all is to my mind looking for excuses and painting lipstick on pigs.
This is the important part for the US and has to do with foundational values. Also, it has to be said, that there’s a whole industry out there of people paid to write negative stuff on China. You have your anti-communist organizations (like the “Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation”), your think tanks funded by the US State Department and the weapons industry (like ASPI), your various separatist and dissident movements funded by Washington to try to destabilize China, your “human rights” organizations that have been so weaponized they actually harm human rights, and so on and so forth. And all their content – each for their own purpose – participates in this great demonization effort. But I think it’s also much deeper than this. For literally thousands of years proselytism – the notion that we have such superior values and beliefs that we need to convert others to them – has been foundational to our culture. We’re programmed to absolutely loath difference, so much so that we need to erase it. We’re led to believe we “celebrate difference” but we only celebrate the very artificial differences within our societies, differences between people who essentially buy into common beliefs and values. As soon as we encounter actual meaningful difference – which in the case of China is extremely profound – we find it absolutely intolerable. Which by the way is quite unique to our culture: to my knowledge, no culture in Asia thinks this way for instance. In fact the very notion that a foreigner could be converted to become Chinese, Japanese, or Vietnamese is not even comprehensible in these countries. To them foreigners aren’t inferior or superior, but they’re different, and that’s ok... there’s no need to go around the world to try and convert them to adopt “socialism with Chinese characteristics” or start celebrating the Moon festival. To us it’s very much not ok: if someone doesn’t buy into whatever our set of beliefs and values is at a given time (it used to be Christianism, now it’s liberalism) they ARE inferior, deemed “oppressed” and in need of “liberation”… All this didn’t harm us much when we were superior technologically and economically because we could afford to not understand others. In fact it was even helpful: it provided an ideological basis for our subjugation of the rest of the world. We didn’t do it to exploit them for our selfish interests or to appropriate their resources but to “liberate” them… But today, as Allison rightly points out, this kind of thinking actively harms the West. We cannot anymore subjugate countries like China, they’ve become our peers in all respects: technologically, economically, militarily, etc. So to coexist and compete it is now vital that we “understand them as they are” to take Allison’s formulation. Because they certainly do: hundreds of thousands of Chinese students have gone to study in the West every year for decades whereas the US estimates there are currently only 211 American students in China (https://scmp.com/news/china/article/3241168/number-americans-studying-mainland-china-falls-sharply-chinese-students-still-flock-us), which is insane! This places China at an immense competitive advantage: they understand the West intimately whereas we don’t understand China, at all. Very concretely it means that whenever we make a decision that relates to China, our decision is likely to be completely inappropriate because informed by a miraged notion of China and made by people who just don’t get the country. Examples abound: the recent semiconductors sanctions is a good one. Made for the purpose of stifling China’s technological development it has resulted in giving it an unprecedented boost.
This transition to humbleness, accepting others and their difference, stop vilifying and demonizing them but instead seeking to understand them will be exceedingly hard. Frankly, I think that it’s all so deeply rooted that we’re incapable of it. But it is nonetheless absolutely vital because if we persevere we will isolate and eventually destroy ourselves.”
This is the kind of soul-searching that the American people will have to do before being allowed back into the real world assuming we get to kick them out pretty soon! and we have to.
The following is what China and Russia are doing together. The ‘brilliant idea’ to continue with the dreams of fighting China, or one or another way, getting control over China will either way cause our world to explode even more spectacularly than what it is doing now, and the rest of the consequences are such that one does not want to spell those out because we get an immediate brain freeze! and cogitively can’t deal with those. But, at this stage, bring it on if this is what it will take to remove the empire. I can say so, because, for all intents and purposes, I am outside of any fray that will ensue. If I was living on the US East Coast, I would be worried.
China agrees with Putin that “NATO is creeping into Asia.”
“The Ministry of National Defense of the People’s Republic of China published a video of a joint patrol of the waters of the Sea of Japan and the East China Sea by strategic missile-carrying bombers Tu-95MS of the Russian Aerospace Forces and long-range bombers Xian H-6K of the PLA Air Force. Fighter air cover was provided along the entire route of joint patrol by Su-35S aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces and J-16 of the PLA Air Force.”
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
NATO’s eastward march into the Asia-Pacific region contradicts the alliance’s positioning as a regional defense military organization.
These actions will only lead to confrontation between camps in Asia and undermine regional peace and stability.
China-Russia relations are based on the principles of non-alignment, non-confrontation, and non-targeting of third parties. The relationship goes beyond the model of a military-political alliance from the “Cold War” era, differing fundamentally from NATO’s “small circle” and bloc confrontation.
https://t.me/EurasianChoice/32575
Philippine actions in South China Sea ‘extremely dangerous’ – Chinese state media
Chinese state media accused the Philippines on Monday of repeatedly infringing on China’s territory in the South China Sea, spreading false information and colluding with extraterritorial forces to cause trouble.
The Philippines has relied on US support to continually provoke China, with such “extremely dangerous” behavior seriously harming regional peace and stability, the People’s Daily wrote in a commentary on Monday.
Washington has frequently used its defense treaty with Manila to “threaten” China, blatantly supporting Philippine violation of Chinese sovereignty and “peddling security anxieties”, the People’s Daily said.
China never called America the “greatest enemy” or the “biggest threat.” China didn’t build military bases around the US. So, Americans start the trade war, Americans start the tech war, Americans start the propaganda war, Americans start feeding the proxies … but eventually China is the evil one! USA, the insane.
I guess .. this is what we get https://twitter.com/i/status/1737823628253647115
Office of the Special Envoy for Iran (US style good wishes to Iran)
On this Yalda night, we want the people of Iran to know that the United States will continue to support your aspirations for a free and democratic future. We are confident that Iran will overcome this period of darkness, and that brighter days are ahead. My statement:
Office of the Special Envoy for Iran
After that, all we can say is you are a dead dumbidiot that has no understanding of where in the world you are and who you are talking to! (I’m for a moment channeling one of our friends!)
While the dogs of war bark, lie and steal, the Russia-China caravan strolls on.
By Pepe Escobar and first posted at Strategic Culture.
2023 may be defined for posterity as The Year of the Russia-China Strategic Partnership. This wonder of wonders could easily sway under a groove by – who else – Stevie Wonder: “Here I am baby/ signed, sealed, delivered, I’m yours.”
In the first 11 months of 2023, trade between Russia and China exceeded $200 billion; they did not expect to achieve that until 2024.
Now surely that’s One Partnership Under a Groove. Once again signed, sealed and delivered during the visit of a large delegation to Beijing last week, led by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, who met with Chinese President Xi Jinping and revisited and upgraded the whole spectrum of the comprehensive partnership/strategic cooperation, complete with an array of new, major joint projects.
Simultaneously, on the Great Game 2.0 front, everything that need to be reaffirmed was touched by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s detailed interview to Dimitri Simes on his Great Game show.
Add to it the carefully structured breakdown written by head of the SVR Sergey Naryshkin, defining 2024 as “the year of geopolitical awakening”, and coming up with arguably the key formulation following the upcoming, cosmic NATO humiliation in the steppes of Donbass: “In 2024, the Arab world will remain the main space in the struggle for the establishment of a new order.”
Confronted with such detailed geopolitical fine-tuning, it’s no wonder the imperial reaction was apoplexy – revealed epidermically in long, tortuous “analyses” trying to explain why President Putin turned out to be the “geopolitical victor” of 2023, seducing vast swathes of the Arab world and the Global South, solidifying BRICS side by side with China, and propelling the EU further into a black void of its own – and the Hegemon’s – making.
Putin even allowed himself, half in jest, to offer Russian support for the potential “re-annexation” of country 404 border regions once annexed by Stalin, eventually to be returned to former owners Poland, Hungary & Romania. He added that he is 100% certain this is what residents of those still Ukrainian borders want.
Were that to happen, we would have Transcarpathia back to Hungary; Galicia and Volyn back to Poland; and Bukovina back to Romania. Can you feel the house already rocking to the break of dawn in Budapest, Warsaw and Bucharest?
Then there’s the possibility of the Hegemon ordering NATO’s junior punks to harass Russian oil tankers in the Baltic Sea and “isolate” St. Petersburg. It goes without saying that the Russian response would be to just take out Command & Control centers (hacking might be enough); burn electronics across the spectrum; and blockade the Baltic at the entrance by running a “Freedom of Navigation” exercise so everyone becomes familiar with the new groove.
That China-Russian Far East symbiosis
One of the most impressive features of the expanded Russia-China partnership is what is being planned for the Chinese northeastern province of Heilongjiang.
The idea is to turn it into an economic, scientific development and national defense mega-hub, centered on the provincial capital Harbin, complete with a new, sprawling Special Economic Zone (SEZ).
The key vector is that this mega-hub would also coordinate the development of the immense Russian Far East. This was discussed in detail at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok last September.
In a unique, startling arrangement, the Chinese may be allowed to manage selected latitudes of the Russian Far East for the next 100 years.
As Hong Kong-based analyst Thomas Polin detailed, Beijing is budgeting no less than 10 trillion yuan ($1.4 trillion) for the whole thing. Half of it would be absorbed by Harbin. The blueprint will reach the National People’s Congress next March, and is expected to be approved. It has already been approved by the lower house of the Duma in Moscow.
The ramifications are mind-boggling. We would have Harbin elevated to the status of direct-administered city, just like Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Chongqing. And most of all a Sino-Russian Management Committee will be established in Harbin to oversee the whole project.
Top flight Chinese universities – including Peking University – would transfer their main campuses to Harbin. The universities of National Defense and National Defense Technology would merge with Harbin Engineering University to form a new entity focused on defense industries. High-tech research institutes and companies in Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen would also move to Harbin.
The People’s Bank of China would establish its HQ for northern China in Harbin, complete with markets trading stocks and commodities futures.
Residents of Heilongjiang would be allowed to travel back and forth to designated Russian Far East regions without a visa. The new Heilongjiang SEZ would have its own customs area and no import taxes.
That’s the same spirit driving BRI connectivity corridors and the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC). The underlying rationale is wider Eurasia integration.
At the recent Astana Club meeting in Kazakhstan, researcher Damjan Krnjevic-Miskovic, Director of Policy Research at the ADA University in Baku, gave an excellent presentation on connectivity corridors.
He referred for instance to the C5+1 (five Central Asian “stans” plus China) meeting three months ago in Dushanbe joined by Azerbaijan’s president Aliyev: that translates as Central Asia-Caucasus integration.
Miskovic is paying due attention to everything that is evolving in what he defines, correctly, as “the Silk Road region” – interlinking the Euro-Atlantic with Asia-Pacific and interconnecting West Asia, South Asia and wider Eurasia.
Strategically, of course, that’s the “geopolitical hinge where NATO meets the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and where the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) connects with Turkiye and the territory of the EU.” In practical terms, Russia-China know exactly what needs to be done to propel economic connectivity and “synergistic relationships” all across this vast spectrum.
The War of Economic Corridors heats up
The fragmentation of the global economy is already polarizing the expanding BRICS 10 (starting on January 1st, under the Russian presidency, and without flirting-with-dollarization Argentina) and the shrinking G7.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko – a key Asia hand -, talking to TASS, once again reaffirmed that the key drive for the Greater Eurasia Partnership (official Russian policy) is to connect the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) with BRI.
As Russia develops a carefully calibrated balance between China and India, the same drive applies to developing the INSTC, where Russia-Iran-India are the main partners, and Azerbaijan is also bound to become a crucial player.
Add to it vastly improved Russian ties with North Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan (a BRI and SCO member) and ASEAN (except Westernized Singapore).
BRI, when it comes down to the nitty-gritty, is on a roll. I’ve just been to Moscow, Astana and Almaty for three weeks, and it was possible to confirm with several sources that trains in all connectivity corridors are packed to the hilt; via the Trans-Siberian; via Astana all the way to Minsk; and via Almaty to Uzbekistan.
Russian International Affairs Council Program Manager Yulia Melnikova adds that “Moscow can and should integrate more actively into transit operations along the China – Mongolia – Russia route” and accelerate the harmonization of standards between the EAEU and China. Not to mention invest further in Russia-China cooperation in the Arctic.
Enter President Putin, at a Russian Railways meeting, unveiling an ambitious, massive 10-year infrastructure expansion plan encompassing new railways and improved connectivity with Asia – from the Pacific to the Arctic.
The Russian economy has definitely pivoted to Asia, responsible for 70% of trade turnover amid the Western sanctions dementia.
So what’s on the menu ahead is everything from modernization of the Trans-Siberian and establishing a major logistical hub in the Urals and Siberia to improving port infrastructure in the Azov, Black, and Caspian Seas and faster INSTC cargo transit between Murmansk and Mumbai.
Putin, once again, almost as an afterthought, recently remarked that trade through the Suez Canal cannot be considered effective anymore, compared to Russia’s Northern Sea Route. With a single, sharp geopolitical move, Yemen’s Ansarullah has made it graphic – for everyone to see.
Russian development of the Northern Sea Route happens to run in total synergy with the Chinese drive to develop the Arctic leg of BRI. On the oil front, Russian shipments to China via its Arctic coast takes only 35 days: 10 days less than via Suez.
Danila Krylov, researcher with the Department of the Middle East and Post-Soviet Asia at the Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, offers a straightforward insight:
“I view the fact that the Americans are getting involved in Yemen as part of a great game [scenario]; there is more to it than just a desire to punish the Houthis or Iran, as it is more likely driven by a desire to prevent the monopolization of the market and hinder Chinese export deliveries to Europe. The Americans need an operational Suez Canal and a corridor between India and Europe, while the Chinese don’t want it because these are two direct competitors.”
It’s not that the Chinese don’t want it: with the Northern Sea Route up and running, they don’t need it.
Now freeze!
In sum: in the ongoing, ever more fractious War of Economic Corridors, the initiative is with Russia-China.
In desperation, and no more than an option-deprived, headless chicken victim in the War of Economic Corridors, the Hegemon’s EU vassals are resorting to twisting the Follow the Money playbook.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has defined the freezing of Russian assets – not only private, but also state-owned – by the EU as pure theft. Now Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov is making it very clear that Moscow will react symmetrically to the possible use of income from these frozen Russian assets.
Paraphrasing Lavrov: you confiscate, we confiscate. We all confiscate.
The repercussions will be cataclysmic – for the Hegemon. No Global South nation, outside of NATOstan, will be “encouraged” to park its foreign currency/reserves in the West. That may lead, in a flash, to the whole Global South ditching the U.S.-led international financial system and joining a Russia-China-led alternative.
The peer-competitor Russia-China strategic partnership is already directly challenging the “rules-based international order” on all fronts – improving their historical spheres of influence while actively developing vast, interconnected connectivity corridors bypassing said “order”. That precludes, as much as possible, direct Hot War with the Hegemon.
Or to put it on Silk Road terms: while the dogs of war bark, lie and steal, the Russia-China caravan strolls on.
Please note the BRICS explanation which I’ve bolded – Amaryth
—
https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1922749/
Question: Here is a philosophical question: Yesterday, you spoke about justice, a just solution to the crisis, a just multipolar world order, etc. Now the Global South is closely watching us. What kind of justice can we offer them? How do we make it clear to them?
Sergey Lavrov: I think that any normal person, including politicians, immediately understands what injustice is when they see it. It is clear to them when issues are resolved fairly, based on a balance of interests and the key principle of the UN Charter, which emphasises the need to respect the sovereign equality of all states, big and small. Unfortunately, since the creation of the United Nations, the West, especially the United States, has failed to comply with this key principle of sovereign equality.
The Arab world is not just watching us closely; they are also closely cooperating with us. The atmosphere in Marrakesh during the meeting of the Russian-Arab Cooperation Forum, as well as my talks with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Migration and Tunisians Abroad Nabil Ammar and the meeting with the President of the Republic of Tunisia Kais Saied, demonstrated that this is not mere observation. There is a strong desire for active cooperation, both bilateral, in terms of developing the economy and mutual investments, and in the international arena. We aim to coordinate not just on specific issues, but on fundamental matters concerning the future world order.
In this context, justice means equal rights for all states and entities established in different regions. This includes the Arab League, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the African Union, CELAC, as well as numerous subregional institutions in Africa and Latin America. In Eurasia, we have the EAEU, the SCO and ASEAN. These organisations have established close contacts, including through the Belt and Road project.
Integration processes are a natural part of life. Unlike certain plans proposed by Western countries, we do not intend to construct artificial schemes. Instead, we seek to allow these objective tendencies to interact with each other, as there are many overlapping areas where integration naturally develops. Through fair division of labour and mutual benefit for all participants, we will gradually move towards a multipolar world.
Question: Why didn’t you mention BRICS?
Sergey Lavrov: I didn’t mention BRICS because it is self-evident. I listed the organisations that are emerging at the regional level. BRICS is not an organisation but an association. I don’t think there is any interest in turning it into a formal organisation with a secretariat, at least not at this stage and for the foreseeable future. BRICS is a symbol. It represents the shared desire of a majority of countries in the world to develop their initiatives together, taking into account each other’s interests on an equal basis. It serves as a future umbrella for all subregional and regional processes. Some countries in Eurasia, Africa, Latin America and the Arab world are already part of this association. This is the future.
In the West, there are no organisations that have fair rules in terms of equality and genuine consensus. Not the kind we saw in the European Union, when Hungarian Prime Minister Orban was asked to leave the room and go have a coffee when they made some decisions concerning Ukraine. NATO enforces discipline through force. Perhaps one day, the West will realise that these trends are unstoppable and that the desire for real justice is the driving force behind the growing self-awareness of the World Majority, which includes the Global South and the Global East. We are part of this process.
Statistics on the data released by the Gaza government:
From PressTV
From corpses lying unattended on the streets to hospitals and schools reduced to rubble to children made orphans and tens of thousands of people rendered homeless, the gory events unfolding in the besieged Gaza Strip since October 7 are a textbook example of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
The death toll in the coastal territory since the Israeli regime launched its indiscriminate aerial and ground attacks exactly 80 days ago is now close to 21,000, most of them children and women.
Almost all hospitals and medical centers in the Gaza Strip have become defunct due to infrastructure damages as well as the lack of electricity and fuel to keep the essential services running.
Schools and universities have also been bombed. Bakeries remain shut. Almost all refugee camps have been rendered uninhabitable due to random strikes, forcing the majority of the population to sleep under the open sky amid heavy winds and heavy downpours.
Writer:
Frans Vandenbosch is a Fleming who lived in China for years. Previously, he has crossed all of China and visited more than 50 large and small towns and cities throughout the country.
It’s over and done
In a few days, the historical year 2023 will be over. This past year, significant changes have taken place, shining some light on what we have to expect in the coming time.
The USA has lost its first place
This year the US suffered a major blow. The US’s global reputation as the most powerful and leading nation was undermined. The image of the US has been completely destroyed in the past year.
The de-industrialisation of the USA and western Europe is almost complete. It will make it nearly impossible for the US to continue the war with Russia in Ukraine or to start a full-scale hot war with China. The trade war with China, the sanctions and restrictions on technology trade with China should have made it very clear that China no longer needs anything from the West.
The latest RAND report (with a simulation of a hot war between the US and China) was showing a devastating outcome for the USA. For the US, it is getting increasingly difficult to mobilise its “allies” (actually vassals, colonies, servant countries). For their “Operation Prosperity Guardian” in the Red Sea, they were unable to convince any NATO “partner” to participate. The US appears to be increasingly isolated internationally, as recent votes in the UN have shown.
The US weaponry is proving to be technologically outdated. Russian and Chinese weapon systems are faster, more accurate and flexible.
The global de-dollarization has just started. Latest in 2025 almost all countries will have dropped the dollar as a universal trade currency.
The USA preparing for a war with China
The war cries today are so deafening that they threaten to awaken from the dead all of the victims of previous wars, including the First and Second World Wars. American tax money is poured into military spending of all kinds, while civilian economies collapse, infrastructure decays, and schools and hospitals are closed or fall apart. In the United States, the Pentagon’s defence budget for 2024 amounts to nearly one trillion dollars, while the entire EU budget and all national budgets in Europe are slated for militarization. German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius is demanding that society become “war-ready” and has asserted that we only have five to eight years before a major military confrontation with Russia. American think-tanks are working feverishly on “war games” for a major war with China, which should, in their view, take place sooner rather than later. See the article by the Council of Foreign Relations magazine, Foreign Affairs, “The Big One: Preparing for a Long War With China.” The US spends four times more in real terms and sixteen times more per capita on defence than China.
How did we end up on this trajectory, which can only take us to a Third World War, a global nuclear war between the U.S.A. (probably joined by some NATO countries) on the one side, and Russia and China on the other, and thus nuclear Armageddon? [1]
It is unfortunate that the USA is refusing to accept its defeat with more dignity. They keep behaving internationally as a gang of school bullies. That attitude will not win them any supporters in the rest of the world.
China, on the other hand,
China, on the other hand, is gaining ground in all the above-mentioned fields. In 2021, China was leading the world in 4 scientific fields. Only two years later, in April 2023 a new study was showing that China was leading in 37 of 44 technologies.[2] At the time when China was still weak, poor and underdeveloped, the USA could not defeat it in Korea, nor in Vietnam.
There really is no way to stop or contain China. No sanctions, no slander, no cold or hot war will prevent China’s further development.
Admittedly, China is nowhere to be found in a number of areas such as global propaganda, media control and public opinion influencing. It is remarkable how absent China is in these fields.
Since Confucius, 2500 years ago, Chinese culture or politics has never had any desire to influence politics or culture in other countries.
2024 will be the year of the Dragon
In Chinese legend, the Dragon Kings were believed to be the rulers of weather and water, such as rainfall, waterfalls, rivers, and seas. Four Dragon Kings each controlled a sea of China: ‘East Sea’ (the East China Sea), ‘South Sea’ (the South China Sea), ‘West Sea’ (Qinghai Lake and lakes beyond), and ‘North Sea’ (Lake Baikal). The four Dragon Kings were believed to be the dispensers of rain and wind.
Consequently, 2024 will be a decisive year.
We have passed the tipping point. [3]
There’s no way back. The economic prosperity that Europeans so long for is now rapidly declining. The decreasing prosperity hopefully will purify the political system and paving the way for a new future. The USA is rapidly declining in economic downfall, moral and political demolition and impoverishment. This year 2023 will go down in history as the year the US lost its significance.
Certainly, for Europe and the rest of the West, the demise has only just begun. Western Europe is facing a steep descent into a deep valley. The combined population of the US and EU is only 13%, a small fraction of the world’s population. They will have to learn to find peace with their insignificance in the world.
There is hope; and joy and happiness at the other side of the valley. Not immediately for the west, but for the large majority of the world population, 2023 was the year of the tipping point, the year where they got a clear view on their much brighter future.
We’ve heard of mafia-like “pistol-whips” about the face, and cruder “b” slaps, but this a third path being delivered by Uncle Lavrov, delivered with quintessential dry diplomatic sadness..
@Sputnik Africa:
Dollar has become a tool of interference in domestic affairs and regime changes, Lavrov notes
Lavrov in an interview with Sputnik and Rossiya 24 broadcaster: the United States called Russia an enemy, if this is so, then Moscow is ready for any development of events
Russia expects to reach its goals in the special military operation, Lavrov argues. The West’s strategy to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia has failed, Sergey Lavrov noted in an interview with Sputnik and Rossiya 24 news channel.
Lavrov calls the Western countries’ attempts to resolve the conflict in Ukraine in such a way as “declaring Kiev’s victory” a monkey business.
Lavrov in an interview with Sputnik and Rossiya 24: I don’t see a bright future for the European Union, in a good way
In Russian, the idiom for the “bright future” sounds like “a rainbow future,” hence the pun.
Only a serious domestic upheaval can bring the US to its senses, now it has “superiority running rampant,” Lavrov says
Russia will gradually introduce the “BRICS culture” into world affairs: Lavrov
Full interview:
— MFA Russia
Peter Koenig (The PressTV Interview that did not take place)
In this fictitious interview that never took place – the first and principal question would have been about the cost of the Israel – Gaza / Palestine War, and who would pay for it.
The short answer was the cost of the war may be Israel itself. Meaning, the existence of Israel. After the genocide they have committed and are still committing in their occupied Gaza and now also in the West Bank, cannot be forgiven. Such a country cannot be allowed to exist. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are wantonly killing civilians. So far more than 20,000 Palestinians have been killed of whom at least two thirds are women and children.
After all, Israel is not even a real country. She has been established on a piece of land historically Palestine, Zionist-coerced out of the UK Government, former colonial power of this part of the world – without any justification. The spineless UK leadership was then as it is today bending over backwards in the face of Zionist pressure and assumed might – and, because the powers of the “winners” of WWII all-out backing of the Zionists throughout the world.
An absurdity. But we are living in a sick-sick world, way beyond Orwellian description.
Sometimes it looks as if there was no possible healing, that we passed the point of no-return. Going back to a civilized and ethical behavior, by We, the People in the west, also called the Global North, is no longer possible.
For the creation of Israel, the UK had the backing of the young United Nations, created in 1945. At the time – 1948 – of the Zionist- forced Israel, the UN was only 53 members strong, also cowardly in the face of the former colonial powers and the “winners” of WWII – and the pressure of Zionism.
Under the Treaty of Sèvres (1920), the League of Nations (precursor to the United Nations) formally gave control of Palestine to the British government. Britain’s job was to implement the Balfour Declaration, which had been signed three years earlier, stating Britain’s desire to create a homeland in Palestine for the Jews.
The Balfour Declaration came about by Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour writing on November 2, 1917, to Britain’s most illustrious Jewish citizen, Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild (real name Rosh Yilf), expressing the British government’s support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The letter would eventually become known as the Balfour Declaration.
The rest is history.
Or history in the making.
The Palestinians were never asked their opinion. After all, they were no longer under the colonial power of the UK. By any decent international law, they should have had a decision power over their own home land. That was bitterly denied to them by the international community, which then like today, had no ethics, no morals and can easily be called the murderous, genocidal west, led by the self-styled – but rapidly fading – empire, the United States of America.
From the looks, law, especially international law, already then did only exist for the common people. Their Highnesses, the Lordships, and later the transatlantic elites, made their own laws as they suited them best for the moment. Today it’s called the “rules-based order”.
Very likely the UK was coerced by the Zionists into allocating Palestinian land to the creation of Israel, way before the Balfour letter, so that the Balfour declaration became a mere rubberstamping of the fact.
—–
In the aftermath of this horrendous ongoing Gaza massacre, having extended long ago into the West Bank, Israel could be wiped off the map and no longer exist. The falling empire and its western puppets can no longer afford pumping not just billions but eventually trillions into Israel and the region to make it livable again.
In fact, Israel is wiping herself off the map. This war will stop as soon as weapon deliveries and money stop flowing. Israel under Netanyahu can no longer face the world.
The flow of money will stop, as the dollar and its little cousin, the Euro are every day worth less and rapidly moving into the direction of “worthless”. While per se, it has not mattered so far, as new dollars and Euros are printed as need.
However, there comes the point, when even the complicit but money-thirsty Wall Street and BlackRock on top, are taking cautiously note of the fast and irreversibly accumulating national debts, risking a major industrial collapse, as in bankruptcies, and a rapidly faltering economy precisely in these countries led by the self-styled world elite, those still dreaming of a One World Order, with a One World Government.
———–
There may be genocidal leaders, whose brutality and corrupted obedience was read, a.k.a., analyzed before they were put into their positions, like Ursula von der Leyen. Irish Member of the European Parliament (MEP), Clare Daly called European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen “Frau Genocide” over the EU’s stance on Israel’s military operation in Gaza.
Ms. Daly accused the EU Commission president of “swooping in and overriding the foreign policies of elected governments” in recent months, while cheerleading a “brutal apartheid regime that she calls a ‘vibrant democracy.’”
Speaking from the European Parliament podium on 24 December, Ms. Daly added that von der Leyen was “elevated to power without a single vote from the citizens.”
This opinion is shared by hundreds of EU Parliament members and EU staffers, as evidenced by Irish Times which reported at least 842 EU staffers, who had signed a letter, denouncing the Commission’s stance on Israel. The document reportedly accused von der Leyen of giving a “free hand to the acceleration and legitimacy of a war crime in the Gaza Strip.”
This EU example is valid for most EU member countries, where 90% of the people condemn Israel for the war crimes it keeps committing – and this against the official policy of their compromised and corrupted governments.
Zionists are sitting everywhere in influential roles. So, these governments are everywhere around the western world.
Outside these powers of Government influence, large independent institutions, like Amsterdam’s largest and high-end Department store, De Bijenkorf, is openly calling for boycotting Israeli goods. See this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7lOV8QCd-0 .
Similarly, the Algerian DJ Snake has issued a strong pro-Palestine statement, depicting this telling picture about Gaza and The World. See this https://youtu.be/dE9e15JFsuw?si=vXvyKZK8p2KgsHB5
———-
There are many money and weapon parallels between the Israeli and Ukraine aggressions. Both are leading to human mass-killings that are encouraged by the soulless west.
The consequences, or aftermath of these wars will be massive dying for years to come, from dehumanized living conditions, famine, diseases, bankruptcies, unemployment, suicide – all blending in perfectly with the Great Reset’s and the UN Agenda 2030’s major goal – massive population reduction.
Mind you, that is only one front, where this Goal Numero Uno is played out.
And mind you again, it will not happen, We, the People, will resist.
——
Israel, after 75 years of dishonest creation and existence – and especially after this horrendous never-before seen in recent history democide, is definitely no longer a viable and trustworthy country – if ever it was.
Scott Ritter goes as far as saying that the Israeli State is no longer allowed to exist and to pollute the face of the earth; he is no longer in favor of a Two-State Solution, but a One-State-Solution, and the One State is Palestine; going on saying, the concept of a Jewish State called Israel is dead. Listen to his full 3-min short video
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C1TBE8Lsq0t/?igsh=MXRlYWJiOTd3Y3g1Zw%3D%3D
——
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
Peter Koenig (Transcript – PressTV Interview)
Background
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the Gaza war has exacted a “very heavy price” on the regime.
Netanyahu said Israel has no choice but to keep fighting to achieve its goals, including elimination of Hamas and return of its hostages. He made the comments after the Israeli army confirmed that 14 troops were killed in Gaza since Friday. It said 153 Israeli troops have been killed and nearly 500 others wounded since the beginning of Israel’s ground invasion in Gaza. Hamas says the number of Israeli army casualties is much higher.
PressTV:
Israel has committed enormous crimes against humanity, causing more than 21,000 Palestinian casualties, since Netanyahu ordered a ground invasion in Gaza.
Please give us your views on these crimes and their consequences.
PK reply:
Where to begin is the question. There is an abundance of crimes being committed as we speak
The Israel Defense Forces – IDF – are wantonly targeting civilian populations.
Of the estimated more than 21,000 killed since October 7, at least two thirds are women and children.
Coincidence? – Of course not, there are no coincidences. Children are the future generation of Palestine, and women are the bearers of future generations. – Eliminating them is an Israeli strategy.
More than 80% of all housing is destroyed, not to speak of infrastructure.
Israel is withholding emergency shipments of food and water – literally attempting to starve Palestinians to death.
Israel is selectively cutting off electricity and means of communication – internet, telephone, television….
But these are just “statistics”, right?
Nevertheless, think about it, when you are celebrating New Years with friends and laughs and good times — you may, of course. It is your right.
But please, DO NOT forget Gaza and Palestine.
Remember, that most likely your government – especially when you are in the US or European Union – EU – your government supports – or rather encourages the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians.
And I have not even mentioned yet:
The execution style killings – a few days ago IDF soldiers separated a group of men from women – then they shot death point blank the men – about a dozen – in front of their wives and children.
Organ stealing – totally illegal – Israel has always been one of the leaders in human organ trading, if not THE leader – now they are stealing killed Palestinians, removing their organs for their illicit organ trade.
Stripping civilians, mostly men – by the hundreds, having them sitting in rows in full sight of everybody – a shameful humiliation.
And more, much more – the list goes on and on — Israeli crimes no end.
Nobody should ever talk about the Holocaust inflicted by Nazi Germany on the Jews. Nobody.
What Zionists are doing to Palestinians is at least in the same category or worse.
And it has lasted for 75 years, for the entire existence of Israel, the apartheid system has prevailed – and killed countless Palestinians, indiscriminately, year after years, after year; silenced by the mainstream media, most of which are under Zionist control.
In addition to all the atrocities mentioned before, there is the human suffering that cannot be accounted for not in money not in numbers.
But the price Israel is most likely paying for their indiscriminate and well-thought-out genocide of an entire population – is high – it may be Israel herself.
Israel – Netanyahu, Zionist-in-chief, is wiping Israel off the map.
Once this is over – and one day it will be over, namely as soon as the money and weapons flow stops – pretty much like the Ukraine – then, the war will stop.
Israel cannot survive without western money – with war or without war.
Israel’s regular budget, in normal times – depends to about one third on “subsidies” from the US – compliments of US tax-payers.
The price for these atrocities and suffering Israel is inflicting on Palestine will be steep.
PEACE – is what We the Western People – forget our corrupted governments – wish upon Palestine.
Our thoughts, our positive vibes shall help bringing PEACE to Palestine..
——–
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
It was noted at the conference that great transformation is accelerating across the world. Changes of the world, of our times, and of historical significance are unfolding like never before, and the world has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation. Yet the overall direction of human development and progress will not change, the overall dynamics of world history moving forward amid twists and turns will not change, and the overall trend toward a shared future for the international community will not change. We must have full confidence in these trends of historical impact.
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/zxxx_662805/202312/t20231228_11214416.html
The Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs was held in Beijing on December 27-28. Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), President of the People’s Republic of China and Chairman of the Central Military Commission, attended the conference and delivered an important address. Members of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee Li Qiang, Zhao Leji, Wang Huning, Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang and Li Xi, and Vice President Han Zheng attended the conference.
In his important address, Xi Jinping presented a systematic review of the historic achievements and valuable experience of major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics in the new era, gave a profound exposition on the international environment and historical mission of China’s external work on the new journey, and made comprehensive plans for China’s external work for the present and coming periods. Presiding over the conference, Li Qiang emphasized the importance of ensuring sound external work on the new journey under the guidance of Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy, and set out requirements for studying and implementing the guiding principles of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important address.
It was made clear at the conference that since the 18th CPC National Congress, historic achievements have been secured and historic changes have taken place in China’s external work on the great journey of advancing the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era. First, we have established and developed Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy, opening up new vistas in the theory and practice of China’s diplomacy and providing the fundamental guideline for advancing major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. Second, we have showcased distinct Chinese characteristics, style and ethos in our diplomacy, and established the image of a confident, self-reliant, open and inclusive major country with a global vision. Third, we have advocated the building of a community with a shared future for mankind, pointing the right direction for human society leading to common development, lasting peace and security, and mutual learning between civilizations. Fourth, we have followed the strategic guidance of head-of-state diplomacy, and played an increasingly important and constructive role in international affairs. Fifth, we have taken a holistic approach to our relations with all parties, with a view to fostering major-country dynamics featuring peaceful coexistence, overall stability and balanced development. Sixth, we have expanded a comprehensive strategic layout, and formed a wide-ranging, high-quality global network of partnerships. Seventh, we have advanced high-quality Belt and Road cooperation, and established the world’s most broad-based and largest platform for international cooperation. Eighth, we have worked to both pursue development and safeguard security, and effectively upheld China’s sovereignty, security and development interests with a firm will and an indomitable fighting spirit. Ninth, we have taken an active part in global governance, and shown the way in reforming the international system and order. Tenth, we have strengthened the centralized, unified leadership of the CPC Central Committee, and brought about greater coordination in China’s external work.
It was underlined at the conference that in the decade of the new era, we have seen high winds and choppy waters and overcome various difficulties and challenges in China’s external work. We have opened up new prospects in major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics, and gained much more strategic autonomy and initiative in our diplomacy. China has become a responsible major country with enhanced international influence, stronger capacity to steer new endeavors, and greater moral appeal.
It was pointed out at the conference that a range of valuable experience has been gained in the new era of Chinese diplomacy. It is imperative to uphold principles. On major issues concerning the future of humanity and the direction of the world, we must take a clear and firm position, hold the international moral high ground, and unite and rally the overwhelming majority in our world. It is imperative to shoulder China’s responsibility as a major country. We need to advocate the spirit of independence, champion peaceful development, and promote global stability and prosperity. It is imperative to apply systems thinking. With a correct understanding of history and of the big picture, we must navigate the prevailing trends, adopt a coordinated approach, and seize the initiative. It is imperative to uphold fundamental principles and break new ground. We need to follow the fine tradition and fundamental direction of China’s diplomacy, and at the same time work progressively for innovation in both theory and practice. It is imperative to carry forward our fighting spirit. We must reject all acts of power politics and bullying, and vigorously defend our national interests and dignity. It is imperative to leverage our institutional strengths. Under the centralized, unified leadership of the CPC Central Committee, all regions and all departments must coordinate with each other and build strong synergy.
It was noted at the conference that great transformation is accelerating across the world. Changes of the world, of our times, and of historical significance are unfolding like never before, and the world has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation. Yet the overall direction of human development and progress will not change, the overall dynamics of world history moving forward amid twists and turns will not change, and the overall trend toward a shared future for the international community will not change. We must have full confidence in these trends of historical impact.
It was highlighted at the conference that looking ahead, China faces new strategic opportunities in its development. On the new journey, major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics will enter a new stage where much more can be accomplished. We must focus on the central task of the CPC and the country, seek progress while maintaining stability, break new ground while upholding fundamental principles, and firmly safeguard China’s sovereignty, security and development interests. We will explore new frontiers in China’s diplomatic theory and practice, foster new dynamics in the relations between China and the world, and raise China’s international influence, appeal and power to shape events to a new level. We will create a more favorable international environment and provide more solid strategic support for building China into a great modern socialist country in all respects and advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation on all fronts through the Chinese path to modernization.
It was pointed out at the conference that building a community with a shared future for mankind is the core tenet of Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy. It is how China proposes to solve the questions of what kind of world to build and how to build it based on our deepening understanding of the laws governing the development of human society. It reflects the Chinese Communists’worldview, perception of order, and values, accords with the common aspiration of people in all countries, and points the direction for the progress of world civilizations. It is also the noble goal pursued by China in conducting major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics for the new era. Since the dawn of this new era, building a community with a shared future for mankind has developed from a Chinese initiative to an international consensus, from a promising vision to substantive actions, and from a conceptual proposition to a scientific system. It has served as a glorious banner leading the progress of the times. In summary, in building a community with a shared future for mankind, the goal is to build an open, inclusive, clean and beautiful world of lasting peace, universal security and shared prosperity, the pathway is promoting global governance that features extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit, the guiding principle is to apply the common values of humanity, the basic underpinning lies in building a new type of international relations, the strategic guidance comes from the implementation of the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative, and the platform for action is high-quality Belt and Road cooperation. On this basis, we seek to bring countries together to meet challenges and achieve prosperity for all, and usher in a bright future of peace, security, prosperity and progress for our world.
It was pointed out at the conference that given the series of major issues and challenges facing the world today, China calls for an equal and orderly multipolar world and a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization. An equal and orderly multipolar world is one in which all countries, regardless of size, are treated as equals, hegemonism and power politics are rejected, and democracy is truly promoted in international relations. To keep the progress toward greater multipolarity generally stable and constructive, the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter must be observed by all, the universally recognized, basic norms governing international relations must be upheld by all, and true multilateralism must be practiced. A universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization is one that meets the common needs of all countries, especially the developing countries, and properly addresses the development imbalances between and within countries resulting from the global allocation of resources. It is important to resolutely oppose the attempt to roll back globalization and abuse the concept of security, oppose all forms of unilateralism and protectionism, firmly promote trade and investment liberalization and facilitation, overcome the structural problems hindering the healthy development of the world economy, and make economic globalization more open, inclusive, balanced and beneficial to all.
It was made clear at the conference that in the current and upcoming periods, China’s external work shall be guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the New Era and Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy in particular. It should serve the goals and missions of Chinese modernization, and follow the principles of self-confidence and self-reliance, openness and inclusiveness, fairness and justice, and win-win cooperation. Focusing on the theme of building a community with a shared future for mankind, we need to strengthen strategic planning in sync with the changing times, deepen and improve our diplomatic layout, follow a problem-oriented approach, and apply a systematic way of thinking. We need to identify the strategic tasks of Chinese diplomacy in a more multi-dimensional and comprehensive manner. We need to act with a stronger sense of historical responsibility and a more vibrant spirit of innovation to make new headway in our major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.
It was pointed out at the conference that upholding fundamental principles and breaking new ground in our external work is the natural requirement of making new headway in our major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics on the new journey, and of providing a stronger underpinning for Chinese modernization. It is important to strengthen the intellectual and theoretical competence of the foreign service, deepen reform of systems and institutions, promote the building of a contingent of personnel involved in foreign affairs, and continue to make our external work more science-based, forward-looking, proactive and innovative.
It was stressed at the conference that we must unswervingly uphold the CPC central leadership’s ultimate authority over foreign affairs, conscientiously uphold the centralized, unified leadership of the CPC Central Committee, and further strengthen the systems and institutions for the CPC’s leadership over external work. All localities and departments should keep in mind the big picture and coordinate with each other to implement the decisions and plans of the CPC Central Committee on our external work in both letter and spirit.
Wang Yi gave concluding remarks. Leading officials of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee, the International Department of the CPC Central Committee, the Ministry of Commerce, the Joint Staff Department of the Central Military Commission and Yunnan Province, and a representative from the Permanent Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations gave presentations at the conference.
Members of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and members of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, leaders of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, State Councilors, President of the Supreme People’s Court, Procurator General of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and leaders of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference attended the conference.
Members of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs, major officials of provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the Central Government, cities separately listed in the state plan, and the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, of the relevant departments of central CPC and State institutions, relevant people’s organizations, relevant departments of the Central Military Commission, and of some financial institutions under the direct management of the Central Government, as well as Chinese ambassadors, ambassadorial-rank consuls general posted overseas and representatives to international organizations participated in the conference.
As published in American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 70, No. 4 (October, 2011).
*The author acknowledges funding from Prosper Australia for this article.
ABSTRACT. Reflecting the Progressive Era’s reform agenda Simon Patten (1852–1922) argued that freeing markets from one source of economic rent (by taxing land rent) would merely leave the surplus to be taken by other monopolists and rent extractors (railroads, Wall Street trusts, and basic privatized utilities). To prevent unearned income (economic rent) from adding to the economy’s cost of living and doing business, potentially rent-yielding infrastructure should be kept in the public domain as a “fourth factor of production.” Instead of rentiers making a profit by charging access fees and user fees, the return to public investment should take the form of reducing the economy’s overall price structure.
Along with Edmund James and Richard T. Ely, Simon Patten studied in Germany in the late 1870s. As in America, Germany’s national interest called for an alternative economic policy—and hence, a supportive body of economic theory—from that of British free-trade orthodoxy, which left public-sector investment out of account. “I became imbued with the German view,” he wrote, “and came home hoping to help in the transformation of American civilization from an English to a German basis” (Patten 1912, in 1924: 273).
The German Historical School’s focus on national differences in political and economic institutions reflected its concern with state leadership in protecting industry and pioneering social welfare policy by enacting labor laws such as old-age pensions. Patten saw Germany’s creation of a public railroad network in particular as increasing its competitive industrial power along similar lines to those that protectionists in the United States were following. National price structures were being shaped not merely by wages, profit, and interest rates, but also by public spending and tax policies.
Returning to the United States, Patten saw a mixed economy shaped by public investment in transportation, education and other infrastructure, protective tariffs, and subsidies. His friend James was appointed senior professor at America’s first business school, the Wharton School of Finance and Economy at the University of Pennsylvania, in 1883, a year after it started classes.
In 1885, James, Ely, and Patten took the lead in founding the American Economic Association. Three years later James helped bring Patten onto the Wharton faculty as its first professor of economics, a chair Patten held until 1917. (I summarize Patten’s life and major writings in Hudson 2010.) From his defense of protectionist trade policy to his advocacy of social reform, Patten recognized that national economies were at different stages.
America differed from England, as did Germany and other countries confronting British industrial competition. Free-trade policy was not appropriate for conditions that called for steering economic evolution along the most productive lines. And what British economists treated as universal actually reflected its class structure, especially its hereditary groundrent stemming from the Norman invasion. Free-trade economists attributed America’s high wage levels to the nation’s vast backwoods of available land on which to settle as an alternative to working in factories. Like other protectionists, Patten found this explanation insufficient.
American industrial labor had to be sufficiently productive to sustain higher living standards. This required investment in capital, which in turn required protective tariffs and public infrastructure investment. Patten recognized that rising productivity, public investment, and wage levels went together. That is what enabled well-fed, well-trained, and well-housed American labor to undersell “pauper labor.” American free traders who followed the lead of British economists in urging governments to stand aside bought the idea that market forces by themselves would produce the most efficient outcomes. But what are markets, reformers asked, if not carefully constructed arrangements shaped by tax laws, land and property tenure, government subsidies and price regulation, educational systems, and infrastructure? Would not a market without regulation or public services become “free” for predators?
The institutional and sociological economists who emerged from the American protectionist tradition and German Historical School were almost alone in retaining from classical political economic thought the concept of economic rent (the excess of market price over intrinsic cost-value) as unearned income. Defenders of property and opponents of tax reform found this focus on rentier revenue disturbing, above all its application to land ownership, and the monopolies and trusts created by Wall Street. These vested interests applauded the free-market marginalists who took property relations for granted, and especially endorsed John Bates Clark’s rationalization of property income as “earned.”
While extending economic analysis along lines that later would be called institutional, Patten retained the classical definition of rent as unearned income—the excess of market price over intrinsic cost. Economic rent taken by landlords, monopolists, and financial institutions has no counterpart in the technological requirements of production, but stems from legal and historical privileges that privatize the free gifts of nature or permit monopolistic power to charge access fees over cost for the use of basic infrastructure. Patten believed that economies should minimize the cost of living and doing business by becoming as rent-free as possible, socializing monopolies outright, or at least taxing land, mining, and other natural resources, and regulating prices to minimize unnecessary rentier charges.
Rent Theory and the Crisis of Classical Political Economy
Patten recalled that the generation of American economists who studied in Germany in the 1870s was taught that John Stuart Mill’s 1848 Principles of Political Economy was the high-water mark of classical thought. But Mill’s reformist philosophy had been overtaken by more activist schools, and turned out to be “not a goal but a half-way house” between classical laissez-faire and the emerging epoch of class conflict. Mill was “a thinker becoming a socialist without seeing what the change really meant,” Patten concluded: “The Nineteenth Century epoch ends not with the theories of Mill but with the more logical systems of Karl Marx and Henry George (Patten 1912, in 1924: 274; also see Patten 1899: 339).
The rise of socialist reformers in the wake of Europe’s 1848 revolutions defined labor/capital relations as exploitative and called for nationalization of the means of production. As Patten observed, “If this new group of thinkers called themselves sociologists or historians they might be disregarded.” But the social reformers “openly claim to be economists, and the worst of the matter is, they have . . . the mass of the older economists on their side. Nothing pleases a socialist or a single taxer better than to quote authorities and to use the well-known economic theories to prove his case (Patten 1908a, in 1924: 219).
Meanwhile, the analysis of economic rent paid to owners of land, mineral resources, and natural monopolies—using the labor theory of value to isolate such rent as “empty” pricing that did not reflect production cost—flowered into a political movement to tax or nationalize and socialize land and monopolies outright. The vested property interests felt duly threatened. The new generation of economists, friendlier to the vested interests, “soon realized that their favorite authors were not so perfect as they supposed, and that economic doctrine must be recast” to exclude logic that implied an exploitative character of the “unearned increment” that landowners obtained in the form of rent and rising property prices, and even industrial profit as surplus value (employing labor to sell its products at as large a markup as possible).
Reacting to the policies of Marx and Henry George that urged nationalization or full taxation of land and natural resources, a post-classical orthodoxy arose to divert attention away from the analysis of economic rent as unearned income (prices and income without cost value). Clark in America and a marginal utility school in Europe tried to base their view of the economic system on consumer psychology, while treating all income as reflecting—by definition—the recipient’s contribution to production. The result was a circular reasoning to confirm their desired outcome and starting viewpoint: If all income was “earned,” there was no such thing as a free lunch. Wages were rising, paid out of productivity gains. Describing America as reflecting the dynamic of future evolution to a “pleasure surplus” economy, Patten showed how a growing surplus was available not just to landlords and owners of capital as in Ricardian theory, but also to workers in the form of rising wages and living standards. This means that rentier income is taken at the expense of labor’s high wage levels as well as industrial profits.
David Ricardo juxtaposed “profits and wages, or profits and rent, but never rent and wages. If he had broken away from his concrete thinking enough to contrast wages and rent, he would have forestalled Henry George, since the latter writer has nothing new of theoretical importance except this contrast neglected by Ricardo and his followers” (Patten 1892, in 1924: 153). To Ricardo, writing at a time and place when it seemed natural to assume subsistence wage levels, the major class conflict was between landlords and industrial employers.
Ricardo described economic rent as rising for owners of the most fertile soils as diminishing returns pushed up crop prices at the margin of cultivation where land was least fertile. This forced up subsistence wages. The higher cost of living was paid to landlords, whose income rose at the expense of industrial profits. To avoid rising food prices, Ricardo argued that Britain should import cheaper grain from abroad—and indeed it repealed its protectionist Corn Laws in 1846. “Ricardian socialists” from James Mill and John Stuart Mill to Ferdinand Lassalle in Germany and Henry George in America radicalized the analysis of groundrent.
Land prices and rents rose not because of efforts made by landowners themselves, but because of economy-wide forces (general prosperity) and public investment that increased site values. This became the socialist argument for nationalizing the land, or at least its rental income. Arguing that not all market prices and incomes were earned fairly or reflected social use value, “institutional” economists such as John Commons and Thorstein Veblen emerged around the turn of the 20th century to analyze “unearned” wealth, especially that of the emerging monopolies and trusts. Social and fiscal reforms were needed to steer prices and the distribution of income to maximize economic welfare.
Combining evolutionary analysis with the evangelism of economic reform, they advocated public policies to promote a more productive and fairer economic future for everyone. The guiding idea of economic fairness—and also of competitive power—was to minimize unearned income, that is, income without a counterpart in technologically necessary costs of production.
The Democratization of Land Rent—On Credit, with Increasing Debt Leveraging
Rentier income was a class phenomenon in Britain and other European countries. Most groundrent was still monopolized by the landed aristocracy, the heirs to the Norman conquerors.
Economists from Ricardo through Mill analyzed how economic rent and land prices rose at the expense of industrial employers. In the years before the word “socialism” took on Marxist connotations dealing mainly with labor and with the outright nationalization of property, “Ricardian socialists” described groundrent and rising land prices as accruing to landlords in the form of what Mill termed an “unearned increment”— unearned because the gain occurred without property owners having to expend any effort of their own.[1]
Higher prices for food, minerals, and the products of natural or artificial monopolies threatened to increase labor’s cost of living (and hence, subsistence wage levels), eating into industrial profits and bringing investment and economic growth to a halt—all to benefit an idle landlord class. In contrast to Europe’s hereditary landed aristocracies, land rent and interest recipients were not a specific class in the United States. Railroads and other monopolies were a more pressing concern. Their extortionate pricing prompted the government to enact the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and create the Interstate Commerce Commission to regulate railroad charges.
Patten wrote about economic rent in his critique of Ricardo in his 1890 Economic Basis of Protection, and provided a critique of Clark and George the following year. The thrust of his analysis was that minimizing economic rent would benefit labor, farmers, and small business as well as capitalists. Rather than each type of income being associated with a distinct political class as in Britain (groundrent with a hereditary aristocracy), property ownership was becoming so widespread a phenomenon that most Americans received the economic rental value of their homes or farms, and most received interest as savers, as well as profits made by the emerging middle class of businessmen.
The older thought assumed that for each kind of income there was a social class which was interested in its defense. The social condition of England at the time economic theory was formulated favored this concept. The aristocracy held the land, the so-called middle or industrial class owned the capital, while the great mass of unskilled and politically unprotected laborers did the work. The essence of the Ricardian economics was an opposition to the aristocratic landlords, and it succeeded so well that an imputation of being unearned was put up on their income. In America, however, while we have rent, we have no landlord class. The income from rent and interest is so diffused that all income-receivers form one class. . . . Profit holders blend with the holders of rent and interest and think of themselves as a social unit. All get profits, rent and interest in their income . . . . (Patten 1908a, in 1924: 219)
Industrial protectionism, trade unionism, and bank credit enabled families to obtain farms or homes in cities with good public school systems. This led to a growing economy in which, “when families get $1,000 a year their income is derived more from monopoly, rent and interest than from mere wage-earning power. They own houses, they receive special rents from the position of local advantage they hold, they enjoy monopolies through their trade unions, and they derive great advantage from the municipal expenditures that give them water, health, sanitation and education. Their income is thus not pure wages, but a diffused income derived from many sources” (Patten 1908a, in 1924: 221).
This is why land taxation never was as popular in the United States as in Britain. Land remains the major asset in every economy today, followed by natural monopolies and subsoil minerals and fuels, and property ownership has been the major force shaping fiscal policy as well as politics. There is indeed a power elite composed of what Veblen called vested interests, but land ownership—especially housing—has been democratized. This has enabled absentee owners and speculators to represent their interests as synonymous with that of small homeowners in campaigning for property tax relief. And behind them stand the bankers — some 70 percent of bank loans are mortgages, absorbing a rising share of property’s income via interest charges.
The Objective of Minimizing Economic Rent Across the Board
Classical economists from John Locke through Adam Smith, Ricardo, and Mill defined value ultimately in terms of the expenditure of labor (including that embodied in the production of capital goods and other inputs). To them, bidding up property prices on credit did not reflect underlying value. Nor did stock watering, which occurred when financiers and other insiders issued bonds to themselves, counting the interest charges on these securities as part of the cost of production.
Classical economists described interest payments in general as an element of market price in excess of intrinsic value, a financial form of rentier overhead. The Progressive reform movement in America accordingly aimed to bring prices in line with production costs to reflect this intrinsic value. This meant developing a policy to minimize economic rent and “fictitious” or “watered costs” imposed by monopolies and finance—charges that, as Patten put it, entered into prices beyond “the doctrine of physical valuation,” his term for the labor theory of value.
Although Ricardo (followed by George) warned that groundrent threatened to absorb the entire economic surplus, Patten pointed out that other monopolies also vied for it, headed by the railroads seeking to appropriate agricultural rents. Frank Norris’s novel The Octopus (1901) told how the railroad monopoly exploited farmers, and Gustavus Myers’ History of the Great American Fortunes (1907–1909) exposed its political insider dealings. To regulate railroad rates “so that the cost of production shall fix prices” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 253), the Interstate Commerce Commission was founded to prevent railroads from exploiting farmers, consumers, and industrialists by incorporating unnecessary financial and kindred rentier costs into their transport charges.
It is, therefore, a popular error to suppose that the rent of land absorbs the whole of this surplus. According to the Ricardian theory of distribution, this would be so, but this theory gives an undue emphasis to land . . . the surplus, however, may be absorbed in many ways . . . Our railroads are now getting a large share of this surplus. As the owners of farms are separated from the market of their produce by long distances, they must make use of our railroad system to transport their grain. Any increase in the rates of transportation, therefore, will act as a reduction of rent, and if the railroad system of our country has its stock largely watered, it will reduce the value and rent of lands, and in this way a large portion of the surplus will go to the owners of railroads, rather than to the owners of land. (Patten 1891: 361)
To move against just one monopoly, such as land ownership, was not enough for Patten. “It is often said that the way to avoid socialism is to control particular prices such as railroad rates or tariff schedules; but this control will not help the public so long as other forms of monopoly remain undisturbed”[2] (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 255). Revenue freed from one monopoly is available for others to take.
The application of the principle of physical valuation to railroads does not mean any advantage to the public so long as the same principle is not applied to farms and city lots. Low railroad rates mean a high value of western farms with higher rents and more congestion of population in eastern cities. Should the value of western farms go up to $150 an acre because of lower rates, it does not mean that western farm laborers will get more wages, or that farm produce will sell at a lower price in eastern cities. Higher land values will push the pressure of population into cities more rapidly than before and the pressure to lower wages will be strengthened. These conditions will make apparent the advantage of extending to land the same principle of physical valuation that landholders now want to have applied to railroad property and to protected industries. (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 254)
Patten criticized George’s Single Tax for leaving monopolies besides land intact. Unless economic rent were taxed across the board, the rent rescued from one party’s grasp would be taken by others: “a limited application of the [land tax] principle . . . merely lowers the value of one form of monopoly and raises that of some other. Farms go down in value as railroad rates go up. Land values in cities go up as tariffs go down” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 255). Further, taxing the land’s rental value “would cause the watered costs of the farms and city property to shrink to a lower point than would the values of railroads” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 254). Patten thought that George was shortsighted by supposing “that we can secure all the surplus if we would only seize the rent of land. We might in this way get only a small portion of it. The rent of farm land seems to decrease, relatively at least, with the advance in civilization, and hence a larger portion of the surplus is absorbed in other ways” (Patten 1891: 362; Patten also made this critique in his “Principles of Rational Taxation”).
Whereas George wanted to tax groundrent at market rates, Patten wanted to minimize economic rent. “We want a low price of food and not a large public revenue from land.” The aim was to minimize rent and prices, not tax the maximum that could be extracted. The government should be a rent minimizer, not a rent maximizer that allows landlords (or itself as infrastructure operator) charging as much as the market would bear. Patten recognized that soil differences would diminish as agriculture became industrialized, and that rising farm productivity would make food prices “so low that the unearned increment will be unworthy of notice, and no one will care to disturb land-tenures to secure so small a sum” (Patten 1891: 369).
Transportation investment would lower the rent-of-location, which was more important than soil fertility, given America’s large land mass. To be sure, taxing the land’s groundrent would leave less for railroads to siphon off. Every trust, or combination, therefore tends to transfer a considerable share of the surplus or unearned increment from the owners of land to the owners of other monopolies.
Patten proposed that the way to prevent rent seeking was to apply “the doctrine of cost prices, the physical valuation of property and the control of prices by the state” across the board, under the principle of eminent domain. Partial cures would be ineffective because to permit the state “to control [only] some prices is to give it the power to favor special interests.” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 255).
Minimizing economic rent by controlling all prices was implicitly socialist, Patten recognized. Progressive reform should start with land and transportation infrastructure, followed by the mining trusts. “The kinds of property that are in the fewest hands will be those to which this principle will be first applied, and each other kind of property will be attacked in turn until the application of the principle is general” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 255).
The Vested Interests Fight Back
Recipients of economic rent—the vested interests—sought to narrow the scope of economics so as not to go down this path, by promoting their own economic perspective. Instead of focusing on economic and social structures, the marginalist mainstream emerging in opposition to Progressive Era (and especially to socialist) reforms took the status quo for granted in their economic arguments, as a way of defending and promoting their conservative point of view without calling attention to their conservative position.
Clark led the break from the classical treatment of rentier income as overhead. In a series of papers on land rent and interest in 1890–1891 culminating in his 1899 Distribution of Wealth, he extended his earlier attack on socialist claims that labor was exploited. Everybody earned what they deserved, he argued, in proportion to their contribution to production. Hence, no exploitation existed. “It is the purpose of this work,” he wrote in his introduction (Clark 1899: v), “to show that the distribution of the income of society is controlled by a natural law, and this law, if it worked without friction, would give to every agent of production the amount of wealth which that agent creates.”
Whatever income or wealth was “unearned” was held to result from “market imperfections,” subsequently called “imperfect competition.” By definition these imperfections were political and institutional, and their study was exiled to what became the academic subbasement of sociology. John Henry (1983, 1995: 84) traces the inspiration for Clark’s marginal productivity explanation of income back to his early critiques from 1877–1889 opposing socialist theories of “the wage problem”[3] (also the view of Clark’s son, John Maurice Clark).
The implication was that landlords and bankers are part of the production process, with rent and interest explained by marginal productivity theory. This was a bad analogy, Patten argued. It could be maintained only by treating rent-yielding assets as capital investment, conflating tangible industrial capital with all other assets. At issue was what constitutes the cost of production in terms of real value, as distinct from extractive rentier charges. “The defect of the reasoning of Professor Clark”, Patten observed, was his failure to distinguish man made capital from property rights (Patten 1891: 363).[4]
Clark’s so-called pragmatic approach conflated profits earned on industrial capital with land and monopoly rent stemming from legal ownership rights involving no real cost of production. Real estate owners, monopolists, and financial operators deem their income to be earned by their own efforts and outlays. After all, their argument goes, they bought their land and other property on mortgage, and stocks and bonds whose price reflected the capitalized value of real estate, so that financial and monopoly charges were, to them, an investment cost. The vested interests are happy that “The farmer thinks that land values depend on real costs” because he had to pay good money for his property, explained Patten, “and the city land speculator has the same opinion as to town lots” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 254). This is the argument expressed by Clark in The Distribution of Wealth, conflating rentier income with wages earned in the production sector: “each workingman under a perfect competitive law gets what he produces, and thus . . . the ethical standard of wages is the standard that society tends to realize in fact” (Patten 1891: 363).
However, Patten pointed out, these outlays capitalize property rights and financial charges that are by no means intrinsic and inevitable. Wealth in the form of income-yielding assets is provided freely by nature as well as by labor, yet natural and artificial monopolies are legal property rights or institutions that do not require labor to create or maintain. To Clark, economic rent appeared not as an element of price without value or labor effort, but simply as a return on what investors spent on acquiring land—just another cost of doing business. “According to the economic data he presents,” Patten wrote, “rent in the economic sense, if not wholly disregarded, at least receives no emphasis. Land seems to be a form of capital, its value like other property being due to the labor put upon it” (Patten 1891: 356).
In practice, rentier rights are legalized tollbooths to extract revenue that rightly should belong in the public sector. Clark argued that labor receives its entire product. But Patten pointed out that if rentier and monopoly income was unearned, it had to be at the expense of earned income.
It seems to me that the doctrine of Professor Clark, if carried out logically, would deny that the laborers have any right to share in the natural resources of the country. . . . All the increase of wealth due to fertile fields or productive mines would be taken gradually from workmen with the growth of population, and given to more favored persons whose shares are not reduced by the use of poorer land. These privileged classes would then enjoy all the advantages due to better natural resources or to more productive instruments of other kinds. When it is said that the workingman under these conditions gets all he is worth to society, the term “society,” if analyzed, means only the more favored classes who are contrasted with the workmen. They pay each laborer only the utility of the last laborer to them, and get the whole produce of the nation minus this amount. (Patten 1891: 365f.)
Subsequent mainstream economics has followed precisely the tautological circular reasoning criticized by Patten, depicting rent, interest, and land-price gains as costs of production built into the way in which markets function. “Professor Clark has a skillful way of hiding land values by subserving them under the general concept of capital,” Patten observed, “but if the doctrine of physical valuation is once introduced the public will soon be educated to the evils of watered land values” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 254) and railroad rates.
What has disappeared from today’s neoclassical (that is, postclassical) economics is the idea of unearned income. Any given distribution of income and property is rationalized without acknowledging that market prices and incomes may diverge from benefiting society as a whole. “Everyone thinks he earns what he gets,” Patten granted, “but he [the investor] keeps his accounts in such a way that he exaggerates his costs until they seem equal to his income. As he views it, he has no unearned income similar to the watered stocks of railroads or the high prices of protected industries” (Patten 1908b, in 1924: 254). Whatever is paid to rentiers is considered a bona fide cost, and hence has intrinsic value. Contrary to the classical distinctions between economic rent, interest, and profit, everyone’s income appears justified regardless of the form it takes.
Clark would have been called a natural theologian if he had written in Adam Smith’s day, for his class harmony message that economic forces give each income recipient his just reward was an evangelistic “gospel of peace [rather] than of grim struggle” (Patten 1908a, in 1924: 222). However, Patten concluded, the idea that whatever income people obtain reflects their contribution to production turns economic analysis into circular reasoning. The tautology does not explain who gets the surplus, and indeed is ambivalent over whether there really is a surplus. “To whom it shall go depends upon the laws and usages of each nation. Our present laws allow a large part of it to go to the owners of natural resources” (Patten 1891: 366).
A core tenet of American institutionalism as a program of economic reform was the recognition that “Rent is obtained by owners of land, not as a right based on economic considerations, but as a premium given by society to secure progress out of a fund to which its claim is superior to that of any individual.” Land and monopoly rights are not real factors of production, but are claims for payments levied as access charges to land, credit, or basic needs. “The unearned increment is that which comes to individuals or to classes, not from industrial qualities which they use in production, but from the lack of supply of some needed article,” Patten explained. “Although the case of land is not the only example where there is an unearned increment, because the price of food is always more than its cost of production on the best land, yet it is the best example, and hence is the one in common use as an illustration” (Patten 1891: 356f.).
To Patten the classical aim of minimizing rentier charges remained a prime policy objective. “With the increase of our knowledge of the incidence of taxation,” he concluded his essay on the ethics of land tenure, “we can place its burden more completely upon those who profit by the increase of rent and other forms of unearned revenue” (Patten 1891: 370). Whereas Ricardo had sought to minimize agricultural fertility rents by importing cheaper crops from abroad, Patten sought to minimize the rent-of-location by public investment in transportation.
Like most of his fellow reformers, with the exception of George’s Single Taxers, he extended the analysis of economic rent to monopolies across the board.
Public Infrastructure as a Factor of Production
Neither Clark nor subsequent mainstream economists recognized public capital investment as contributing to an economic surplus or otherwise fit it into marginal productivity models. Government spending was deemed deadweight cost, as if it were for war making or other economically unproductive purposes. Public sector spending in excess of receipts was a deficit, without regard for investment in infrastructure for future progress. Yet such investment has been the largest category of capital investment in most economies down to the 1980s. Patten stands almost alone among economists in recognizing this as capital investment fitting into an overall model.
Patten’s analysis of public spending goes beyond economics as such into the political and sociological realm. He described the transition to a “pleasure” economy of abundance as being led by a shift in government spending away from war making toward a better standard of living. In contrast to military levies, which were a pure burden to taxpayers, “in an industrial society the object of taxation is to increase industrial prosperity”[5] (Patten 1892, in 1924: 96) by lowering costs rather than leaving economic rents to be taken by private appropriators intent on maximizing access charges to their holdings.
How the U.S. government increased prosperity was by creating infrastructure in the form of canals and railroads, a postal service, and public education as a “fourth” factor of production alongside labor, land, and capital. Taxes would be “burdenless,” according to Patten, if invested in public internal improvements, headed by transportation infrastructure. “The Erie Canal keeps down railroad rates, and takes from local producers in the East their rent of situation. Notice, for example, the fall in the price of [upstate New York] farms through western competition” by making low-priced crops available from Western farms. Likewise in the cities, public transport would minimize property prices (and hence economic rent) in the center relative to the outlying periphery[6] (Patten 1892, in 1924: 98).
Under a regime of “burdenless taxation” the return on public investment would not take the form of profit, but would aim at lowering the economy’s overall price structure to “promote general prosperity.” This meant that governments should operate natural monopolies directly, or at least regulate them. “Parks, sewers and schools improve the health and intelligence of all classes of producers, and thus enable them to produce more cheaply, and to compete more successfully in other markets.” Patten concluded: “If the courts, post office, parks, gas and water works, street, river and harbor improvements, and other public works do not increase the prosperity of society they should not be conducted by the State. Like all private enterprises they should yield a surplus” for the overall economy, but not be treated as what today is called a profit center (Patten 1892, 98).
Little trace of Patten’s concept survives in today’s national income and product accounting. It would go against current free-market ideology to estimate the price saving of public over private infrastructure investment by calculating its capital cost, and estimating what normal charges would be added for interest, profits, dividends, other financial fees, and high executive salaries. What is important to recognize is that industrialists themselves advocated infrastructure investment, going back to Henry Clay’s “American System” of internal improvements, protective tariffs, and a national bank early in the 19th century. And indeed, in almost every 20th-century economy, public infrastructure represents the largest capital investment, especially in third-world countries. Yet free-market models continue to treat public spending only as deadweight, and public budgets report such spending as part of the deficit, not as capital investment productive of any economic return, except for user fees.
Ostensibly in response to these models, public infrastructure investment has been sold off and privatized since the 1980s. As Patten showed, the relatively narrow scope of free market marginal productivity models applied only to private-sector industrial investment, not to public investment. (What would the “product” be?) The great virtue of Patten’s analysis was to point out that the alternative was to promote a rentier “tollbooth” economy enabling private owners of infrastructure or other monopolies to charge much more than the “marginal product” being supplied.
The Theory of Economic Obsolescence
Patten recognized what Alfred Marshall called industrial quasi-rents, which Joseph Schumpeter subsequently portrayed as the mainspring of entrepreneurial capitalism. Marshall and Schumpeter viewed them as being earned for introducing cost-cutting innovation. The long-term effect of such innovation was to lower prices as emulators adopted the new, more productive technology, assuming that “The gains of monopoly are temporary, due to sudden increases of productive power” (Patten: 1908b, in 1924: 255).
Patten recognized that economic progress left laggards in its wake. His belief that knowledge is the key to economic development led him to infer that countries failing to upgrade their educational systems and technology would be left behind because uneducated and untrained people lost out as a result of the social changes that Patten accompanied progress. In his view, such individuals deserved rehabilitation in the form of public education and job training. “The state has always made use of the right to put special taxes on those who have special advantages, and it would only be a further extension of a well-organized principle, if the cost of improving the condition of the lower classes was placed upon those whose incomes grow because of social progress” (Patten 1891: 368).
A second inference was that the rising role of knowledge would cause income and wealth disparities. “After the state has settled its accounts with those who have lost through the changes due to social progress, it must look to the holders of the unearned increment, and to those who have special gains from other sources, for funds to pay these claims against it” (Patten 1891: 368). But most of all, Patten’s theory of economic rent—especially as it applies to public infrastructure investment as lowering economy-wide costs of living and production—suggests that countries failing to go beyond the rentier form of society would suffer higher cost structures and hence lose their competitive edge. And to the extent that monopoly privileges are sold on credit, interest charges are built into the seeming “cost of production” of essential services. Rent-seeking and financial practices thus might make entire national economies obsolete, so that the most rent-free economies would emerge dominant.
This was the starting point of what may be thought of as enlightened American industrial capitalism—which aimed at becoming the world’s most rent-free economy.
The Aftermath
“We have arrived at a point in the development of the social sciences where we cannot let one another alone,” Patten told the 1894 American Economic Association (AEA) meetings. But the “cleft between the economic and sociological camps” had widened to such a degree that economists were ignoring the institutional environment—the political element of classical political economy. To help overcome this situation, E. R. A. Seligman acknowledged that Patten taught and inspired “more of the younger scholars in the United States than any other individual” (Fox 1967: 146f). He was an early mentor of the social work profession, and when the American Sociological Society (ASS) was founded at the 1905 meeting of the AEA, six of its 36 founding members had taken their PhDs under him.
The ASS was formed to extend economic analysis to include the transformation (and hence, reform) of society’s institutions of finance and property — and in response to the fact that the most socially aware economists were leaving the discipline as it was taken over by narrow constructionists who excluded the study of public policy-making from scientific status quo economics (Mitchell 1967). Rather than seeking “universals” as if this would give the badge of scientific method to economics, and rather than seeking a universal “technological” or material basis for explaining economic growth, Patten recognized that institutional practices were what defined national economies—their laws, their mode of handling monopolies and the phenomenon of economic rent, and their banking and credit practices — what today is termed the FIRE sector, finance, insurance, and real estate. Yet it is precisely the FIRE sector that subsequent “free market” economics has neglected.
Patten “was not afraid to break down the barriers between his science and others and to write about ethics, psychology, education, sociology, religion, and biology in the manner philosophers used before the great specializing trend of the nineteenth century began” (Tugwell 1923: 154). Patten “prophesied, before others, the success of feminism and prohibition, the success of economic federalism, changes in consumption habits . . . the general rise in living levels, [and] the future programs of taxation,” observed his student Rexford Tugwell (Tugwell 1923: 188), citing Clark’s remark “that Patten, at one time or another, anticipated all the later developments in economics, but that he worked none of them through” (Tugwell 1923: 186).
Much to our loss, Patten never formed a “school.” His approach was too wide-ranging and pan-disciplinary to synthesize in a Principles of Economics text. In contrast to the simplified view of current mainstream economics in which rent and free lunches, real estate and financial bubbles are portrayed as anomalies or “market imperfections,” Patten’s institutional economics retains a more realistic and socially complex perspective. But reactionary response by the vested interests to the progressive conclusions of institutional and sociological economics re-defined the criterion of academic economics to be simplicity and an internal consistency of assumptions, without much regard for their conformity to reality (Hudson 2000: 292–315).
What began as a reaction against classical political economy in the 1880s and 1890s became an academic rejection of the labor theory of value and its associated theory of economic rent. Rentier income is now treated as just another profit opportunity to gain from investing tangible or financial capital. Land and monopolistic rent-seeking activities are lumped together as “capital,” stripping away the classical distinction between economic rent and normal profit. For the past hundred years, all gains have been portrayed as being earned by providing a service. It was and is blindly assumed that market competition will prevent exploitative economic rents from emerging on more than a temporary basis.
As the 19th century’s endorsement of taxing land and its groundrent has dissipated — to say nothing of attempts to nationalize land and key monopolies — the concept of economic rent as unearned income has been dropped from the academic curriculum and public discourse. As Veblen observed, this narrowness appeals to defenders of property precisely because it leaves little room to deal with the landlord’s or financier’s “unearned increment” that results from rising prices for farmland and urban sites, mineral rights and natural monopolies, or for railroads and trusts that incorporate watered costs into the prices they extort from producers and consumers.
Opponents of distinguishing between earned and unearned income have disparaged progressive reformers and institutionalists as if they had no grounds for a theory. They did indeed have grounds for a theory, but its scope was broader than that of the marginalists, for whom “institutional facts are taken for granted, denied, or explained away.” Regarding the financial system, for example, “the effect of credit extension on business traffic is left on one side and there is an explanation of how the borrower and lender co-operate to smooth out their respective income streams of consumable goods or sensations of consumption” (Veblen 1936: 154). The resulting unhistorical and overly abstract views of the marginalists trivialized any analysis of how wealth actually is obtained and what economies are all about.
By being “universal,” abstract theory ignores the specific historical modes of wealth accumulation—for instance, what Honoré Balzac expressed when he quipped that behind every family fortune lies a great, often undiscovered crime. “Market” economics has no room for the discovery of crimes, exploitation, unearned income, economic rent, interest, capital gains, or other asset-price gains, much less a remedy for the imbalances and inequities these phenomena cause. While today’s mainstream “free enterprise” economics focuses on the so-called “real” economy, business analysts focus increasingly on developing more rent-seeking activities, whose financing now makes up the majority of bank loans.
The pursuit of wealth is still primarily about rent seeking. This is why the financial approach of Hyman Minsky and his post-Keynesian followers retains the premise that “Institutions must be brought into the analysis at the beginning; useful theory is institution specific” (Papadimitriou and Wray 1998: 201). But instead of viewing this financial rentier overgrowth as stifling the economy, free market doctrine and policy treats it as the essence of today’s path to business wealth — in practice, a greed-is-good culture regardless of economy-wide consequences.
To the institutionalists, the purpose of explaining the historical differences among nations was to bring into focus the public policy and financial context that shaped market relations — and by logical extension, on reforms that aimed to regulate, tax, and socialize wealth for the future of the economy. This is anathema to economists who — by definition — deem a “free market” as one steered by financial insiders and other rentiers “free” of public regulation.
Patten thus extended the discussion of economic rent far beyond that of Ricardo. Ricardo dealt with resource rents, not financial rents. The economic problem in Ricardian analysis was landlords seeking protective grain tariffs, but by the late 19th century it was the monopolists and financial trusts that organized and backed them that were the problem. Whereas Ricardo warned that rent-seeking landlords would render Britain a high-cost economy, Patten warned that rent-seeking monopolists and financiers were the major threat to the United States.
Subsequent institutionalists extended the discussion to mining and industrial trusts, the Standard Oil monopoly, and high finance. In their day they were the academic counterparts to investigative journalists in explaining how finance absorbed the insurance and commercial property sectors, fuels, and mining, as well as farming in which financial interests could control the key wholesale marketing, transport, and other choke points.
It may be surprising that the first economics professor at America’s first and foremost business school should have been so strong an endorser of public infrastructure. But this is a reminder of how far economic orthodoxy has departed from classical economics and the strategy that made the U.S. economy the most productive, highest wage, and the most competitive economy in the world.
Catastrophically, what has been lost since Patten’s day is an awareness of why public enterprise tends to make economies more competitive than private enterprise. Free market ideology since the 1980s treats privatization as inherently more efficient than public enterprise, even for natural monopolies such as transportation. But private ownership of basic infrastructure — almost always debt leveraged, as is real estate — adds interest and other financial charges, high management fees, stock options, and capital gains to the cost of providing basic services.
It is important to note that public enterprise is free of these charges. Private ownership of natural monopolies creates a vested political interest in deregulation. Owners become rent seeking, charging as high a price as possible over the cost of production. Political lobbying along these lines threatens to turn economies into tollbooth opportunities for price extortion. The end result tends to benefit the financial sector, whose lending turns rent extraction into a flow of interest payments.
Likewise rising valuations on land sites typically are collateralized for increasingly large bank loans. Today, banks rather than the tax collector end up receiving the site rent. This forces governments to tax labor and industry to make up for the loss of the property-tax base, adding to the cost of living and doing business. This is the path along which the United States and other nations are traveling today. It is the opposite from that pursued a century ago during America’s rise to economic power, in which Simon Patten and others laid out the logic for keeping rent seeking in check by retaining tollbooth opportunities and economic rent in the public domain. At that time, industrial capital and business found this theory sufficiently reflective of its interests such that Patten’s views were taught at the Wharton School as the economic strategy of America’s future rise to global dominance. But that is the exact opposite policy from what is being taught and pursued in the United States and throughout most of the world, for the benefit of the few.
Notes
[1]
As Mill put matters in 1848 (Principles of Political Economy, Book V, ch. II §5), rent-yielding properties enabled their holders to demand payment from society “without any exertion or sacrifice on the part of the owners . . . [Landlords] grow richer, as it were in their sleep, without working, risking, or economizing. What claim have they, on the general principle of social justice, to this accession of riches? In what would they have been wronged if society had, from the beginning, reserved the right of taxing the spontaneous increase of rent, to the highest amount required by financial exigencies?”
[2]
Patten (1908b, in 1924: 254) elaborated: “At present there are four classes of property that gain a relatively large share of the benefits of improvements and whose values and costs are most frequently watered. These are the railroads, protected industries, western farms and city lands. A city lot valued at $100,000 or a western farm that sells at $100 an acre represents a higher proportion of watered values than do railroad stocks or the protected trusts.” A large proportion of the price of rural and urban real estate consists of the mortgages attached to it, absorbing its rental income in the form of interest charges.
[3]
See Henry (1983: 382): “The year 1890 provides the watershed in the development of Clark’s orthodoxy,” developing the theory of distribution that became the essence of his 1899 Distribution of Wealth. By contrast, Mason Gaffney (1995) attributes Clark’s views and indeed neoclassical economics as a whole to opposition to Henry George’s Single Tax program, not to Marx and other socialists. This seems to overlook Clark’s writings opposing socialism from 1877 through 1889.
In fact, Gaffney’s argument closely follows Patten’s 1890 article in the Journal of Ethics, yet makes no reference to its precedence by over a century to the effect that marginal productivity theory treats economic rent as being as fairly earned as all other income—as if rent and interest were payments for landlords, bankers, and financial operators creating a marginal product. More egregiously, Gaffney misses entirely George’s failure to apply a rigorous theory of economic rent to non-land rent extraction in the way that Patten did in what best may be characterized as the reformist wing of American industrial capitalism. This neglect does not seem to be innocent. For example, the article by Charles F. Collier (2003) presents a travesty of Patten’s thought—censoring his criticism of George and utterly misrepresenting his view—without citing the discussion of George at all!
[4]
Clark argued along similar lines in his articles on “The Ethics of Land Tenure” (1890a), “The Moral Basis of Property in Land” (1890b), and “Distribution as Determined by a Law of Rent” (1891). Henry (1995) provides a bibliography and analysis of Clark’s development of marginal productivity theory.
[5]
Europe’s aristocratic governments developed their tax policy “at a time when the state was a mere military organization for the defense of society from foreign foes, or to gratify national feelings by aggressive wars.” Such states had a “passive” economic development policy, and their tax philosophy was “based upon moral or political ideals,” not economic efficiency.
[6]
Stated the other way around, transportation facilities would increase outlying land prices along the routes. London’s recent Tube extension along the Jubilee Line, for example, inspired a discussion about whether underground and bus transport can be financed publicly by taxing the higher rental value created for sites along such routes. Paying for capital investment out of such tax levies could provide transportation at subsidized prices, minimizing a major element of the economy’s cost structure.
References
Clark, J. B. (1890a). “The Ethics of Land Tenure.” International Journal of Ethics 1(1): 62–79.
——. (1890b). “The Moral Basis of Property in Land.” Journal of Social Science 27: 21–26.
——. (1891). “Distribution as Determined by a Law of Rent.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 5(3): 289–318.
——. (1899). The Distribution of Wealth. New York:
Collier, C. F. (2003). “Patten: A Study in Itellectual Dishonesty.” In Critics of Henry George. Ed. R. F. Andelson, pp. 395–406. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fox, D. M. (1967). The Discovery of Abundance: Simon N. Patten and the Transformation of Social Theory. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Gaffney, M. (1995). “The Neo-Classical Stratagem.” In The Corruption of Economics. Eds. M. Gaffney and F. Harrison, pp. 29–163. London: Shepheard-Walwyn Ltd.
Henry, J. F. (1983). “John Bates Clark and the Marginal Product: An Historical Inquiry into the Origins of Value-Free Economic Theory.” History of Political Economy 15(3): 375–389.
——. (1995). “God and the Marginal Product: Religion and the Development of J. B. Clark’s Theory of Distribution.” Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology 13: 75–101.
Hudson, M. (2010). America’s Protectionist Takeoff: 1815–1914. ISLET.
——. (2000). “The Use and Abuse of Mathematical Economics.” Journal of Economic Studies 27: 292–315.
Mill, J. S. (1848). Principles of Political Economy. Vol. II. Revised Edition. New York: Colonial Press.
Mitchell, W. C. (1967). Types of Economic Theory. New York: A. M. Kelley.
Papadimitriou, D. and Wray, R. (1998). “The Economic Contributions of Hyman Minsky: Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Reform.” Review of Political Economy 10(2): 199–225
Patten, S. (1890). The Economic Basis of Protection. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company.
——. (1891). “Another View of the Ethics of Land Tenure.” International Journal of Ethics 1(3): 354–370.
——. (1892). “The Theory of Dynamic Economics.” In Patten, 1924,pp. 33–135.
——. (1893). “The Interpretation of Ricardo.” In Patten, 1924, pp. 144–163.
——. (1899). The Development of English Thought. New York: Macmillan’s.
——. (1908a). “The Conflict Theory of Distribution.” In Patten, 1924, pp. 219–239.
——. (1908b). “The Political Significance of Recent Economic Theories.” In Patten, 1924, pp. 248–258.
——. (1912). “The Reconstruction of Economic Theory.” In Patten, 1924, pp. 273–340
——. (1924). Essays in Economic Theory. Ed. Rexford G. Tugwell. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Tugwell, R. G. (1923). “Notes on the Life and Work of Simon Nelson Patten.”
Journal of Political Economy 31(2): 153–208
Veblen, T. (1936). What Veblen Taught: Selected Writings of Thorstein Veblen.
Ed. W. C. Mitchell. New York: Viking Press.
Photo by Filbert Mangundap on Unsplash
In a single move, Yemen’s Ansarallah has checkmated the west and its rules-based order.
By Pepe Escobar and first posted at The Cradle.
Whether invented in northern India, eastern China or Central Asia – from Persia to Turkestan – chess is an Asian game. In chess, there always comes a time when a simple pawn is able to upset the whole chessboard, usually via a move in the back rank whose effect simply cannot be calculated.
Yes, a pawn can impose a seismic checkmate. That’s where we are, geopolitically, right now.
The cascading effects of a single move on the chessboard – Yemen’s Ansarallah stunning and carefully targeted blockade of the Red Sea – reach way beyond global shipping, supply chains, and The War of Economic Corridors. Not to mention the reduction of the much lauded US Navy force projection to irrelevancy.
Yemen’s resistance movement, Ansarallah, has made it very clear that any Israel-affiliated or Israel-destined vessel will be intercepted. While the west bristles at this, and imagines itself a target, the rest of the world fully understands that all other shipping is free to pass. Russian tankers – as well as Chinese, Iranian, and Global South ships – continue to move undisturbed across the Bab al-Mandeb (narrowest point: 33 km) and the Red Sea.
Only the Hegemon is disturbed by this challenge to its ‘rules-based order.’ It is outraged that western vessels delivering energy or goods to law-breaking Israel can be impeded, and that the supply chain has been severed and plunged into deep crisis. The pinpointed target is the Israeli economy, which is already bleeding heavily. A single Yemeni move proves to be more efficient than a torrent of imperial sanctions.
It is the tantalizing possibility of this single move turning into a paradigm shift – with no return – that is adding to the Hegemon’s apoplexy. Especially because imperial humiliation is deeply embedded in the paradigm shift.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, on the record, is now sending an unmistakeable message: Forget the Suez Canal. The way to go is the Northern Sea Route – which the Chinese, in the framework of the Russia-China strategic partnership, call the Arctic Silk Road.
For the dumbfounded Europeans, the Russians have detailed three options: First, sail 15,000 miles around the Cape of Good Hope. Second, use Russia’s cheaper and faster Northern Sea Route. Third, send the cargo via Russian Railways.
Rosatom, which oversees the Northern Sea Route, has emphasized that non-ice-class ships are now able to sail throughout summer and autumn, and year-round navigation will soon be possible with the help of a fleet of nuclear icebreakers.
All that as direct consequences of the single Yemeni move. What next? Yemen entering BRICS+ at the summit in Kazan in late 2024, under the Russian presidency?
The new architecture will be framed in West Asia
The US-led Armada put together for Operation Genocide Protection, which collapsed even before birth, may have been set up to “warn Iran,” apart from giving Ansarallah a scare. Just as the Houthis, Tehran is hardly intimidated because, as West Asia analyst ace Alastair Crooke succinctly put it: “Sykes-Picot is dead.”
This is a quantum shift on the chessboard. It means West Asian powers will frame the new regional architecture from now on, not US Navy “projection.”
That carries an ineffable corollary: those eleven US aircraft carrier task forces, for all practical purposes, are essentially worthless.
Everyone across West Asia is well aware that Ansarallah’s missiles are capable of hitting Saudi and Emirati oil fields, and knocking them out of commission. So it is little wonder that Riyadh and Abu Dhabi would never accept becoming part of a US-led maritime force to challenge the Yemeni resistance.
Add to it the role of underwater drones now in the possession of Russia and Iran. Think of fifty of these aimed at a US aircraft carrier: it has no defense. While the Americans still have very advanced submarines, they cannot keep the Bab al-Mandeb and Red Sea open to western operators.
On the energy front, Moscow and Tehran don’t even need to think – at least not yet – about using the “nuclear” option or cutting off potentially at least 25 percent, and up, of the world oil supply. As one Persian Gulf analyst succinctly describes it, “that would irretrievably implode the international financial system.”
For those still determined to support the genocide in Gaza there have been warnings. Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani has mentioned it explicitly. Tehran has already called for a total oil and gas embargo against nations that support Israel.
A total naval blockade of Israel, meticulously engineered, remains a distinct possibility. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Commander Hossein Salami said Israel may “soon face the closure of the Mediterranean Sea, the Strait of Gibraltar, and other waterways.”
Keep in mind we’re not yet even talking about a possible blockade of the Strait of Hormuz; we’re still on Red Sea/Bab al-Mandeb.
Because if the Straussian neo-cons in the Beltway get really unhinged by the paradigm shift and act in desperation to “teach a lesson” to Iran, a chokepoint Hormuz-Bab al-Mandeb combo blockade might skyrocket the price of oil to at least $500 a barrel, triggering the implosion of the $618 trillion derivatives market and crashing the entire international banking system.
The paper tiger is in a jam
Mao Zedong was right after all: the US may be in fact a paper tiger. Putin, though, is way more careful, cold, and calculating. With this Russian president, it’s all about an asymmetric response, exactly when no one is expecting it.
That brings us to the prime working hypothesis perhaps capable of explaining the shadow play masking the single Ansarallah move on the chessboard.
When Pulitzer-winning investigative journalist Sy (Seymour) Hersh proved how Team Biden blew up the Nord Stream pipelines, there was no Russian response to what was, in effect, an act of terrorism against Gazprom, against Germany, against the EU, and against a bunch of European companies. Yet Yemen, now, with a simple blockade, turns global shipping upside down.
So what is more vulnerable? The physical networks of global energy supply (Pipelineistan) or the Thalassocracy, states that derive their power from naval supremacy?
Russia privileges Pipelineistan: see, for instance, the Nord Streams and Power of Siberia 1 and 2. But the US, the Hegemon, always relied on its thalassocratic power, heir to “Britannia rules the waves.”
Well, not anymore. And, surprisingly, getting there did not even entail the “nuclear” option, the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which Washington games and scaremongers like crazy.
Of course we won’t have a smoking gun. But it’s a fascinating proposition that the single Yemeni move may have been coordinated at the highest level between three BRICS members – Russia, China, and Iran, the neocon new “axis of evil” – plus other two BRICS+, energy powerhouses Saudi Arabia and the UAE. As in, “if you do it, we’ve got your back”.
None of that, of course, detracts from Yemeni purity: their defense of Palestine is a sacred duty.
Western imperialism and then turbo-capitalism have always been obsessed with gobbling up Yemen, a process that Isa Blumi, in his splendid book Destroying Yemen, described as “necessarily stripping Yemenis of their historic role as the economic, cultural, spiritual, and political engine for much of the Indian Ocean world.”
Yemen, though, is unconquerable and, true to a local proverb, “deadly” (Yemen Fataakah). As part of the Axis of Resistance, Yemen’s Ansarallah is now a key actor in a complex Eurasia-wide drama that redefines Heartland connectivity; and alongside China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the India-Iran-Russia-led International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), and Russia’s new Northern Sea Route, also includes control over strategic chokepoints around the Mediterranean Seas and the Arabian peninsula.
This is another trade connectivity paradigm entirely, smashing to bits western colonial and neocolonial control of Afro-Eurasia. So yes, BRICS+ supports Yemen, who with a single move has presented Pax Americana with The Mother of All Geopolitical Jams.
The most uncomplicated way to say it, is … we, our planet, our world, demands placed on leaders and ourselves as functional inhabitants of this planet, have all changed. 2023 is the year of awareness, where most became aware of the fall of the rules-based order. Here we can only refer to the various summits where the news was distributed and the hope for different structures was enthusiastically discussed and ran high. (It is still running high!). Think of the SPIEF meeting, the BRICS meeting, the Latin America CELAC, the Russia Africa meets, the picking up of Belt and Road after Covid, the Eastern Economic Forum, and many more. The world is talking to one another. 2022 was the time when this rules-based order started facing direct challenges. 2024 will be decisions and forward movement and momentum to embrace the change not seen in 100 years, and there will be chaos while hammering in new structures against the badly damaged rules-based thingy falling down down like a clapped-out old second-hand vehicle with nothing left to lose!
Don’t underestimate the coming year. We are facing major issues and challenges. We will not, at the end of the year have an equal and orderly multipolar world and universally beneficial and inclusive economic opportunities, but we will be more visibly on our way.
“An equal and orderly multipolar world is one in which all countries, regardless of size, are treated as equals, hegemonism, and power politics are rejected, and democracy is truly promoted in international relations. To keep the progress toward greater multipolarity generally stable and constructive, the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter must be observed by all, the universally recognized, basic norms governing international relations must be upheld by all, and true multilateralism must be practiced. A universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization is one that meets the common needs of all countries, especially developing countries, and properly addresses the development imbalances between and within countries resulting from the global allocation of resources. It is important to resolutely oppose the abuse of the concept of security, oppose all forms of unilateralism and protectionism, firmly promote trade and investment liberalization and facilitation, overcome the structural problems hindering the healthy development of the world economy, and make economic globalization more open, inclusive, balanced and beneficial to all.” Xi Jinping.
We started the year with one war. We end the year with two. The end for neither of the two is currently in sight. We also know that this world can’t continue with a war-making paradigm. Whether you subscribe to climate change or not, whether you see the part that is a hoax and the part that is a normal planetary process, or whether you think during some of those dark nights of the soul, that we, humans have to be involved in some way or another, if only just for the massive changes that we’re creating. Think only of land and the toxic load on that. We had our full say on Covid and the toxicity, but we don’t say too much about land degradation as one example. We may have a hand in this change, we may not. I simply look at what China is physically doing and what Russia is physically doing and then I feel I have a handle on affairs. Both China and Russia are doing remedial works, in the case of China, massive! In the case of Russia, it is not so massive but they have the forests that do remediation for them. My mind changed somewhat when I realized that the permafrost in the other colder regions was really melting. We can live without war on our planet. We have a lot of productive work to do.
Now how is this global space of ours going to transform? Change is a strange thing. One can plan to the 9th degree but plans sometimes do not work out as envisaged. So, be ready for many surprises of the positive and negative kind.
In the past year, we had a very pleasant surprise. In March, Beijing mediated the agreement to resume diplomatic relations – broken seven years ago – between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which opened the doors for Riyadh and Tehran to join the BRICS11. (BRICS10).
De-dollarization is running at a fast clip, faster than what I expected. Iran is all in of course. The strategic relationship between China and Russia deepened in 2023, with two meetings between their presidents. Trade between Russia and China hit a record high this year, reaching US$218 billion in November, up 26.7% year-on-year and with 95% bilaterally, now in rubles and yuan, taking another step towards de-dollarization between their countries. For the first time in history, most of China’s foreign trade (49%) was carried out in yuan. The country signed an agreement with Brazil to conduct trade and investments in local currencies and now has similar agreements with more than 20 countries. Beijing also carried out currency swaps with Argentina, which paid installments of its debt to the IMF in yuan, something unprecedented in the fund’s history. China reached an agreement to buy oil from Iraq – its third largest supplier – in yuan, and made the first purchase of this strategic commodity in digital yuan. However, the yuan’s share of world trade is still low, having reached less than 4% between January and September. Undoubtedly, China’s great technological accomplishment in 2023 was achieving the domestic manufacture of the 7-nanometer microchip. Huawei surprised the world with its new Mate 60 Pro cell phone. Without announcing it, the Chinese company used a 7nm chip manufactured by its subsidiary HiSilicon with technology from SMIC, also Chinese. While still lagging behind the most advanced 3nm microprocessors, China achieved this goal in just 5 years. And from Russia, the events run by Roscongress, in Delhi, Mumbai & Bangalore this month were preparation for the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum 2024 (Jun 5-8) and pointed to the 2023 trade total of $50bn being surpassed easily next year.
In the 20th century – with its wars, revolutions, colonial possessions, and national liberations – the world was cut up bizarrely and illogically. The military-ideological confrontation of the second half of the century was gradually transformed into a global framework. With its help, all collisions should, in theory, have been resolved. But they were not. On the contrary, as soon as the foundations began to wobble, they recurred with renewed vigor.
The current proliferation of conflicts is a symptom of the weakening of the modern international power structure. This was exercised in the form of a “liberal world order” (more recently called a “rules-based order”).
In the 20th century – with its wars, revolutions, colonial possessions and national liberations – the world was cut up bizarrely and illogically. The military-ideological confrontation of the second half of the century was gradually transformed into a global framework. With its help, all collisions should, in theory, have been resolved. But they were not. On the contrary, as soon as the foundations began to wobble, they recurred with renewed vigor.
The current proliferation of conflicts is a symptom of the weakening of the modern international power structure. – Fyodor Lukyanov
Just thinking about BRICS – from January 1, 2024, the G7 will become a poverty club and BRICS will develop to be the rich kids on the block. This is a massive change. Banks will develop. The multipolar world does not have sufficient banking facilities at the moment and development is greatly needed.
Russia is arranging three sports internationals for the coming year … an alternative sports arena alongside the conventional international stage, Games of the Future will introduce several new events and tournaments as well as modern computer games. The Valdai discussion club hosts major think tank-type gatherings and the Roscogress is amazing in terms of the number of international congresses and conferences that it hosts.
China is equally busy. Their major intention which they followed through on for 2023, was recovering the Belt and Road project after borders were opened post-Covid. The Belt and Road’s initial set of meetings was very business-like. In the new year, I’m expecting massive growth.
The wars – we always believe that the SMO is not done until NATO is done and out. Are we going to be proven right with the NATO move to the east? Overall, the effect of the israel war on Palestine will be more visible. Israel is toast as a country (if it even is a country) and the US, while it did not do anything in the UN to support a cease-fire and continued supplying weapons, will never, in our 100 years of changes, recover its so-called importance or so-called leadership. Nobody is impressed with its so-called democracy© and in fact nobody wants to have anything much to do with the US and the collective West. They cannot even do much regarding Yemen, but keejerked and declared a bunch of sanctions. Sanctions as a unilateral tool are also losing their luster and there are so many now, that there is no possible way that sanctions can be enforced. Most of Latin America is feverishly busy breaking sanctions, Russia buys shadow fleets, China moves stuff across the Russia/China border and the North Korean border. Sanctions as a regime are falling apart and the World Trade Organization has its problems as nobody is interested in the western games being played there.
So, if we say that 2024 could be the year when the West’s liberal elites lose control of the world order, we may be thinking in the right direction, although we are in for a messy time. (I am not considering nukes).
Strangely, I am excited! It’s been a few years since that happened and a new year has me excited. I feel there is progress.
I wish you all a fortunate, lovely, positive, creative, and uplifting new year! Don’t make wishes, make visions!
Transcript
Ania: Michael Hudson. The interview took place on December 29, 2023.
ANIA: Hello everyone, welcome back to my channel. It looks like we are live and we are a few seconds before time, so a little bit better than Swiss precision. Today I have for the second time a very, very special guest. Many of you have been anticipating this conversation with Professor Michael Hudson, who is the financial analyst and very distinguished research professor of economics. Someone whose expertise, opinion, knowledge I very much value. And I think as we are coming to the end of 2023, this might be a very important discussion here, very important information from Professor Hudson. So welcome back, Professor Hudson. Thank you so much for finding time for our conversation.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, it’s good to be back, Ania.
ANIA: Thank you. And just to let you know, everyone, all the links to find Professor Hudson are already down below this live stream. You can support his work via Patreon, all the books, there’s a link as well, also his website. All the links are down below. I appreciate you subscribing, liking, sharing, supporting my channel as well. And let’s start with actually Professor Hudson has sent me a very, very informative email. And I want to say thank you officially now to you for sending this to me because of that email, I was able to kind of narrow my question down to you. And if there are any questions from the audience, please put them in the Super Chats.
So in your email, you’ve mentioned that Ukraine’s apartheid state is an apartheid state. And I would like to start with this. Can you explain to the audience what does this really mean to be an apartheid state? And Israel is also an apartheid state.
MICHAEL HUDSON: An apartheid state. Well, that goes back to Nazi Germany in the 1930s. An apartheid state says that only one ethnicity should dominate the state and all other ethnicities should be excluded. As soon as World War II ended, the U.S. military and the intelligence agencies recruited the nationalists and the Nazis who had been working for the Germans against the Russians into the NATO framework as managers and began to prepare for a long-term fight against the Soviet Union. Somehow the end of World War II metamorphosized gradually into really a renewal of what followed World War I, the fight against the Soviet Union. And from the very beginning, for the last 80 years, the United States has sought to fight Russia. Even when Russia stopped being the Soviet Union, it was viewed as having an independent characteristic, an independent policy. And so it used the Nazis to spur a nationalistic, anti-Russian feeling of treating the Russians really as subhumans, denying the Russian-speaking population the retirement income and Social Security and health care and public services. And basically you had the Ukrainians treating the Russians as the Germans had treated the Nazis.
Well, you’re having the same fight now in Israel when Netanyahu and President Biden says there can only be one ethnicity in Israel. There can only be a single state. It’s possible to have a two-state solution. You can have Israel and you can have Palestine, but only Jews will occupy either Israel or Palestine.
The United States mentality, not only for Ukraine and for Israel, but for the whole world economy, is there can only be one economy and one state favoring one group of people. And what you’re seeing in the apartheid state of both Ukraine with its anti-Russian, banning the Russian language, banning Russian books, destroying Russian novels and literature from the libraries, not performing Russian music. All of this is followed by the United States pressing for the Olympic Committee, for instance, not to let Russian athletes join in the Olympics under the flag. The apartheid that you’re seeing in Ukraine is followed by the United States itself, spurring the apartheid state. To the United States, Both Ukraine and Israel are sort of models of what the United States would like to do on a global basis for the entire world economy. There can only be one economy. And basically, it’s a U.S.-NATO-centered economy to which other countries are either supposed to obey and accept the rules or else they’re to be fought against. And so you can look at what’s happening in Israel right now and Ukraine right now as a dress rehearsal on a small scale of the same kind of fight that is occurring in the world economy. Are there going to be two different economies? And are these economies going to be equals democratically? Or is the world economy somehow going to be itself an apartheid state between the United States and NATO on the one hand and the BRICS Plus and the Global South on the other, all in a central unit? That really is what all this fight and maneuvering is about right now in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea and the oil gulf. It’s not only an ethnic apartheid, it’s an apartheid of economic systems, both in Ukraine and Israel and in the kind of order the United States is trying to create.
ANIA: Thank you so much for answering this. And on this note, I would like to ask you two questions following on that. First, do you think the United States will be able to succeed this plan, will be able to be successful with this plan? And will the U.S. be able to keep Western Europe as a U.S. economic, political and military satellite? Yes or no? And if no, what’s going to happen?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, there are really two questions there. For your first question there, what is success? The fight in Israel right now is really a process that’s been going on for 20 years. The United States is backing Israel. And you can look at Israel as being to the United States what Ukraine is. The United States is willing to fight to the last Ukrainian against Russia. It’s willing to fight to the last Israeli against the Muslim states. The United States ever since 9-11 in 2001 has wanted to conquer Iraq, Syria, and most of all, Iran, as well as Libya. In the United States press, all of the discussions of what’s happening in Gaza and Israel today, whenever they talk about Hezbollah or Hamas, the newspapers all put in the qualifying adjective, Iranian-backed Hamas, Iranian-backed Hezbollah. And if Iraqis are trying to fight to drive out the Americans that are stealing the oil from Iraq, it’s the Iranian-backed Iraqis.
This whole fighting that you’re seeing in Israel now, that on the surface seems to be a fight to purify the Israeli state from the non-Jewish population, is part of the American attempt to really conquer the whole Near East and its oil production. To America, the Near East is important because American domination of the world economy for the last hundred years has rested upon its control of oil, along with British Petroleum and the French oil companies. The United States has used oil as controlling energy, and by controlling energy and its pricing, controlling industrial productivity and GDP. GDP, labor productivity, industry, is all a function of energy.
So what the United States is doing is goading Netanyahu to try to provoke the Lebanon Hezbollah into retaliating, so the United States can attack Lebanon, and trying to provoke Iran. It recently assassinated an Iranian leader in Syria, trying to provoke Iran into doing something.
Well, under normal circumstances, when Lebanon or Iran is attacked in the way that the Israelis are attacking now, you’d fight back. That’s the natural tendency. If you’re punched, you’re going to punch back. But this is so obvious that this is what the United States wants Lebanon to do, and wants Iran to do, that they’ve stepped back a month ago, and said, wait a minute, we’re not going to retaliate, just like the United States was trying to goad the Ukrainians to provoke a Russian attack, so that we could begin to bleed Russia, the United States is trying to provoke an attack so that it can finally attack Iran with everything it has.
Well, what has happened for the last month is Iran and Hezbollah and other Muslim groups have talked with each other to try to coordinate what we’re doing, and saying, look, we’re all under attack. We’re not going to let the United States pick us off one by one. Let’s not let the United States divide and conquer us, and first conquer Lebanon, and then conquer Syria, and then reconquer Iraq and drive out the opposition and the liberation fight in Iraq, and then conquer Iran. We’ve got to have a united front, and that’s why Russian ships and Chinese ships have moved into the area, and it’s realized that this fight that seems on the surface to be one between Netanyahu and the Palestinians, is really just a catalyst, a fuse, a trigger for the Near Eastern war that the United States has been planning.
And that brings us to the second part of your question. Will the United States succeed in maintaining control of Europe? Well, the fight in the Near East is very similar to the logic that the United States was fighting with its foreign policy in Europe, beginning in 2022. Its fear was that looking at the world situation from the German and French perspective, the logical policy of Western Europe would be to have a symbiotic trade and investment relationship with Russia and with China. And in this relationship, Germany would import Russian oil, gas, and other raw materials, and it would pay for the imports by exporting industrial goods.
Well, if this scenario had unfolded, the United States really would be pretty much left out. What did it really have to offer Europe? Well, the one thing it had to offer was refraining from blackmailing the German and French political leaders who basically had been nurtured and prepared by the United States State Department and CIA and non-governmental organizations, the National Endowment for Democracy, all to sort of represent U.S.-NATO interests, not the interests of their own countries.
From the United States’ point of view, how do you make Europe part of the U.S. economy, not part of the BRICS economy, not part of the Eurasian economy? Well, Nord Stream took care of that, along with the trade sanctions that the U.S. put in the hands of the German leaders, especially NATO leaders, to impose on the entire European economy. Well, right now, you’re seeing the collapse of the German industry as a result. The BASF, the large German chemical company, has already announced that its new plants are going to be located in China because that’s where it can get the natural gas and the oil, largely from Russia, that it needs technologically for its operations. Just last week, one of the big metal companies in Germany announced it’s closing its doors, it’s laying off its labor force, it cannot produce in Europe anymore. European companies are all closing down, and their choice is either to follow the U.S. directions and say, well, why don’t you move to the United States and put your plants in the United States?
Well, they can’t really put their plants in the United States because the cost of living and doing business is so high in the United States, because it’s a financialized economy, that they can’t make profits. So they’re thinking, well, where are we going to move? We can’t move to Russia because they have sanctions. Do we move to China? Do we move to India? Do we move to Asia? Or do we just continue to close down, and where is our labor force going to go? Germany has a very high productivity, highly trained, highly skilled technical labor force. There are no jobs for it now. They’re being closed down.
The question is, will Germany end up looking like Latvia, losing its population? This labor looks for some countries that want skilled machinists, skilled industrial designers, skilled, basically, industrial workers. Well, all of this is occurring in Asia. It’s not occurring in the United States. It’s not occurring in Europe.
So the question is, at what point will the European government act in the interest of its population? Well, you’re already seeing the European population rejecting the European government, because the European government turns out to be NATO. It doesn’t turn out to be acting in the interests of Germany or France or other European countries, but in the interest of NATO that’s controlled by, basically, an arm of the State Department.
And the question is, how can you bring democracy to Europe? It hasn’t really been democratic in the sense of the United States meddling since World War II. For 80 years, the United States has been financing the political right wing. You’ve all seen the story of the Gladio terrorist operation in Italy that the United States staged to oppose the left-wing Prime Minister Moro, ending with Moro’s assassination by a CIA front. The United States has said, we’re going to treat Western Europe in the same way we treated Chile under Allende. If Europe votes for somebody like Allende, we’re going to put in a European Pinochet and a man like Macron, who’s completely anti-labor and doesn’t represent his constituency, or leaders like Angelina Baerbock, the Green leader in Germany, pro-military leader Olaf Scholz, the Christian Democrat leader. They’re going to put in leaders who reflect the U.S. neoliberal doctrine.
And the real fight is, are you going to somehow make all of continental Europe thatcherized and Reaganized and financialized to privatize its public infrastructure along the lines that have occurred in England, in the United States, and in Chile under Pinochet? This is the great question.
Well, what can the European population do when the political system only permits them, basically, to vote for the leading three parties, not for any real alternative that is trying to say, well, why don’t we join the global majority and be in an economic system of mutual gain, mutual trade, mutual investment? That’s the question. Your question is, can it succeed? It can succeed as long as the United States can prevent democracy in Europe by making NATO the political policy arm of Europe instead of democratically elected politics representing the interest of voters.
ANIA: Thank you, professor. So what is the way out of it for the citizens? Do you think it’s an uprising of the citizens? How? Because I see this. I believe that many countries will be ultimately pulling out from the European Union system. You know, in Poland now, they just signed this agreement because they were opposed to it at first. Now we have a new government that is really in the same… A long story. Anyway, we will have to welcome the migrants, because if we don’t, I forgot the exact amount, how much penalty the country has to pay. Is it daily, I believe? 50,000 euros per day, I believe? Something of that nature. How do you see this ending? Because if those, and we know those leaders, so-called leaders, are already assigned to certain positions, they are most of the time groomed to be in those positions. There is a certain ideology that has to be implemented. How those countries, how those citizens come out of it ultimately?
MICHAEL HUDSON: I don’t think they are going to come out of it. I think that Europe is a lost continent for certainly the next decade. It’s going to take a long time. I don’t think Europe can save itself, because it hasn’t made any attempt to save itself. The European leadership believes that it must depend on the United States for their personal support, and also their personal fortunes, and even their personal freedom. So I don’t think that Europe can save itself.
I do think over the long term, the rest of the 21st century, they’re in salvation, but it won’t come from Europe. It will come from China, Russia, the BRICS Plus, and Eurasia, with the Global South, pursuing an entirely different economic and political agenda. You’re going to have the world dividing into two parts, and we’ve discussed this on, I think, our last show. You’ll have the neoliberal, financialized, privatized, NATO, European, U.S. economy. On the one hand, what Joseph Borrell calls the flowering garden, which is really, the flowers are all wilting, but the flowers have been picked. They’re not really a growing garden anymore. They’ve been picked and are lying on the ground.
ANIA: Poisonous flowers.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Right. And on the other hand, you have the jungle. The jungle is what’s growing. That’s what a jungle does. It grows. So the jungle is going to be Asia, East Asia, South Asia, and its linkages to Africa and Brazil. And the wild card is, of course, who’s going to control the Near East. Now, the alternative to the U.S. neoliberal model is a model of mixed economies. I see China and Russia following pretty much the same model that the whole world was going in prior to World War I.
In the early 20th century, you had American industrial capitalism. You had German industrial capitalism, all with a very active public sector. Both countries relied on government investment in roads, railways, canals, school systems, health systems, to minimize the cost of living, minimize the cost of doing business, and to prevent monopolies from developing that would make money without really producing anything.
All of that ended with World War I. The fight against the Soviet Union became a whole fight against not only socialism, but against industrial capitalism’s own idea of having public infrastructure as the key driver for economies. Well, right now, you’ve seen China take the lead in a country that is using its economic surplus not to make financial wealth, but actual tangible means of production. Railroads, the high-speed trains, roads to drive on, car production, industrial production. And you’re having a mixed economy, with most of all money itself being treated as a public utility, so that the government can decide, what are we going to create money for? We’re going to create money to finance tangible capital investment and employment in real goods and services. Building houses, building office buildings, building the infrastructure, building ports and ships and trains and railroads. That’s what they’re creating money for.
In the United States, the Federal Reserve, and in Europe with its central banks, are creating money basically for financial interests to buy existing industrial companies and infrastructure and close them down. The model for Western Europe is the Thames Water in England, a company that was privatized, and instead of providing clean water and stopping pollution in the sewage system, just uses the money that it gets to pay dividends to the investors without making the investment, and ends up polluting the water and losing a lot of water through leakage, and just being the disaster that you’re seeing in England. Similar stories could be said in the United States.
Let’s look 10 years, more likely 20 years in the future. What is going to happen when Western Europe and the United States see how China, Russia, Iran, and the rest of the BRICS 10 countries are raising their living standards, increasing their productivity? They will be to the West what America was to Europe after World War II. Now the situation is reversed. Now it’s the US and Europe that will look towards Russia and China as the leads of how do we emulate them? How do we get Russian and Chinese products for luxuries? Instead of buying blue jeans, American blue jeans and cigarettes as they did after World War II, they’re going to want to buy Chinese and Russian and Asian and, I hope, Near Eastern products as well.
Obviously, at a certain point, not only the population but business interests will say, well, if we want to make money, we’re going to have to join this expanding economic order instead of staying with the shrinking economic order that we’re seeing in the United States and Europe. Normally, you would think that countries always would act in the interest of their leading business classes, but that hasn’t happened in Europe. It hasn’t happened in the United States, and it is happening in Asia because of the way in which governments are creating a market for business to make profits by expanding the economy rather than by closing it down and gentrifying it.
ANIA: Wow, so you literally took me to the question that I had for you, which is, will the Western Europe ever reunite with Russia in trading? And you were already answering it, but I would like to know at what point you think this will happen?
MICHAEL HUDSON: That is impossible to say because the United States is doing everything it can to fight against it. And the United States cannot compete economically with Europe and Asia. It cannot provide an economic model or an economic system that works better.
What it does have is the power to destroy. Not the power to trade, but the power to destroy. It can mount color revolutions. You just saw last week an attempted color revolution in Serbia. And you’re seeing yet more attempts at color revolutions in Kazakhstan because that produces oil. So Kazakhstan has the curse of oil just as the Near East has the curse of attracting American military attacks. The American policy is not economic rivalry. It’s a regime change, color revolutions, and ultimately the kind of war that you’re seeing in the Mediterranean and Red Sea right now. The United States has 800 military bases around the world, and they’ve been put in place for just such an occasion. This is the time when the United States is finally saying, let’s use all the weapons that we have because we’re almost out of guns. We’re out of tanks. We’re out of ammunition. We’re out of bullets. We’re out of missiles. This is our last chance to fight, to at least if we can control Iran and the Near Eastern oil, we can starve other countries into depending on American control of energy, and on the condition that they not join the BRICS 10, that they join the United States instead of China and Russia, that they break relations with the East and lock themselves into the same dependency on the United States diplomacy that Europe has locked itself into.
So Europe is sort of a dress rehearsal. What’s happened to Germany is a dress rehearsal of what the United States is trying to do to other countries. And of course, the U.S. model is what happened to Russia under President Yeltsin, who was the tool of the neoliberals in the 1990s. Privatize all of this infrastructure that the socialist countries have put in place. If you can privatize it and sell it off, then you can replace infrastructure with low prices with natural monopolies charging very high prices. And if Americans are permitted to create the dollar money on their computers and buy out these companies and turn them into monopolies, then America can somehow live off the monopoly rents that it extracts from the BRICS countries and use these rents to pay for the manufactured goods and the labor-produced goods that these countries are supposed to supply the U.S.-NATO economies with a kind of a class war that is put back in business of the rentier economy in the West and the labor economy, socialist economies in the East.
The question will be, will BRICS in Africa and Brazil and other South American countries be willing to submit to financial colonialism and military colonialism in the same way that 18th and 19th century military colonialism of Europe took place? It’s really the same fight but on a different kind of a chessboard, a financial diplomatic covert chessboard instead of open military conflict.
ANIA: Thank you, professor. Here is a question from the viewer and I would like to ask this question to you. Dr. Hudson, I’m relatively young with not much but ambition and intelligence. Should I stay in the U.S. or if not, where should I move? Much appreciated. Could you answer this, please?
MICHAEL HUDSON: That depends how you want to steer your ambition. What is it that you want to do? Do you just want to make money? Do you want to survive? Do you want to be creative? Is there any talent that you have that you’re interested in? People are best at doing what naturally interests them and they follow it up, whether they’re a musical performer, a dancer, an industrialist, an inventor, an author, an analyst. Everybody has their own particular talents and whatever your talents are, you decide, what field do I want to go into? And then you say, well, okay, if this is what I want to do, this field, where and what part of the world is this field more promising?
Well, you’re very likely to have Americans asking questions like that. And just as Europeans asked this question 200 years ago and decided, well, if they want to be innovative and make money for themselves, they’re going to leave Europe and move to the United States. Well, a lot of Americans are going to think, well, now if we want to be innovative, we’d better move to China, Russia, Iran, and one of the BRICS countries that are following economic growth.
Because no matter what you want to do, whether it’s art or industry or even finance, you’ll do better in a growing economy than a shrinking economy. So you’re going to look at where is the world’s economic growth going to be centered. You can look at the U.S. economy as a failed economy. And the U.S. is a failed state. And you can look at Europe as a failed state because it let itself be run by U.S. neoliberal planners that are treating Europe just like they treated Russia in the 1990s. So wherever you see the growth of what you’re interested in is occurring, that’s where you want to go. And you may very well see a reversal of the whole world immigration movement to the new world. And now they move to the new New World, which is East Asia and Russia, the north.
ANIA: Thank you so much for answering this. I would like to ask you now about the United Nations. What is the purpose of existence of the U.N. anymore?
MICHAEL HUDSON: The purpose is to serve the United States foreign policy. That was built into the United Nations at the beginning by giving the United States veto power. The purpose of the United Nations is not to do any action or support any policy that is vetoed by the United States on the Security Council.
Well, what this means is that the United Nations is a failed institution. It’s a failed state. I remember when it was formed back in 1945 and all of the talk was the Nuremberg trials and the purpose of the United Nations ostensibly was to prevent war and to create an alliance of countries to move against any country that either was Nazi, meaning ethnic Nazism, ethnic superiority or war.
Well, beginning in 1950, the United Nations became the first official declarer of war, namely the Korean War. Russia did not use its veto for that because Stalin wanted to see the war in East Asia, fearing that the United States was going to fight Russia in the west from Europe. Stalin was paranoid about another invasion of Russia from Germany and the old Nazi countries under U.S. NATO move against itself. And so Russia let the United Nations proceed with the war in Korea, and Stalin sort of browbeat Mao into agreeing to support the North Koreans in this.
Well, any thought that the United Nations has a role to play, ended two months ago in October of this year. If the United Nations cannot prevent the ethnic attacks in not only in Ukraine, but in Israel, the the attempt at genocide of the entire Gaza population, as President Netanyahu has explained, the goal is to have an Israel for Israelis free of Palestinians.
Here you have a whole country that is at odds with the ostensible purpose of the United Nations and is breaking all of the rules of war that were supposed to be the rules of the United Nations. What the United Nations lacks is any attempt to enforce penalties on countries that are violating the United Nations Charter. You’ve had the head of the United Nations, Gutierrez, quite rightly, denounce Israel for genocide and denounce what’s happening as genocide. He refused to do that against Ukraine, but it was the same policy. And you have the Pope doing the same thing, denouncing the genocide that’s taking place.
But Stalin said to Churchill at the Yalta meetings in 1944-45, Stalin said, how many divisions does the Pope have? And Churchill said to Stalin, well, you know, you really want the… There are a lot of Catholic countries, you want the church on your side. Stalin said, well, without an army, what can the church do? Well, you can say, without an army, what can the United Nations do? Without an ability to impose economic and political sanctions on the United States and Israel, we’re talking about a partnership here. It’s not just Israel. It’s the United States and Israel in a tandem. It’s the United States that is providing all of the bombs, all of the armaments, all of the money to support Israel. Israel is really very much like Ukraine in its dependency on the United States and also in the corruption of its leadership, the personal political corruption, which is why Netanyahu would be sent to jail as soon as the war ended because he was already being accused of as much of being a criminal as Zelensky in Ukraine. You can think of Netanyahu as Israel’s Zelensky.
Well, if the United [Nations] is powerless to do something here, then what you need is an entirely new international organization, independently from the United Nations. You still need, officially, I guess the Russians and Chinese need to leave somebody in a hotel room in New York just to make sure that they can veto any attempt to have a new Korean War against whoever is America’s enemy of the moment. But you need a new institution that is empowered to actually commit its members to impose military, economic, and political sanctions against countries violating the basic legal rules of war and violating all of the Nuremberg laws that came into being. If you can’t do that, then there is no function at all for the United Nations, and you might as well disband it. It’s obvious that if you even try to reform the United Nations, and I don’t believe it can be reformed, it cannot continue to exist in the United States.
The Golan Heights would be a nice place for it. If it can’t solve the problem in Golan Heights, what’s the point for it to exist? Or it could be in Odessa. That would be a nice place for the United Nations. If it cannot solve the problem there, what’s the point?
There’s no point at all given the American veto power in it, just as America insisted on veto power in the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and any international organization that it joined. If it didn’t have veto power and the power to prevent an organization from pursuing any policy that the United States disagreed with, then it wouldn’t join. The International Criminal Court, International Trade Organization, you can go right down the line.
ANIA: Thank you, Professor. Even though I told you before we started the live stream that we will go about 30 to 40 minutes, I still have two more questions, if that’s okay.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Sure.
ANIA: Thank you. I want to ask you now, for the year 2024, what, in your opinion, will be the biggest change from the monetary financial standpoint? What can we expect?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, you’re trying to have other countries having an alternative to holding their international monetary reserves apart from the dollar. There’s going to be a special kind of money that will be created by the BRICS, and a kind of BRICS bank. This money won’t be dollars and it won’t be euros. It won’t be a currency that you can trade in or buy, like sterling or dollars or euros. It will be a means for central banks to hold mutual claims on each other.
In order to have a monetary system, you have to have a different taxing system, because money and taxes all go together. What gives money its value is the ability of this money [to be used to pay] taxes. You’re going to have to have a synchronism of BRICS members, of monetary tax policy, and also you’re going to have to need their own alternative to the International Monetary Fund, because the International Monetary Fund’s role is to promote austerity in other countries and to force other countries to pay their dollar debts.
The big financial shock is going to be the BRICS countries and the Global South stopping payment on their dollar debts. They’re going to realize that there’s a war on, and in a war you don’t pay debts to the country that’s attacking you. If it’s a colonial war of liberation or a post-colonial war of financial liberation from debt peonage and debt colonization and debt dependency, then you’re going to have essentially a clean slate wiping out the debts to the International Monetary Fund and the general dollar debts that have all been imposed under IMF leadership and under United States leadership as a purely exploitative phenomenon.
These countries will say, these are bad debts. When a bank makes a bad debt, the bank loses money. I’m afraid that the US dollar bank is going to have to absorb the loss. They never should have made loans to countries of Latin America, Africa, and Asian countries that they cannot pay.
Since the United States, just again yesterday on December 28, advised Europe to grab all of Russia’s foreign money, it’s done this as a warning really to Saudi Arabia. It’s telling Saudi Arabia, do you really want to join with the other Muslim countries with all of the money that you saved since 1974, since the oil crisis? All this money, we’ve told you it would be an act of war if you didn’t hold this money in the United States. Well, now we have your money and we’re going to grab it all just like we grabbed Russia’s money, just like we grabbed Venezuela’s money, just like we grabbed Iran’s money, unless you act as an arm of the United States. And so Saudi Arabia is going to have to work with the BRICS countries to move its dollars as rapidly as possible as it can out of the United States and Europe into a safe haven. The fate of the oil countries’ monetary reserves is going to be the key monetary crisis of 2024. Will they be able to achieve freedom from the United States’ grabitization?
ANIA: Thank you so much for this. I want to ask you now, looking back in history, as there is a saying that history repeats itself, if you look at the current reality we are living in, what era in history would you compare it to? And do you think the outcome will be the same?
MICHAEL HUDSON: I can’t think of any real comparison that is a repetition today. I can’t think of any other conflict between a thriving economy and a dead economic system apart from the 19th century flowering of classical political economy. From the French physiocrats, to Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, to Marx and the socialists, they had the same fight. How were they going to free their economies from a parasitic, unnecessary legacy of feudalism, namely the landlord class that burdened the entire economy with land rent? How do you get rid of the landlords? By taxing the rent away. How do you get rid of the monopolies? Essentially, by taking them into the public domain and by socializing the basic needs. And how do you get rid of the worst monopoly, the financial monopoly of credit creation, by making money a public utility?
This was the fight that America and Germany fought so successfully from the late 19th century to the beginning of World War I. And that is the same fight that’s happening today, except instead of fighting against feudalism to create an industrial capitalism that is evolving into socialism, we’re having a geopolitical fight of Eurasia, Russia, China, along with the Global South to be independent of the neo-feudalism of neo-liberal economics done by the United States and NATO.
ANIA: So, you don’t think we will end up in a global war?
MICHAEL HUDSON: The United States is threatening to do that. That’s the one power it has. It can say, well, if we can’t control the world, the world’s not worth surviving. That’s the U.S. attitude. Just as President Putin of Russia said, well, if America destroys Russia in atomic war, who wants to live in a world without Russia? Certainly not the Russians who were destroyed.
So, yes, there is a chance of war and it’s never been higher. It’s the United States that is trying to provoke the war because it has 800 military bases. No other country in the world, no other region of the world has the kind of military bases or the war mentality of wanting to go to war, of wanting an atomic war that the United States leadership has.
That’s what should shock the BRICS Plus countries and the Near Eastern countries into a realization that the United States is threatening them not only with economic parasitism, but with atomic destruction and military destruction. That’s what the war in Israel and Gaza and Lebanon is really all about. It’s about the United States sweeping across the Near East to Iran and grabbing control of all of the oil or simply at the worst case, simply destroying it all, simply bombing Saudi Arabia, so leaving the world entirely dependent on oil from supplies controlled by the United States.
So, yes, as Rosa Luxemburg said a century ago, the choice is between barbarism and socialism. And barbarism is the US NATO today. Socialism is the hopes for what BRICS 10 can become.
ANIA: Professor Hudson, thank you so much for joining me today. I am really, really grateful for your time, honor for your time. And I want to ask you, what can we wish you for the 2024? What would you like to be the wish for 2024?
MICHAEL HUDSON: That people understand what the real war is about and that it’s about what kind of a world we’ll have and really what direction civilization is going in. This is really a civilizational war. It’s not just a military conflict. It’s not just an ethnic conflict. It’s not just the financial rivalry. It’s really a choice of which direction civilization is going in.
And that’s why I wrote my book, The Destiny of Civilization, to explain what the fight is all about.
ANIA: Thank you so much. And that book and many other books you’ll find down below the live stream. There is the link attached already. And the website to Professor Hudson, also his Patreon, where you can support his work. Thank you so much for joining us today, everyone. Thank you for your comments. Thank you for your likes. Thank you for sharing this video. I appreciate you very much. And thank you, Professor Hudson. Hopefully until next time, next year.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, thank you very much, Ania.
A timely reminder of the spiritual war at play. This interview aged really well in the last month since it came out; the continued maintenance of an irrational Genocide which provokes the entire Islamic world of 2 Billion and places the Zionist entity at existential risk indicates atypical calculations are at work. This is largely NOT about economics such as the gas off Gaza, or mere geopolitics. It has morphed into a global war of ideology and for various factions even eschatology.
In the Holy Land of West Asia, it is the culmination of the Long War begun by Zionism in Basel of the 1890s and subsequently affirmed by the Anglo-Americans through Lord Balfour’s declaration. The current moment witnesses the necessary ritual Annihilation of the Palestinians for lebensraum, as was achieved with native Americans in the Americas or incessantly attempted with Slavs in east Europe.
The worldwide confrontation is not socialism versus capitalism, nor the White Man’s Burden, nor even the limited opposition of western Christianity to Islam and Orthodox Christianity. It is about Feudal Oligarchy versus Sovereignty.
Under which principles do we organize ourselves?? An amoral totalitarian individualism or the harmonious social community with security and stability steered by a protective state, no matter how imperfect? A universal diktat under the same single expansive boot since 1991, or the respectful tolerance of diversity and the God-given right to be different?
Thus the Multipolar Traditional world faces off with the Apartheid Satanic world. The latter is determined to cull all Others who do not submit to their “Rules-based International Order.” The Rest of Humanity fights for the right to be a respected and free Other, unhindered and uncontrolled by supremacists in any fashion. The Ukraine and Palestine are the two incandescent battlegrounds, for now.
https://english.news.cn/20231231/4e0fc2697d994cd2b4dcb5dca525a611/c.html
BEIJING, Dec. 31 (Xinhua) — On New Year’s Eve, Chinese President Xi Jinping delivered his 2024 New Year message via China Media Group and the Internet. The following is the full text of the message:
Greetings to you all! As energy rises after the Winter Solstice, we are about to bid farewell to the old year and usher in the new. From Beijing, I extend my best New Year wishes to each and every one of you!
In 2023, we have continued to forge ahead with resolve and tenacity. We have gone through the test of winds and rains, have seen beautiful scenes unfolding on the way, and have made plenty real achievements. We will remember this year as one of hard work and perseverance. Going forward, we have full confidence in the future.
This year, we have marched forward with solid steps. We achieved a smooth transition in our COVID-19 response efforts. The Chinese economy has sustained the momentum of recovery. Steady progress has been made in pursuing high-quality development. Our modernized industrial system has been further upgraded. A number of advanced, smart and green industries are rapidly emerging as new pillars of the economy. We have secured a bumper harvest for the 20th year in a row. Waters have become clearer and mountains greener. New advances have been made in pursuing rural revitalization. New progress has been made in fully revitalizing northeast China. The Xiong’an New Area is growing fast, the Yangtze River Economic Belt is full of vitality, and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area is embracing new development opportunities. Having weathered the storm, the Chinese economy is more resilient and dynamic than before.
This year, we have marched forward with robust steps. Thanks to years of dedicated efforts, China’s innovation-driven development is full of energy. The C919 large passenger airliner entered commercial service. The Chinese-built large cruise ship completed its trial voyage. The Shenzhou spaceships are continuing their missions in space. The deep-sea manned submersible Fendouzhe reached the deepest ocean trench. Products designed and made in China, especially trendy brands, are highly popular with consumers. The latest models of Chinese-made mobile phones are an instant market success. New energy vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaic products are a new testimony to China’s manufacturing prowess. Everywhere across our country, new heights are being scaled with dogged determination, and new creations and innovations are emerging every day.
This year, we have marched forward in high spirits. The Chengdu FISU World University Games and the Hangzhou Asian Games presented spectacular sports scenes, and Chinese athletes excelled in their competitions. Tourist destinations are full of visitors on holidays, and the film market is booming. The “village super league” football games and “village spring festival gala” are immensely popular. More people are embracing low-carbon lifestyles. All these exhilarating activities have made our lives richer and more colorful, and they mark the return of bustling life across the country. They embody people’s pursuit of a beautiful life, and present a vibrant and flourishing China to the world.
This year, we have marched forward with great confidence. China is a great country with a great civilization. Across this vast expanse of land, wisps of smoke in deserts of the north and drizzles in the south invoke our fond memory of many millennium-old stories. The mighty Yellow River and Yangtze River never fail to inspire us. Discoveries at the archeological sites of Liangzhu and Erlitou tell us much about the dawn of Chinese civilization. The ancient Chinese characters inscribed on oracle bones of the Yin Ruins, the cultural treasures of the Sanxingdui Site, and the collections of the National Archives of Publications and Culture bear witness to the evolution of Chinese culture. All this stands as testament to the time-honored history of China and its splendid civilization. And all this is the source from which our confidence and strength are derived.
While pursuing its development, China has also embraced the world and fulfilled its responsibility as a major country. We held the China-Central Asia Summit and the Third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, and hosted leaders from across the world at many diplomatic events held in China. I also paid visits to a number of countries, attended international conferences, and met many friends, both old and new. I shared China’s vision and enhanced common understandings with them. No matter how the global landscape may evolve, peace and development remain the underlying trend, and only cooperation for mutual benefit can deliver.
Along the way, we are bound to encounter headwinds. Some enterprises had a tough time. Some people had difficulty finding jobs and meeting basic needs. Some places were hit by floods, typhoons, earthquakes or other natural disasters. All these remain at the forefront of my mind. When I see people rising to the occasion, reaching out to each other in adversity, meeting challenges head-on and overcoming difficulties, I am deeply moved. All of you, from farmers in the fields to workers on factory floors, from entrepreneurs blazing the trail to service members guarding our country — indeed, people from all walks of life — have done your very best. Each and every ordinary Chinese has made an extraordinary contribution! You, the people, are the ones we look to when we fight to prevail over all difficulties or challenges.
Next year will mark the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. We will steadfastly advance Chinese modernization, fully and faithfully apply the new development philosophy on all fronts, speed up building the new development paradigm, promote high-quality development, and both pursue development and safeguard security. We will continue to act on the principle of seeking progress while maintaining stability, promoting stability through progress, and establishing the new before abolishing the old. We will consolidate and strengthen the momentum of economic recovery, and work to achieve steady and long-term economic development. We will deepen reform and opening up across the board, further enhance people’s confidence in development, promote vibrant development of the economy, and redouble efforts to boost education, advance science and technology and cultivate talents. We will continue to support Hong Kong and Macao in harnessing their distinctive strengths, better integrating themselves into China’s overall development, and securing long-term prosperity and stability. China will surely be reunified, and all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait should be bound by a common sense of purpose and share in the glory of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
Our goal is both inspiring and simple. Ultimately, it is about delivering a better life for the people. Our children should be well taken care of and receive good education. Our young people should have the opportunities to pursue their careers and succeed. And our elderly people should have adequate access to medical services and elderly care. These issues matter to every family, and they are also a top priority of the government. We must work together to deliver on these issues. Today, in our fast-paced society, people are all busy and face a lot of pressure in work and life. We should foster a warm and harmonious atmosphere in our society, expand the inclusive and dynamic environment for innovation, and create convenient and good living conditions, so that the people can live happy lives, bring out their best, and realize their dreams.
As I speak to you, conflicts are still raging in some parts of the world. We Chinese are keenly aware of what peace means. We will work closely with the international community for the common good of humanity, build a community with a shared future for mankind, and make the world a better place for all.
Right at this moment, when the lights in millions of homes light up the evening sky, let us all wish our great country prosperity, and let us all wish the world peace and tranquility! I wish you happiness in all the four seasons and success and good health in the year ahead!
Thank you! ■
https://t.me/Slavyangrad/82195
Vladimir Putin: Citizens of Russia, friends,
We are bidding farewell to 2023. Very soon it will become part of history and we will have to move forward, create the future.
We have worked very hard and accomplished a lot over the past year. We were proud of our common achievements and happy about our successes. And we were firm, protecting the national interests, our freedom and security, and our values which continue to provide us with an unshakeable foundation.
And the main thing which has united us is the destiny of the Motherland. There is a deep understanding of the utmost importance of the historic period which Russia is going through, those large-scale objectives which society is facing and the colossal responsibility for the Motherland which every one of us feels.
We are acutely and clearly aware of how much depends on us during this period, on our positive attitude, and our aspiration to support each other in word and deed.
Work for the collective good has united society. We are united in our thoughts, tasks and in combat, whether at work or on days off, displaying the main traits of the Russian people – solidarity, mercy and firmness.
I would like to address our military personnel – everyone who is on duty, who is on the front lines fighting for truth and justice. You are our heroes. Our hearts are with you. We are proud of you and we admire your courage.
I am well aware that now you feel the love of those nearest and dearest to you, the powerful, sincere support of millions of Russian citizens, the support of the entire people.
We have proved over and over again that we are able to tackle the most difficult tasks and we will never back down as there is no force that can divide us, make us forget the memory and the faith of our fathers, or stop our development.
Friends,
At all times, the New Year celebrations have been associated with bright hopes and the sincerest wish to bring joy to loved ones.
The upcoming year of 2024 has been declared the Year of the Family in our country. And a truly big family is definitely a family where children grow up, where parents are given attention, and treated with warm-heartedness and care, and where everyone loves and respects each other.
Devotion to the Motherland is nurtured via such kinship of all generations, love of home.
I would like to convey my very best wishes for the new year to all Russian families. After all, the history of our huge, wonderful and beloved Motherland is shaped by the history of each family. We – the multinational people of Russia – decide and create its fate.
We are one country, one big family. We will ensure the steady development of the Motherland, the well-being of our citizens, and we will become even stronger.
We are together. And this is the most reliable guarantee of the future of Russia.
Happy New Year, friends! Happy 2024!
The Daily Chronicles are snippets of the most important news across the world for this and each day as it rolls in – as such, this thread is non-structured with the latest news on top. Facts without the fluff but there is plenty of fluff when necessary.
Jan 3 (From Pepe Escobar)
The genocidals are now totally out of control.
Killing women and children is the way of cowards.
As their army continues to be humiliated in Gaza.
Enter a deadly provocation against Hezbollah.
Plus a deadly provocation against Iran.
Blowback is a given.
Asymmetrical and surgical.
Jan 3
Hamas announced a freeze on ceasefire negotiations with Israel after the faction’s deputy chief, Saleh al-Arouri, was killed on Tuesday evening in an Israeli attack in Lebanon.
“We have informed the brothers in Qatar and Egypt of the freezing of negotiations,” the source said on condition of anonymity. So far, Qatar and Egypt have been mediating a ceasefire.
Hamas rejected any talks about reaching a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip amid escalated Israeli aggression and “assassination schemes” against Palestinian leaders.
Several aides of Al-Arouri, deputy head of the Hamas politburo, were also killed in the Israeli attack targeting a Hamas office in the southern suburb of the Lebanese capital of Beirut.
WATCH: Who was Saleh al-Arouri, the slain deputy Hamas leader and military strategist, and why did the Israeli regime fear him?#AlArouri pic.twitter.com/h2xPzPeKfu
— Press TV (@PressTV) January 3, 2024
Jan 3
2 explosions, 10 minutes apart, hit Soleimani’s cemetery. Iran says it was a terrorist attack. 103 dead, 188 injured. This terrorist act will be met with a strong and decisive response from the security and military apparatus in the shortest possible time – Iranian interior minister
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2024/01/03/717528/terror-attack-in-Iran-Kerman-leave-at-least-20-dead
The West is desperate to kick up a regional war and the more it can involve Iran, the happier the US lawmakers will be. The complete area is experiencing an uptick of contempt, mocking, and sheer fakery in information. These people want a war.
It’s no coincidence that on the anniversary of his assassination, Israel also kills a Hamas leader in Beirut + an Iranian officer in Syria last week.
Israel is playing with fire to hide its failures in Gaza.
Jan 3
Biden administration sanctions Niger, Gabon, CAR and Uganda by kicking them out of African Growth and Opportunity act, bring back Mauritania into the folds.
I was waiting for this which I believe is an opportunity for the countries that were stuck to the Growth and Opportunity Act. It is time we understand clearly with no doubt that these mechanisms are control mechanisms. There is very little ‘good’ there.
Jan 2
Belgorod is again under missile attack. The Russian Ministry of Defense stated that 2 Tochka-U missiles and 7 Vilkha MLRS missiles were shot down.
Jan 2
Just a few hours ago, Israeli troops conducted a targeted airstrike on the Beirut suburb of Ad-Dahiya. The objective of the attack was to eliminate the deputy head of the Hamas Politburo, Saleh al-Arouri. Along with him, six other individuals lost their lives. According to some Palestinian sources, the leader of Hamas’ military wing in South Lebanon, Abu Amer, may also have been among the casualties. However, this information has not yet been confirmed.
Hezbollah’s reaction is unpredictable, especially given the recent increase in attacks in the south of Lebanon. Hassan Nasrallah, has a scheduled speech tomorrow.
Tomorrow is also the fourth anniversary of the assassination of Iranian commander-in-chief Qasem Soleimani. Therefore, in the Middle East, it is reasonable to anticipate increased activity. We shall see.
Jan 2 | horrifying numbers
The Government Media Office in Gaza released an infographic about the scale of destruction of the IOF aggression on Gaza from October 7th, 2023 to January 1st, 2024.
• 87 days of the comprehensive war of genocide.
• 1,838 massacres.
• 28,978 martyrs and missing.
• 21,978 martyrs reached the hospitals.
• 9,280 child martyrs.
• 6,600 women martyrs.
• 326 medical worker martyrs.
• 40 civil defense martyrs.
• 106 journalist martyrs.
• 7,000 missing; 70% of them are children and women.
• 56,697 wounded.
• 10,000 cancer patients at risk of death.
• 99 arrests of health workers.
• 10 arrests of journalists.
• 1.9 million displaced in the Gaza Strip.
• 350,000 Gazans infected with infectious diseases as a result of displacement.
• 130 government headquarters destroyed by the occupation.
• 93 schools and universities completely destroyed by the occupation.
• 292 schools and universities partially destroyed by the occupation.
• 120 mosques completely destroyed by the occupation.
• 212 mosques partially destroyed by the occupation.
• 3 churches targeted and destroyed by the occupation.
• 65,000 residential units completely destroyed by the occupation.
• 292,000 residential units partially destroyed by the occupation.
• 30 hospitals taken out of service by the occupation.
• 53 health centers taken out of service by the occupation.
• 150 health centers partially destroyed by the occupation.
• 104 ambulances completely destroyed by the occupation.
• 200 archaeological and heritage sites destroyed by the occupation.
• 65,000 tons of explosives dropped by the occupation on Gaza.
Jan 2 – Uuum! Oof! Who is saving their own bacon – run baby run!
https://t.me/EurasianChoice/32983
Jan 2 – Russia is cleaning up! OK, there is the retaliation for the Belgorod and Donbass strikes but the cleanup is clear to see.
Putin said it clearly: “Russia will not retaliate in kind to Kiev’s actions, despite being capable of doing so, Putin stressed. “Of course, we can, we are capable of carpet-bombing Kiev and any other [Ukrainian] city,” the president noted.
Instead, Russia will continue targeting Ukrainian military assets and infrastructure, Putin said, warning that the number of such strikes is bound to grow. The Ukrainian authorities’ terrorist activities will not be left unanswered, he stressed.”
Russian Defence Ministry report on the progress of the special military operation
(2 January 2024)
Part I (see Part II (https://t.me/mod_russia_en/11708))
The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation delivered a group strike with high-precision long-range weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles on enterprises of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine that carried out orders for the production of missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and repair of weapons and military hardware in Kiev and its suburbs, as well as storage sites for missiles, ammunition, and aircraft weapons supplied to the Kiev regime by Western countries. The purpose of the strike has been achieved. All the targets have been engaged.
In addition to the group strikes, the denazification cleanup :
Two sites associated with WW2-era Nazis – hailed in present-day Ukraine as national heroes – were damaged in the western city of Lviv overnight on January 1st. A major explosion entirely destroyed the house-museum dedicated to Roman Shukhevich. An early leader within the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, Shukhevich participated in terrorist activities and assassinations when Lviv was part of Poland during the interwar years. He went on to serve with the Nazi SS and later on led the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which has been accused of extensive ethnic cleansing targeting the region’s Jewish and Polish populations. He died in 1950 during a shootout with Soviet counterintelligence.
The main building of the Lviv National Agrarian University was also damaged overnight; an explosion blew off its roof and set the historic structure on fire. The university is known as the alma-mater of Stepan Bandera, another Ukrainian nationalist leader and WW2-era Nazi collaborator who is commemorated with a statue in front of the now-damaged building.
Jan 1
IT’S ON US: We are called to be “winter soldiers.” If we cannot stop genocide, what good are we?
Rise, like lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you
Ye [we] are many – they are fewPercy Bysshe Shelley
— Ray McGovern (@raymcgovern) December 31, 2023
Ceasefire and a free Palestine!
Jan 1 – BRICS off and running
Putin announces about 30 more countries want to join BRICS (https://t.me/IntelRepublic/18097), “association attracting more and more like-minded people” at start of Russia’s BRICS chairmanship.
Five new members (Egypt, Iran, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia) formally became full-fledged members (https://t.me/IntelRepublic/32321), as US hegemony continues to crumble.
Motto of Russia’s BRICS 2024 presidency will be strengthening multilateralism for equitable global development and security, will work to increase role of association in international monetary and financial system;
Placing special emphasis on foreign policy coordination and a joint search for answers to international security challenges, Russia plans to promote cooperation in three key areas: politics, economics and culture – Putin.
Putin announces about 30 more countries want to join BRICS (https://t.me/IntelRepublic/18097), an “association attracting more and more like-minded people” at start of Russia’s BRICS chairmanship.
Five new members (Egypt, Iran, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia) formally became full-fledged members (https://t.me/IntelRepublic/32321), as US hegemony continues to crumble.
Motto of Russia’s BRICS 2024 presidency will be strengthening multilateralism for equitable global development and security, will work to increase role of association in international monetary and financial system;
Placing special emphasis on foreign policy coordination and a joint search for answers to international security challenges, Russia plans to promote cooperation in three key areas: politics, economics and culture – Putin.
Jan 1
On a possible US-UK-EU Assault on Yemen
The US via Saudi Arabia already waged war on Yemen for years, including aerial bombardments and a ground invasion, both of which failed.
The US (and the UK) were heavily involved, choosing targets, shipping additional arms to Saudi Arabia, carrying out maintenance on Saudi weapons including warplanes, and even providing special forces on the ground.
The US, UK, and EU launching a military operation against Yemen now will unfold in a very similar manner, and expend weapons the US requires for its proxy war in Ukraine and its expanding military aggression in Asia-Pacific.
Michael Hudson published this as far as I know first at Ben Norton’s PoliticalEconomy
Note Featured Image: I don’t see that Russia has new imaging out for their presidency 2024 as yet.
Economist Michael Hudson details how BRICS could create a mutual settlement currency for payment imbalances among central banks and build an alternative to the financialized neoliberal model of the dollar/NATO bloc.
This first week of October has seen U.S. interest rates soar to the 5% level on long-term Treasury bonds. That has made long-term Treasuries one of most attractive investment vehicles in the world, or even the most attractive.
One obvious result is that countries aiming to de-dollarize their central-bank reserves would make an untimely decision to move out of the dollar at this point. To avoid holding dollars in the form of US Treasury securities would mean holding foreign reserves denominated in a currency that is declining against the dollar. No other government is willing to make its currency so attractive to international investors (including central banks) by raising interest-rates so high.
At 5%, US bonds are the most secure and best investment around. There is a huge move into the dollar – and hence, pushing up its exchange rate against most other currencies. That has made it much more expensive for Global South countries to service their foreign debts denominated in dollars to the IMF, World Bank, and private bondholders. If they try to pay these debts – which are now much more expensive in their own currencies – they will have to suffer austerity, and use their economic surplus to pay dollar-holders instead of using it to develop their own economies.
That strain imposed by international debt service is the most serious since the late 1920s – with the same refusal of creditor countries to see how today’s foreign-debt overhead cannot be paid. We have seen this before, in the austerity caused by Germany trying to pay its World War I reparations debts, and by England and France trying to pay their inter-Ally debts despite the self-destruction of adhering to creditor demands.
The world refused to negotiate a write-down of these inter-governmental debts until the 1929 crash forced realistic observers to agree to the 1931 moratorium on German reparations and inter-Ally debts. By that time the Great Depression was underway.
Today’s 5% interest rate threatens to destabilize the domestic US economy and federal budget just as much as it is increasing the cost of debtor countries servicing their foreign dollar bonds. A 5% interest rate on 30-year bonds means a doubling time in 14 years. (The Rule of 72: Divide 72 by the interest rate to get the doubling time.) For a 30 year bond, a million-dollar purchase will quadruple in face value, to $4 million by the time the bond matures in 2053, thirty years from now.
Think of the effect that this will have on the US budget by that time. A much larger share will have to be allocated to pay bondholders – most of whom make themselves tax-exempt, for instance by holding their savings offshore.
The world’s debtor countries, if not the creditors, are finally coming to realize that many government debts can’t be paid – except by throwing their economies into depression and austerity. That might be in store for the US economy too if it tries to tax the economy to pay creditors instead of simply printing the money.
Obviously there needs to be an alternative. It needs to beyond merely the first step of declaring a debt moratorium. A longer-term restructuring of the international financial system is needed, because the present system has become dysfunctional.
This recognition has been most explicit by the statements of China’s and Russia’s government. Although they are positioned to become creditor countries in the coming world realignment, they recognize the need to create a way for countries to run balance-of-payments surpluses or deficits without polarizing the international economy between creditors and debtors, creating a new split such as is now occurring.
At the Valdai Club meeting in Sochi on October 5, Russia’s President Putin explained how he viewed the needed restructuring. Contrary to much discussion in the West, what is planned is not a “BRICS currency,” but something much more limited: a means of settling payments imbalances along quite different lines from those that have led to today’s crisis.
As far as BRICS is concerned, we don’t need to create a single currency, but we need to set up a settlement system, create financial logistics in order to ensure settlements between our countries, switch to settlements in national currencies, while understanding what is happening with our national currencies, and keep in mind the macroeconomic indicators of our economies, exchange rate differences, inflationary processes.
…
I have already said, and many believe, that the Bretton Woods system is outdated. After all, this is not me talking, these are Western experts. It needs to be changed. Of course, it leads to such ugly phenomena as, say, debt obligations of developing economies, of course, this is the absolute, complete domination of the dollar in the world system. It’s only a matter of time before this happens.
What is needed certainly is not a “new Bretton Woods.” The old Bretton Woods system was designed in 1944 by US planners first and foremost to break down Britain’s Imperial Preference based on block sterling holdings (government reserves that could not be spent outside of the sterling area) and the prospect of depreciation of the pound sterling. US planners consolidated American power by basing international monetary policy on the asset that the US Treasury held: gold, of which the U.S. held three-fourths of the world’s monetary gold reserves by 1950.
Along with insistence on free trade and free capital movements (no capital controls or restrictions on how India and other British Empire countries could spend their accumulation of sterling reserves during World War II), the US “rules-based order” turned British sterling into a satellite currency. Having obtained British acquiescence, the US Bretton Woods proposals were imposed on Europe and other countries. Their fate has followed that of Britain’s domestic budget squeeze and “stop-go” austerity policies.
John Maynard Keynes proposed an alternative to holding dollars – something like an anti-Bretton Woods. His aim was to avoid US financial dominance by creating a fiat currency, the bancor. That was not a form of international money, but had a special purpose as an asset of “paper gold,” akin to what the IMF later introduced as Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) in response to the US government itself needing a bailout as its foreign military spending pushed its balance of payments deeply into deficit during the 1970s war in southeast Asia. Bancors or SDRs could be issued to countries running balance-of-payments deficits to pay payments-surplus countries.
This is the problem that the BRICS+ and Global South countries are trying to solve today. The popular press has confused matters by referring to a “BRICS currency.” It is not a currency like the euro or the ruble or renminbi. It is not a currency that anyone could spend at the grocery store or to pay rent. It is not “money” as generally understood. It is not a currency that can be traded on foreign-exchange markets, and certainly cannot be bought by speculators (although they could gamble on what it might exchange for, something like betting on a horse race without having a horse or jockey in the race).
Domestic money, like the dollar or euro, ultimately derives its value from being accepted by national governments in payment of taxes or other transactions with the public sector. That makes such money fungible. Money in that sense can be thought of as a public utility. But providing such currency for a number of countries requires a common government, fiscal authority and legal system. If the currency is to be issued by a number of countries – like the euro – it therefore requires a political union empowered to allocate who gets how much of the currency. No such political foundation yet exists for the BRICS. In President Putin’s words, countries are “at different stages of development.” More to the point, their mutual trade and investment is nowhere near in balance at present. That imbalance is the major problem to be solved, just as it was in 1944-45. It is a balance-of-payments problem, not one of financing domestic government budgets and spending.
How can countries with chronic balance-of-payments deficits (like most Global Majority countries looking to an association with BRICS+) can run up debts to payments-surplus countries (like China and Russia), without being forced to impose austerity. How can inter-governmental debt be prevented from causing the problems that the US/Bretton Woods system and IMF “conditionalities” have created?
The first step has been a stop-gap of making swap agreements. That enables countries to settle for trade and investment imbalances among themselves with their own national currencies. The advantage is that there is no need to involve “hard line” creditors such as the United States, and to avoid the risk of US/NATO countries simply grabbing their central-bank monetary reserves as they seized $300 billion from Russia.
But the problem goes beyond simply avoiding the use of dollars and euros. A system of international finance needs to be created that does not impose austerity on debtor countries. That self-defeating policy simply makes it even more impossible to pay the buildup of foreign debts.
Most international payments occur on “capital account,” for foreign investment, lending, flight capital. But academic textbooks of international trade theory treat it as barter – as if money, currency speculation and flight capital are only a veil. If foreign trade and payments were in balance, there would not be any need for international reserves being accumulated. The books would be cleared. But international payments rarely are balanced.
What is now under discussion is how to denominate the financial claims that result from this imbalance. The buildup of international reserves is not a healthy economic sign if they grow faster than the pace of world trade. When these imbalances – not only of trade, but foreign investment, war-making, currency flight, speculation – rise and accrue interest year after year, they become increasingly unpayable. That is the situation in which the world finds itself today.
The vast majority today’s central-bank reserves are still foreign holdings of US dollar securities – that is, nominal US debt to foreign governments. The US Treasury did not “borrow” this money. Rather, they spent dollars into the international economy, headed by US military spending in an increasingly aggressive and belligerent way. One could think of foreign dollar reserves as their bearing the costs of US military encirclement of the globe. (This is the process that I have described in Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire.)
Most international payments occur on “capital account,” for foreign investment, lending and flight capital. If foreign trade and payments were in balance, there would not be any need for international reserves being accumulated. The books would be cleared. But international payments rarely are balanced.
As noted above, the present stop-gap solution is for countries to pay in their own currency, and for payments-surplus nations to accept this. But currency swaps are subject to their own problems. Not only governments exchange their currencies, but speculators not directly involved in exporting and importing. George Soros made his fortune mobilizing lenders to break the bank of England and force it to depreciate by outspending it at the currency poker tables.
The currencies of many countries seem destined to decline – imposing a loss on payments-surplus nations. This has become a problem especially with the euro. At the Valdai meetings, President Putin explained why the euro is unlikely to be one of the currencies into which BRICS+ countries hold as they dedollarize:
Do you understand what happened? The competitiveness of the European economy has fallen, and the competitiveness of their main competitor in terms of the economic component of the United States has increased dramatically, and other countries, including in Asia, have also increased. As a result of the loss of part of their sovereignty, they were forced to make decisions to their own detriment.
Why do we need such a partner? … we are largely moving away from the fading European market and increasing our presence in growing markets in other regions of the world, including Asia.
Among the BRICS+ countries, Argentina is a case in point. Its foreign dollar debt has grown largely by IMF sponsorship. The IMF’s main political function in US foreign policy has been to enable pro-American client oligarchies to move their money out of countries whenever there is a chance of a left-wing or simply democratic reformer being elected. Convert their Argentinean currency into dollars lowers the peso’s exchange rate. Without IMF intervention, that would mean that as the exchange rate falls, the wealthy classes engaging in capital flight receive fewer and fewer dollars. To support the currency – and hence, the hard-currency dollars that capital-flight actors receive – the IMF lends the right-wing government dollars to buy up the excess pesos that the client oligarchy is selling off. That enables Argentineans to move their money out of the country to obtain a much higher amount of US dollars than they would if the IMF were not lending money to the right-wing puppet government.
When the new reform government comes in, it finds itself loaded down with a huge foreign debt owed to the IMF. This debt has not been taken on in a way that helped Argentina develop its economy and earn dollars to pay back the loan. It is simply a result of IMF support of right-wing governments. And the IMF then tells the new government (whether Argentina or any other debtor) to pay off its foreign loans by lowering the wages of labor. That is the only way that the IMF recognizes for countries to “stabilize” their balance of payments. So the reform government is obliged to behave just like a right-wing government, intensifying the class war of capital against labor. The “cure” for their balance-of-payments deficits thus becomes even worse than the original disease, that is, its rentier oligarchy moving their money out of the country.
Recently, the IMF paid back part of one of these odious IMF loans. It did so with money that it borrowed from China. And China has been in discussions about raising its quota in the IMF to reflect its rising economic power. Yet US politicians have designated China as America’s number-one long-term enemy, and are seeking to expand NATO into the Pacific to ramp up military threats to China. The US/NATO war in Ukraine has been described as a strategy to destroy Russia’s economic ability to support China in the coming Cold War. And to support the West’s arms supply to fight Ukraine, the IMF has lent Ukraine seven times its quota – despite this large a loan being against the IMF rules, despite Ukraine being at war, and despite the fact that this loan obviously cannot be repaid. The Germans have helpfully suggested giving the $300 billion in confiscated Russian reserves to Ukraine to pay its foreign creditors and pay for more US arms.
It therefore seems quite obvious that the IMF cannot play a role in any BRICS bancor arrangement. But it also shows how hard it is to create an alternative economic system to the present legacy of World War II.
The most serious problem has not been discussed publicly. There is no way that a viable and resilient economy for Global South countries and their arrangement for central banks can take shape without repudiating the overhang of US dollar debt. This unpayably high foreign-debt burden is a legacy of US-sponsored financial colonialism. As long as this debt is kept on the books, countries will remain obliged to use their trade surplus and sales proceeds from selling off their property to foreign investors to pay their former colonial powers and post-colonial creditors.
When one talks of dedollarization and the creation of a BRICS+ bank, this is the kind of quandary from which they need to escape. The first need is to create a vehicle to handle the inevitable payments imbalances. At present, these are settled by debt obligations. A key feature of Keynes’s bancor proposal was that if chronic credits accrued to a payments-surplus country – and if their counterpart in chronic debts occurred in deficit countries – these imbalances would be wiped off the books. Keynes’s intention was to prevent debt imbalances from destroying the global economy as they had destroyed European economies in the 1920s.
There is no way that today’s international debt overhand can be repaid. That is as true for the United States as it is for Global South debtors. The US Treasury owes much more to foreign governments the form of their holdings of US securities than it can foreseeably repay. It has post-industrialized its economy, and has committed to spending enormous sums abroad, while its dependency on foreign imports is rising and its prospects for collecting its existing debt claims on deficit countries is looking shaky.
The past half-century’s foreign investment has taken the form of privatization of the public domain of debtor countries. This investment has not helped them develop, but has merely transferred ownership of their oil and mineral rights, public utilities and other assets. A viable international financial system requires productive investment such as China’s Belt and Road Initiative that can help countries prosper, not asset stripping.
Perhaps Islamic sharia law has a hint for a solution, in replacing debt obligations with equity arrangements (with buy-back agreements). If the plans being designed by China, Russia and other BRICS members work as intended, countries would be able to pay the investment sponsors out of the growth that would occur – not by imposing austerity as under today’s predatory financial “rules-based order.”
Dollar dominance will continue over Europe and other US satellites. Other countries that need dollar reserves for their trade and investment with the United States. Existing US trade can continue as it has. But what will be changed is a new basis for the international economy iself.
There will not be a new BRICS currency in the sense of a dollar or euro that could become a medium for trade, investment or international speculation. There will only be a mutual “currency of settlement” of payments imbalances among central banks joining the new system. And that system itself will be based on principles opposite from the financialized neoliberal model being promoted by the dollar/NATO bloc. That is the real context for the current discussion of BRICS+ economic reform.
—o0o—
If we understand the principles outlined here by Michael, we will be able to follow what is happening in the BRICS, given that Mr. Putin said that Russia will be focusing on politics, economics, and culture. These may not at the end of the day manifest exactly as outlined, but they give a good grouding. Of all the new structures, I would consider BRICS the main one of importance seeing that it is there that the principles of a new world order will take more shape. And this is what we will see this year. The main political impact may be the one of the UN’s structural existence. It has been years that Russia said that at least the UNSC must be reformed and with the deadlock that we saw during the israeli war on Gaza and ongoing, the fact of entry of more countries (India being first on the list) and reformation of the rule of veto is just about written in stone.
On the cultural side, we have the international sporting events arranged by Russia on the go as a major attraction and +- 200 other various events.
Let’s take another look at Mr. Putin’s focus on BRICS for this year in his own words while keeping in mind that Russia also takes the chairmanship of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States – the confederation of countries that used to form the Soviet Union and there are problems here.)
Address (http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73202) by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin on the start of Russia’s BRICS Chairmanship
On January 1, Russia was passed the baton of the #BRICS chairmanship, an association which, according to the decision adopted by the 15th BRICS Summit in August 2022, now includes 10 countries.
Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates joined BRICS as new full members which is a strong indication of the growing authority of the association and its role in international affairs.
BRICS is attracting an ever-increasing number of supporters and like-minded countries that share its underlying principles, namely, sovereign equality, respect for the chosen path of development, mutual consideration of interests, openness, consensus, the aspiration to form a multipolar international order, and a fair global financial and trade system, and pursuit of collective solutions to top challenges of our time.
The Russian 2024 BRICS Chairmanship under the motto Strengthening Multilateralism for Equitable Global Development and Security will act precisely in this manner and focus on positive and constructive cooperation with all countries concerned.
We will spare no effort to <…> facilitate the harmonious integration of new participants in all formats of its activities.
We will start working on the modalities of a new category of BRICS partner countries.
Russia will continue to promote all aspects of the BRICS partnership in three key areas: politics and security, economy and finance, and cultural and humanitarian contacts.
Our priorities include promoting cooperation in science, high technology, healthcare, environmental protection, culture, sports, youth exchanges, and civil society.
In total, over 200 events of different levels and types will be held in many Russian cities as part of the chairmanship.
Read in full (http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73202)
A RT and Rossiyskaya Gazeta interview with Sergey Karaganov – https://www.rt.com/news/590016-sergey-karaganov-russia-west/
A very good read!
Not long ago, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said: “The European Union must be ready for war by the end of the decade.” Berlin has started talking about the return of universal military service and preparations for a confrontation with Moscow. There are similar sentiments in Poland. But is it only because of the events in Ukraine?
What is the reason for the upsurge in fighting talk in Europe?
Leading Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta talks to international relations expert Sergey Karaganov, who is the honorary chairman of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, an academic supervisor at the School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs Higher School of Economics (HSE) in Moscow, and a former Kremlin advisor.
— Evgeny Shostakov: Mr. Karaganov, given the current difficult foreign policy situation, is there a need for a conceptually different theory of deterrence against Russia’s enemies in order to stop the growing confrontation at an early stage, and to discourage our adversaries from fueling conflicts?
Unprecedented triumphs, tears of joy and grief: How 2023 saw the birth of a new superpower
— The elites of Western Europe – and especially in Germany – are in a state of historical failure. The main basis of their 500-year domination [of the world] was military superiority, on which the economic, political and cultural dominance of the West was built. But this has been knocked out from under them. With the help of this advantage, they manipulated the world’s resources in their favor. First they plundered their colonies, and later they did the same, but with more sophisticated methods.
Today’s Western elites are failing to address a range of growing problems in their societies. These include a shrinking middle class and rising inequality. Almost all their initiatives are failing. The European Union, as everyone knows, is slowly but surely sprawling out. That is why its ruling class has been hostile to Russia for about 15 years now. They need an external enemy; Josep Borrell [the EU’s top foreign affairs official] called the world around the bloc a jungle last year. Indeed, in the past, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that the sanctions adopted by the EU [against Russia] were necessary first and foremost to unite the European Union and prevent it from collapsing.
The German and Western European elites have an inferiority complex in, what is for them, a now-monstrous situation, where their part of the world is being overtaken by everyone. Not only by the Chinese and the Americans, but also by many other countries. Thanks to Russia’s liberation of the world from the ‘Western yoke’, Western Europe is no longer lording it over the states of the Global South, or as I call them, the countries of the world majority.
The threat Western Europe now presents is that the Old World has lost its fear of armed conflict. And that is very dangerous. At the same time, the West of Europe, let me remind you, has been the source of the worst disasters in human history. Now in Ukraine there is a struggle not only for Russia’s interests, for the interests of its security, but also to prevent a new global confrontation. The threat is growing. This is also due to the West’s desperate attempts at counter-attacks to maintain its dominance. Today’s Western European elites are failing and losing influence in the world to a much greater extent than their American counterparts.
Russia is fighting its own battle and fighting it successfully. We are acting confidently enough to sober up these Western elites, lest they unleash another world conflict in despair at their failures. We must not forget that these same people’s predecessors unleashed two world wars within one generation in the last century. Now, the quality of these elites is even lower than it was then.
Suicide mission: As 2023 draws to a close, the Ukrainian army’s last ‘counteroffensive’ advance has stalled
— Are you talking about the spiritual and political defeat of Western Europe as a fait accompli?
— Yes, and it is frightening. After all, we are also part of European culture. But I hope that, through a series of crises, healthy forces will prevail on that side of the continent in about 20 years, let’s say. And it will wake up from its failure, including its moral failure.
— For the time being, we are witnessing the formation of a new Iron Curtain in relation to Russia. The West is trying to “erase” our country, including in the fields of culture and values. There is deliberate dehumanization of Russians in the media. Should we react in reverse and “cancel” the West?
— Absolutely not. The West is now closing the Iron Curtain, first of all because we in Russia are the real Europeans. We remain healthy. And they want to exclude these healthy forces. Secondly, the West is closing this curtain, even more tightly than during the Cold War, in order to mobilize its population for hostilities. But we do not need a military confrontation with the West, so we will rely on a policy of containment to prevent the worst.
Of course, we will not cancel anything, including our European story. Yes, we have completed our European journey [in terms of integration]. I think it has dragged on a bit, maybe for a century. But without European inoculation, without European culture, we would not have become such a great power. We would not have had Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Pushkin or Blok. So we will keep European culture, which the West of our continent seems to be trying to abandon. But I hope that it will not destroy itself completely, in this regard. Because Western Europe is not only abandoning Russian culture, it is abandoning its own culture. It is cancelling a culture that is largely based on love and Christian values. It is cancelling its history, destroying its monuments. However, we will not reject our European roots.
I have always been against looking at the West with mere squeamishness. You should not do that. Then we would be like them. And they are now sliding towards an inevitable march towards fascism. We do not need all the contagions that have been and are growing out of the west of Europe. Including, once again, the growing contagion of fascism.
— The year 2023 saw the unfreezing of old conflicts and the demonstrative creation of the conditions for new ones – the predictable explosion of the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation, a series of wars in Africa, and more localized clashes in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Will this trend continue?
— This trend will not become an avalanche next year. But it is quite obvious that it will increase, because the tectonic plates under the world system have shifted. Russia is much better prepared for this period than it was a few years ago. The military operation we are conducting in Ukraine is aimed, among other things, at preparing the country for life in the very dangerous world of the future. We are purifying our elite, getting rid of corrupt, pro-Western elements. We are reviving our economy. We are reviving our military. We are reviving the Russian spirit. We are now much better prepared to defend our interests in the world than we were a few years ago. We live in a resurgent country that looks boldly to the future. The military operation is helping us to purge ourselves of Westerners and Westernizers, to find our new place in history. And finally, to strengthen ourselves militarily.
— Do you agree that from 2024 the world will enter a period of prolonged conflict? Does humanity today have the political will to change this situation?
— Of course we have entered an era of protracted conflicts. But we are much better prepared for them than ever before. It seems to me that by pursuing a course of containing the West and building relations with brotherly China, we are now becoming an axis of the world that can prevent everyone from sliding into a global catastrophe. But this requires efforts to sober up our opponents in the West. We have entered a struggle to save the world. Perhaps Russia’s mission is to free our planet from the ‘Western yoke’, to save it from the difficulties that will arise from changes that are already causing a lot of friction. The threat comes in no small part from the desperate counterattack of the West, which is clinging to its 500-year-old dominance, which has allowed it to plunder the world.
We see that new values have emerged in the West, including the denial of everything human and divine in man. Western elites have begun to nurture these anti-values and to suppress normal values. So we have a difficult period ahead of us, but I hope that we will preserve ourselves and help the world to save traditional humanity.
One of the many problems facing the world today is, of course, that the global economy is in a systemic crisis because of the endless growth of consumption. This destroys nature itself. Man was not created to consume; to see the meaning of existence in buying new things.
— In an interview with Interfax, our Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov linked the possible future abandonment of the anti-Russian course of the United States and its subordinates to a “generational change” in the West. But could a change of elites in the West, if it happens, provide an impetus to defuse tensions? Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, born in 1980, for example, is a member of the new generation, but her views are more radical than those of other ‘hawks’ of the past. In your view, are there any reasonable, and diplomatic, politicians left in the West?
— I think that today in the West we are dealing with two generations of elites who are already quite degraded. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that we will be able to reach an agreement with them. However, I still believe that societies and peoples, including those in Western Europe, will return to normal values. Of course, this will require a change in generations of elites. I agree with Sergey Ryabkov that it will take a long time, but I hope that the Western European countries, and perhaps the US too, will not fall into a hopeless state, and healthy national forces will return to power across Europe.
However, I do not believe that real, pragmatic, and I repeat, national forces can come to power in Western Europe in the near future. So I believe that if we ever talk about normal relations between Russia and the West [returning], it will take at least 20 years.
We must also realize that we no longer need the West. We have taken all we could from this wonderful European journey that Peter the Great started. Now we must return to ourselves, to the origins of Russia’s greatness. That is, of course, the development of Siberia. Its new development, which means reaching new horizons. We must remember that we are not so much a European country as an Eurasian one. I will never tire of reminding you that Alexander Nevsky spent a year and a half traveling through Central Asia and then Southern Siberia on his way to Karakorum, the capital of the Mongolian Empire. In fact, he was the first Russian Siberian.
By returning to Siberia, to the Urals, by building new roads, new industries, we are returning to ourselves, to the roots of our 500 years of greatness. It was only after Siberia was opened up that Russia found the strength and opportunity to become a great power.
In the foreseeable future, unfortunately, there can be no serious interstate arms limitation agreements in principle.
— How reasonable is it to forget Europe for decades?
— Under no circumstances should we forget the old sacred stones of Europe that Dostoyevsky spoke of. They are part of our self-awareness. I myself love Europe, and Venice in particular. It was through this city that the Silk Road passed, and through it the great Asian civilizations. At that time, by the way, they surpassed European civilization in their development. Even 150-200 years ago, looking towards Europe was a sign of modernization and progress. But for a long time now, and even more so today, it has been a sign of intellectual and moral backwardness. We should not deny our European roots; we should treat them with care. After all, Europe has given us a lot. But Russia must move forward. And forward does not mean to the West, but to the East and the South. That is where the future of humanity lies.
— The Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty expires in 2026. What comes next? Given the legal nihilism of the West, can we count on new interstate military agreements? Or is humanity condemned to an uncontrollable arms race until the establishment of a new world order and, consequently, a new status quo?
— It is pointless to negotiate with the current Western elites. In my writings I urge the Western oligarchy to replace these people, because they are dangerous to themselves, and I hope that sooner or later such a process will begin. Because the current group are so deeply degraded that it is impossible to negotiate with them. Of course, you have to talk to them. After all, there are other threats besides nuclear weapons. There’s the drone revolution. Cyber weapons have emerged. There is artificial intelligence. Biological weapons have appeared which can also threaten humanity with terrible problems. Russia needs to develop a new strategy to contain all these threats. We are working on it, including at the new Institute of International Military Economics and Strategy, and will continue to do so with the intellectual elites of the countries of the world majority. These are, first and foremost, our Chinese and Indian friends. We will discuss it with our Pakistani and Arab colleagues. So far, the West has nothing constructive to offer us. But we will not close our doors.
In the foreseeable future, unfortunately, there can be no serious interstate agreements on arms limitation in principle. Simply because we do not even know what to limit and how to limit it. But we need to develop new approaches and instill more realistic views in our partners around the world. It is not even technically possible to count on arms limitation agreements in the coming years. It would simply be a waste of time. However, it may be possible to conduct some pro forma negotiations. For example, trying to ban new areas of the arms race. I’m particularly concerned about biological weapons, and weapons in space. Something can be done in those areas. But what Russia needs now is to develop a new concept of deterrence, which will have not only military but also psychological, political and moral aspects.
— Are assessments that the West has come to terms with Kiev’s defeat too premature? And the idea that the Global South is confidently defeating the Western world?
— The US benefits from the confrontation in Ukraine. [Meanwhile] for the Western European elites, it is the only way to avoid moral collapse. That is why they will support the conflict in Ukraine for a long time to come. In such a situation, we need to act decisively both on the ground and in the area of strategic deterrence in order to achieve our goals as soon as possible. At the same time, it is important to understand that the majority of the world will not fight against the West. Many countries are interested in developing trade and other relations with it. Therefore, the World Majority is a partner but not an ally of Russia. We have to be tough, but calculated. I am almost certain that with the right policy of containment and an active policy on the fringes of Ukraine, we can break the will of the West’s dangerous resistance.
In today’s world, it’s every man for himself. It is a wonderful multi-polar, multi-colored world. This does not mean that in 20 years there will not be some blocs, including a conditional pro-Russian bloc. We have to find ourselves, to understand who we are. A great Eurasian power, North Eurasia. A liberator of nations, a guarantor of peace and a military-political pivot of the world majority. This is our destiny. In addition, we are uniquely prepared for this world because of the cultural openness we have gained from our history. We are religiously open. We are nationally open. These are all things we are now defending. More and more, we realize that the most important thing about us is the Russian spirit and Russian culture. We are all Russians – Russian Russians, Russian Tatars, Russian Chechens, Russian Yakuts… I think we are finding ourselves again. And I enter the New Year with a sense of spiritual uplift and optimism. Russia is being reborn. It is absolutely obvious.
This interview was first published by Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper, translated and edited by the RT team
By Evgeny Shostakov, in conversation with Sergey Karaganov
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
“Say, ‘Do you await for us except one of the two best things while we await for you that Allah will afflict you with punishment from Himself or at our hands? So wait; indeed, we, along with you, are waiting.'” (Quran 9:52)
Truthful is Allah, the Almighty.
We mourn to our Arab and Islamic nation, to free Palestine and its great resistance, its noble people, and to the free and mujahideen everywhere. The great mujahid leader, Deputy Head of the Political Bureau of Hamas, Sheikh Saleh al-Arouri, along with comrades, martyred on the path to Al-Quds.
We extend our condolences to our brothers in the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas and to the fighters of Al-Qassam Brigades, as well as to the steadfast people of Gaza, Al-Quds, the West Bank, and all factions and movements of resistance and jihad in Palestine. Allah, the Almighty, has sealed the journey of this great leader with the highest honors and martyrdom he sought and worked for alongside his fellow mujahideen: resistance and jihad, victory, or martyrdom.
The criminal enemy, after ninety days of crime, killing, and destruction in Gaza, Khan Yunis, Jabalia Camp, and all the brave cities, camps, and villages, resorts to the policy of assassination and physical liquidation for anyone involved in the heroic Al-Aqsa Flood operation and contributed to defending the oppressed Palestinian people. Today’s crime completes the assassination crime of the great leader Sayyed Rida al-Musawi in another field and a new front in the battle. This heinous crime will only strengthen the resolve of the resistance in Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iran, and Iraq, reinforcing their belief in their just cause and commitment to continue the path of resistance and jihad until victory and liberation.
We consider the assassination of Sheikh Saleh al-Arouri and his martyred comrades in the heart of the southern suburbs of Beirut as a serious aggression against Lebanon, its people, security, sovereignty, and its resistance. It carries political and security messages with significant symbolic and strategic implications, representing a dangerous development in the war between the enemy and the axis of resistance. We in Hezbollah affirm that this crime will never pass without a response and punishment. Our resistance is steadfast, loyal to its principles and commitments, with its hand on the trigger, and its fighters are at the highest levels of readiness. This historic day has implications beyond what follows; patience and reliance on Allah, victory, with the permission of Allah, is near.
Tuesday, 02-01-2024
19 Jumada Al-Akhirah 1445 H.
Inexorably, we continue to be sucked, deeper and deeper, into the vortex of the Raging Twenties.
The following column was written one year after the assassination of Gen Soleimani in Baghdad, on January 3, 2020, and published as the last essay of my book Raging Twenties, which came out in early 2021.
The Raging Twenties, as I then argued, started with a murder. The same applies to Raging 2024, which has started with the murder, in south Beirut, of Deputy Head of the Political Bureau of Hamas, Sheikh Saleh al-Arouri.
Iran’s response to the murder of Soleimani in 2020 sent a clear message to the Empire. Hezbollah’s response to the murder of Al-Arouri in Lebanese soil – a red line – may also send a clear message to Israel. Yet, ominously, there are no guarantees this will be enough to contain a regional war.
Three years after the murder of Gen Soleimani, it may be enlightening to check out what changed – on so many levels: from Iran starring as a full-fledged BRICS member (along with Saudi Arabia) and key actor of multipolarity, to the renewed impetus of the Axis of Resistance.
Gen Soleimani’s years of painstaking work shaped his legacy as the Designer of the Masterplan: the Axis of Resistance finally being able to stare down the Empire of Chaos, Lies and Plunder and its aircraft carrier in West Asia. That’s the incandescent geopolitical juncture we find ourselves today.
So let’s briefly review how we got here.
Soleimani geopolitics, one year on
Pepe Escobar
January 2021
One year ago, the Raging Twenties started with a murder.
The assassination of Maj Gen Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), alongside Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iraq’s Hashd al-Sha’abi militia, by laser-guided Hellfire missiles launched from two MQ-9 Reaper drones, was an act of war.
Not only the drone strike at Baghdad airport, directly ordered by President Trump, was unilateral, unprovoked and illegal: it was engineered as a stark provocation, to detonate an Iranian reaction that would then be countered by American “self-defense”, packaged as “deterrence”. Call it a perverse form of double down, reversed false flag.
The imperial Mighty Wurlitzer spun it as a “targeted killing”, a pre-emptive op squashing Soleimani’s alleged planning of “imminent attacks” against US diplomats and troops.
False. No evidence whatsoever. And then, Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, in front of his Parliament, offered the ultimate context: Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission, on a regular flight between Damascus and Baghdad, involved in complex negotiations between Tehran and Riyadh, with the Iraqi Prime Minister as mediator, at the request of President Trump.
So the imperial machine – in complete mockery of international law – assassinated a de facto diplomatic envoy.
The three top factions who pushed for Soleimani’s assassination were US neo-cons – supremely ignorant of Southwest Asia’s history, culture and politics – and the Israeli and Saudi lobbies, who ardently believe their interests are advanced every time Iran is attacked. Trump could not possibly see The Big Picture and its dire ramifications: only what his major Israeli-firster donor Sheldon Adelson dictates, and what Jared of Arabia Kushner whispered in his ear, remote-controlled by his close pal Muhammad bin Salman (MbS).
The armour of American “prestige”
The measured Iranian response to Soleimani’s assassination was carefully calibrated to not detonate vengeful imperial “deterrence”: precision missile strikes on the American-controlled Ain al-Assad air base in Iraq. The Pentagon received advance warning.
Predictably, the run-up towards the first anniversary of Soleimani’s assassination had to degenerate into intimations of US-Iran once again on the brink of war.
So it’s enlightening to examine what the Commander of the IRGC Aerospace Division, Brigadier General Amir-Ali Hajizadeh, told Lebanon’s Al Manar network: “The US and the Zionist regime [Israel] have not brought security to any place and if something happens here (in the region) and a war breaks out, we will make no distinction between the US bases and the countries hosting them.”
Hajizadeh, expanding on the precision missile strikes a year ago, added, “We were prepared for the Americans’ response and all our missile power was fully on alert. If they had given a response, we would have hit all of their bases from Jordan to Iraq and the Persian Gulf and even their warships in the Indian Ocean.”
The precision missile strikes on Ain al-Assad, a year ago, represented a middle-rank power, enfeebled by sanctions, and facing a huge economic/financial crisis, responding to an attack by targeting imperial assets that are part of the Empire of Bases. That was a global first – unheard of since the end of WWII. It was clearly interpreted across vast swathes of the Global South as fatally piercing the decades-old hegemonic armor of American” prestige”.
So Tehran was not exactly impressed by two nuclear-capable B-52s recently flying over the Persian Gulf; or the US Navy announcing the arrival of the nuclear-powered, missile loaded USS Georgia in the Persian Gulf last week.
These deployments were spun as a response to an evidence-free claim that Tehran was behind a 21-rocket attack against the sprawling American embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone.
The (unexploded) 107mm caliber rockets – by the way marked in English, not Farsi – can be easily bought in some underground Baghdad souk by virtually anybody, as I have seen for myself in Iraq since the mid-2000s.
That certainly does not qualify as a casus belli – or “self-defense” merging with “deterrence”. The Centcom justification actually sounds like a Monty Python sketch: an attack “…almost certainly conducted by an Iranian-backed rogue militia group.” Note that “almost certainly” is code for “we have no idea who did it”.
How to fight the – real – war on terror
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif did take the trouble to warn Trump he was being set up for a fake casus belli – and blowback would be inevitable. That’s a case of Iranian diplomacy being perfectly aligned with the IRGC: after all, the whole post-Soleimani strategy comes straight from Ayatollah Khamenei.
And that leads to the IRGC’s Hajizadeh once again establishing the Iranian red line in terms of the Islamic Republic’s defense: “We will not negotiate about the missile power with anyone” – pre-empting any move to incorporate missile reduction into a possible Washington return to the JCPOA. Hajizadeh has also emphasized that Tehran has restricted the range of its missiles to 2,000 km.
My friend Elijah Magnier, arguably the top war correspondent across Southwest Asia in the past four decades, has neatly detailed the importance of Soleimani.
Everyone not only along the Axis of Resistance – Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, Hezbollah, Ansarullah – but across vast swathes of the Global South is firmly aware of how Soleimani led the fight against ISIS/Daesh in Iraq from 2014 to 2015, and how he was instrumental in retaking Tikrit in 2015.
Zeinab Soleimani, the impressive General’s daughter, has profiled the man, and the sentiments he inspired. And Hezbollah’s secretary-general Sayed Nasrallah, in an extraordinary interview, stressed Soleimani’s “great humility”, even “with the common people, the simple people.”
Nasrallah tells a story that is essential to place Soleimani’s modus operandi in the real – not fictional – war on terror, and deserves to be quoted in full:
“At that time, Hajj Qassem traveled from Baghdad airport to Damascus airport, from where he came (directly) to Beirut, in the southern suburbs. He arrived to me at midnight. I remember very well what he said to me: “At dawn you must have provided me with 120 (Hezbollah) operation commanders.” I replied “But Hajj, it’s midnight, how can I provide you with 120 commanders?” He told me that there was no other solution if we wanted to fight (effectively) against ISIS, to defend the Iraqi people, our holy places [5 of the 12 Imams of Twelver Shi’ism have their mausoleums in Iraq], our Hawzas [Islamic seminars], and everything that existed in Iraq. There was no choice. “I don’t need fighters. I need operational commanders [to supervise the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units, PMU].” This is why in my speech [about Soleimani’s assassination], I said that during the 22 years or so of our relationship with Hajj Qassem Soleimani, he never asked us for anything. He never asked us for anything, not even for Iran. Yes, he only asked us once, and that was for Iraq, when he asked us for these (120) operations commanders. So he stayed with me, and we started contacting our (Hezbollah) brothers one by one. We were able to bring in nearly 60 operational commanders, including some brothers who were on the front lines in Syria, and whom we sent to Damascus airport [to wait for Soleimani], and others who were in Lebanon, and that we woke up from their sleep and brought in [immediately] from their house as the Hajj said he wanted to take them with him on the plane that would bring him back to Damascus after the dawn prayer. And indeed, after praying the dawn prayer together, they flew to Damascus with him, and Hajj Qassem traveled from Damascus to Baghdad with 50 to 60 Lebanese Hezbollah commanders, with whom he went to the front lines in Iraq. He said he didn’t need fighters, because thank God there were plenty of volunteers in Iraq. But he needed [battle-hardened] commanders to lead these fighters, train them, pass on experience and expertise to them, etc. And he didn’t leave until he took my pledge that within two or three days I would have sent him the remaining 60 commanders.”
Orientalism, all over again
A former commander under Soleimani that I met in Iran in 2018 had promised me and my colleague Sebastiano Caputo that he would try to arrange an interview with the Maj Gen – who never spoke to foreign media. We had no reason to doubt our interlocutor – so until the last Baghdad minute we were in this selective waiting list.
As for Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, killed side by side with Soleimani in the Baghdad drone strike, I was part of a small group who spent an afternoon with him in a safe house inside – not outside – Baghdad’s Green Zone in November 2017. My full report is here.
Prof. Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran, reflecting on the assassination, told me, “the most important thing is that the Western view on the situation is very Orientalist. They assume that Iran has no real structures and that everything is dependent on individuals. In the West an assassination doesn’t destroy an administration, company, or organization. Ayatollah Khomeini passed away and they said the revolution was finished. But the constitutional process produced a new leader within hours. The rest is history.”
This may go a long way to explain Soleimani geopolitics. He may have been a revolutionary superstar – many across the Global South see him as the Che Guevara of Southwest Asia – but he was most of all a quite articulated cog of a very articulated machine.
The adjunct President of the Iranian Parliament, Hossein Amirabdollahian, told Iranian network Shabake Khabar that Soleimani, two years before the assassination, had already envisaged an inevitable “normalization” between Israel and Persian Gulf monarchies.
At the same time he was also very much aware of the Arab League 2002 position – shared, among others, by Iraq, Syria and Lebanon: a “normalization” cannot even begin to be discussed without an independent – and viable – Palestinian state under 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as capital.
Now everyone knows this dream is dead, if not completely buried. What remains is the usual, dreary slog: the American assassination of Soleimani; the Israeli assassination of top Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh; the relentless, relatively low-intensity Israeli warfare against Iran fully supported by the Beltway; Washington’s illegal occupation of parts of northeast Syria to grab some oil; the perpetual drive for regime change in Damascus; the non-stop demonization of Hezbollah.
Beyond the Hellfire
Tehran has made it very clear that a return to at least a measure of mutual respect between US-Iran involves Washington rejoining the JCPOA with no preconditions, and the end of illegal, unilateral Trump administration sanctions. These parameters are non-negotiable.
Nasrallah, for his part, in a speech in Beirut on Sunday, stressed, “one of the main outcomes of the assassination of General Soleimani and al-Muhandis is the calls made for the expulsion of US forces from the region. Such calls had not been made prior to the assassination. The martyrdom of the resistance leaders set US troops on the track of leaving Iraq.”
This may be wishful thinking, because the military-industrial-security complex will never willingly abandon a key hub of the Empire of Bases.
More important is the fact that the post-Soleimani environment transcends Soleimani.
The Axis of Resistance – Tehran-Baghdad-Damascus-Hezbollah-Ansarullah – instead of collapsing, will keep getting reinforced.
Iran is increasingly solidified as the key node of the New Silk Roads in Southwest Asia: the Iran-China strategic partnership is constantly revitalized by FMs Zarif and Wang Yi, and that includes Beijing turbo-charging its geoeconomic investment in South Pars – the largest gas field on the planet.
Iran, Russia and China will be involved in the reconstruction of Syria – which will also include, eventually, a New Silk Road branch: the Iran-Iraq-Syria-Eastern Mediterranean railway.All that is an interlinked, ongoing process no Hellfires are able to burn.
WATCH the full conversation with Elijah Magnier on YouTube: https://t.co/0lvrHeDpbP
— Kevork Almassian
BREAKING: Israel assassinated a senior Hamas leader Saleh Al-Arouri in Southern Beirut. Veteran war correspondent Elijah Magnier says Israel broke the rules of engagement with Lebanon and therefore “the reaction will be very harsh and Hezbollah will react very quickly.” @ejmalrai
Oh Mama! They are so stumped! The collective west is throwing everything and the kitchen sink at it, but the Houthis keep stopping the ships and saying as soon as food and supplies get through to Gaza, they will let the ships go! Did you ever see such a thing in your life? Check out, these westerners cannot count > now it is 44 countries. What a bunch of dilly idiots!
A Joint Statement from the Governments of the United States, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/01/03/a-joint-statement-from-the-governments-of-the-united-states-australia-bahrain-belgium-canada-denmark-germany-italy-japan-netherlands-new-zealand-and-the-united-kingdom/?utm_source=twitter
“Recognizing the broad consensus as expressed by 44 countries around the world on December 19, 2023, as well as the statement by the UN Security Council on December 1, 2023, condemning Houthi attacks against commercial vessels transiting the Red Sea, and in light of ongoing attacks, including a significant escalation over the past week targeting commercial vessels, with missiles, small boats, and attempted hijackings,
We hereby reiterate the following and warn the Houthis against further attacks:
Ongoing Houthi attacks in the Red Sea are illegal, unacceptable, and profoundly destabilizing. There is no lawful justification for intentionally targeting civilian shipping and naval vessels. Attacks on vessels, including commercial vessels, using unmanned aerial vehicles, small boats, and missiles, including the first use of anti-ship ballistic missiles against such vessels, are a direct threat to the freedom of navigation that serves as the bedrock of global trade in one of the world’s most critical waterways.
These attacks threaten innocent lives from all over the world and constitute a significant international problem that demands collective action. Nearly 15 percent of global seaborne trade passes through the Red Sea, including 8 percent of global grain trade, 12 percent of seaborne-traded oil and 8 percent of the world’s liquefied natural gas trade. International shipping companies continue to reroute their vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, adding significant cost and weeks of delay to the delivery of goods, and ultimately jeopardizing the movement of critical food, fuel, and humanitarian assistance throughout the world.
Let our message now be clear: we call for the immediate end of these illegal attacks and release of unlawfully detained vessels and crews. The Houthis will bear the responsibility of the consequences should they continue to threaten lives, the global economy, and free flow of commerce in the region’s critical waterways. We remain committed to the international rules-based order and are determined to hold malign actors accountable for unlawful seizures and attacks.”
Highlights from Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrullah’s speech on the fourth anniversary of the martyrdom of leaders Hajj Qassem Soleimani and Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis:
– “Israel” has morally, legally, and humanly fallen, viewed globally as a killer of children and women, displacing people, and responsible for the largest genocide in the current century.
– Lebanese resistance, once perceived as weak, is now bolder and more prepared for challenges.
– Zionist air force failed to decisively win in the Gaza Strip.
– “Israel” cannot survive without security; when security is lost, they pack up and leave.
– Three months in Gaza, and no one in the Zionist entity claims to see a victory.
– Across all battlefronts, trust in the Zionist army, security agencies, and political leadership is eroding.
– The artificial entity of “Israel” and its connection to the land based on security is deceptive; when they lose security, they depart.
– The Al-Aqsa Flood and developments in all battlefronts shattered the concept of a safe haven for Zionists, leading to reverse migration.
– Results of the Al-Aqsa Flood shattered the image of a powerful “Israeli state.”
– Red Sea front is a wise and impactful move by Yemen, significantly affecting the Zionist enemy.
– The great move by Yemen had a substantial impact on the Israeli enemy’s economy.
Sayyed Nasrallah: This experience indicates that if you are weak, the world won’t protect you; your strength, courage, and weapons will.
– If you are strong, you impose your strength on the world.
-What happened and will happen weakens Israel, shakes its foundation, and puts it on the path to demise.
Sayyed Nasrallah: In the past, one operation was enough to make Israel open a war on Lebanon, but today Lebanon is stronger.
-If Israel thinks of waging war on Lebanon, our fight will be limitless and without constraints.
Sayyed Nasrallah: War with us will be extremely costly.
Sayyed Nasrallah: The most important message sent by the resistance when opening the southern front is that it is bold, fearless, and not deterred, defending its people and land.
Sayyed Nasrallah: Yesterday’s incident in the southern suburbs is very dangerous, especially considering the targeting in that area.
Sayyed Nasrallah: The Israeli mobilization with all its weapons is a result of the resistance’s rapid move to open the front.
Sayyed Nasrallah: We fight on the front with calculated plans; hence, we pay a high price in the lives of our youth. However, if the enemy thinks of waging war on Lebanon, it will be limitless and without constraints.
Sayyed Nasrallah on the assassination in the southern suburbs of Beirut: This serious crime will not go without retaliation and punishment, and the battlefield, days, and nights are between us and them.
Live translation (not formal, unofficial) by https://twitter.com/rania_masri
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Xh6cM9iVE_eSujoglmaKDcw8oHJciQIdyNk9YCT6ArY/edit?pli=1
Veteran war correspondent @ejmalrai discusses Netanyahu’s Gaza failure, choices & suicidal assassination of Hamas figure in Beirut, Iran patrols in Red Sea, Hezbollah retaliation expected, over 100 killed by bombs in Iran et plus.
Can also view on Twitter:
Israel Bombs Beirut, Tensions Rise in Red Sea + 100 Killed by Blast in Iran w/ Elijah J. Magnier
Tensions continue to rise surrounding Iran, as nearly 100 people were killed in an attack targeting a memorial near the grave site of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, four years… pic.twitter.com/s6aFhNXo0o
— Rachel Blevins (@RachBlevins) January 4, 2024
Tensions continue to rise surrounding Iran, as nearly 100 people were killed in an attack targeting a memorial near the grave site of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, four years after he was assassinated by the U.S.
Veteran Journalist Elijah J. Magnier noted that we are seeing an increase in high-profile attacks, as this week Israel bombed Beirut, killing a Hamas senior official. This, as tensions also continue to rise in the Red Sea, where Iran has sent a warship, and the U.S. is rallying its allies to target Yemen…
Can also view on Piped:
https://piped.video/watch?v=MrB0gdZ_hxU
First, the Quad, and we will end with the Quad as well.
Announced early in 2023, the so-called quad was set together with great fanfare. It is educational to read the old 2023 early Quad Leader’s statements from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia, Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan, and President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. of the United States. They were going to create a free and open Indo-Pacific that is inclusive and resilient. They were going to support the region’s development, stability, and prosperity through their positive, practical agenda. They will be transparent and respect the leadership of regional institutions, including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA).
So, what happened? The same as with the naval coalition Operation Prosperity Guardian, which the US and the UK tried to pull together to defend Red Sea shipping from Yemenite attacks. And soon, the invitees, the coalition members, became visibly absent, sending perhaps an officer or something or somebody small. So, it is at this stage not effective or active and when Iran sent an old warship into the area, Operation Prosperity Guardian became very quiet.
Currently, the big shippers are not using the transit. Danish shipping giant Maersk ’s decision on Tuesday to pause Red Sea and Gulf of Aden transits until further notice underscores the difficulty for the U.S.-led initiative, called Operation Prosperity Guardian. U.S. Navy helicopters, returning fire, sank three of the four Houthi boats that attacked the Maersk Hangzhou over the weekend, the U.S. military said.
Commercial ships are moving away from the Red Sea and instead going around the Cape of Good Hope says analytics provider MarineTraffic, triggering an increase in container rates from Shanghai. In addition, South African ports are crowded and jampacked which makes the transit time even longer as the cargo carriers must wait their turn, or pay up for an earlier slot.
So far, the situation has affected $225 billion in trade, according to calculations. Overall, freight carrier Kuehne+Nagel said, it’s impacted 330 vessels. The total capacity is estimated at 4.5 million containers, or 20-foot equivalent units (TEUs). The value of a container bound for the Suez is $50,000, according to freight consultancy MDS Transmodal. Global trade data provider Kpler said the number of ships abandoning the route jumped to 124 this week from 55 last week, and from 18 a month ago. To be sure, though, there’s been a modest increase in container ships in the Red Sea, with 21 on Tuesday, up from 16 on Dec. 26. (These are the allowed traffic or we can say the non-western traffic). “Simultaneously, our analysis of traffic through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait for all vessels combined reveals a consistent downward trend in crossings for both northbound and southbound vessels,” said Jean-Charles Gordon, ship tracking director at Kpler. (The strait connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, which opens into the Arabian Sea in the Indian Ocean.)
That raises the stakes for Operation Prosperity Guardian or this makes Operation Prosperity Guardian a failure another one. To achieve results, the task force will need a great deal of naval coordination, according to U.S. Navy Rear Admiral (Ret.) Mark Montgomery, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies who served as policy director for the Senate Armed Services Committee under Sen. John McCain.
So we can take it without a grain of salt that Operation Prosperity Guardian will need a very long time to become effective if it ever does. The UK is still bellowing: “British Foreign Minister: The attacks in the Red Sea must be stopped, otherwise action will be taken to stop them. I will not specify the action that Britain will take.” Of course the world sings .. So, whatcha gonna do? In just now … Israel’s ZIM shipping company announced an increase in the prices of its trips from the middle east by about $1,000 per container.
We see the same tendency and ‘weakness shift’ (Amarynth®) watching the Quad.
Facing a renewed crisis as US President Joe Biden is not able to make it to India in late January for a Quad summit. The divergences among the four partners are now on the surface and the question is: What is the value of this Quad? Why is it needed? They wanted to contain China, but they cannot even keep to a schedule of summits. From Australian, the Sydney Morning Herald said: “Stars not aligning: Quad summit in doubt for the second year running.” Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had plans to host Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the other Quad leaders on January 27, but these were simply ditched, so we can assume they have nothing much to say to one another.
This is not the first time the Biden missed the Quad group. The previous Quad summit, scheduled to be held in Sydney in May 2023, was canceled at the last minute when Biden withdrew because of the US debt ceiling crisis, leading to a makeshift leaders’ meeting being organized on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Hiroshima, according to the Australian media outlet.
The US lacks strength in promoting their Quad, they are snubbing meetings and summits and there is no priority here. A clear case of another weakness shift.
We will be needing this little image a lot over the next period in our world.
Israel is trying to trigger a wider conflict to bring in the US
By Abdel Bari Atwan via Rai Al Youm
Israel’s assassination of Hamas deputy leader Saleh al-Arouri in a drone strike in Beirut on Tuesday evening, coming just days after it killed Iranian general Reza Mousavi in Damascus and amid its ongoing war of extermination on the Gaza Strip, came as a huge shock to Hamas, its Lebanese hosts Hezbollah, and the Axis of resistance generally.
It amounted to a declaration of war on Lebanon and the Lebanese resistance in the south of the country, and a massive provocation to Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah, who had repeatedly threatened punitive retaliation to any Israeli attempt to assassinate any Hezbollah or Palestinian leaders in Lebanon.
The attack seemed calculated to undermine Lebanon’s security and stability and lure the resistance into an all-out confrontation with Israel as it faces humiliating setbacks on multiple internal and external fronts: most notably the Galilee front in northern occupied Palestine as well as the Gaza and Red Sea fronts and against US bases in Iraq.
The Israeli army partially withdrew from parts of northern Gaza Strip because of the heavy losses it was taking, and also maybe to deploy against South Lebanon from where missile and drone attacks have been escalating for the past three months, leading to the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlers from northern Palestine.
Israeli media had indicated that the next stage in the assault on Gaza will include a campaign of assassinations targeting Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders both inside occupied Palestine and abroad. Arouri is said to have ranked third on the Israeli hit-list, preceded by Hamas’ leader in Gaza Yahya al-Sinwar and Islamic Jihad secretary-general Ziad al-Nakhaleh.
Arouri confounded the Israelis by providing the armed resistance in the West Bank with arms, training, and funding, enabling it to escalate and shake the security and stability of the occupation. He coordinated with Islamic Jihad’s cadres and Fateh’s al-Aqsa Brigades in the West Bank, creating a fireball of resistance that rolled from one town to another, scorching the soldiers and settlers that stood in its way, and helping the resistance fighters in Gaza by unsettling the enemy and dissipating its forces.
The martyrdom of Arouri and the five comrades killed alongside him will not weaken Hamas but strengthen its resilience and resolve. It reflected the occupation’s weakness, defeat, and dejection, and was a failed attempt to divert attention away from that reality. The assassination of top Hamas figures in the past (from its founder Sheikh Ahmad Yasin to Abdelaziz al-Rantisi, Salah Shehadeh, and Yahya Ayyash) has only led to the movement becoming stronger, broader-based, and better armed — culminating in the unprecedented victory of 7 October.
Israel will pay a high price for this latest crime, whether in the occupied territories or on the other resistance fronts in South Lebanon, the Red Sea, or Iraq. It may find itself engulfed in an expanded regional war against adversaries who have been preparing for such a day.
The Biden administration, which supported and continues to support Israel’s massacres in the Gaza Strip, has been making great efforts to avoid the war expanding and especially extending to the Lebanese front. It’s Israeli proteges rewarded those efforts by carrying out a criminal operation that could trigger a major regional war. Nothing will be the US’ undoing more than Israel’s massacres and wars.
Nasrallah affirmed in his speech on Wednesday that there would be retaliation and punishment for Arouri’s murder, but did not elaborate. He charged Israel was trying to spark a wider war in order to bring the US in directly on its side, and warned of a no-holds-barred response if it were to attack Lebanon.
The drone strike that killed Arouri and several of his aides, some of them Lebanese, on Lebanese soil was itself an attack on Lebanon and its sovereignty and honour. All Lebanese should support Hezbollah’s retaliation when it comes.
When it does, it could trigger a war that spells the end of the racist colonial Zionist project. If tiny and besieged Gaza can valiantly hold out for three months and teach Israel lessons it will never forget, how would things be if the war were joined by Hezbollah’s missiles and drones and thousands of formidable fighters?
The outcome of US-led conflicts in Ukraine and West Asia will have a profound impact on the developing world order. Washington has already lost the former, and its major adversaries are vested in making sure it loses the latter too.
by Ambassador MK Bhadrakumar at The Cradle.
Geopolitical analysts broadly agree that the war in Ukraine and the West Asian crisis will dictate the trajectory of world politics in 2024. But a reductionist thesis appears alongside that views the Israel-Palestine conflict narrowly in terms of what it entails for the resilience of the US proxy war in Ukraine – the assumption being that the locus of world politics lies in Eurasia.
The reality is more complex. Each of these two conflicts has a raison d’être and dynamics of its own, while at the same time also being intertwined.
Washington’s neck-deep involvement in the current phase of the West Asian crisis can turn into a quagmire, since it is also tangled up with domestic politics in a way that the Ukraine war never has been. But then, the outcome of the Ukraine war is already a foregone conclusion, and the US and its allies have realized that Russia cannot be defeated militarily; the endgame narrows down to an agreement to end the conflict on Russia’s terms.
To be sure, the outcome of the Ukraine war and the denouement of the Israel-Palestine conflict, which is at the root of the West Asian crisis, will have a profound impact on the new world order, and the two processes reinforce each other.
Russia realizes this fully. President Vladimir Putin’s stunning ‘year-enders’ in the run-up to the New Year speak for themselves: daylong visits to Abu Dhabi and Riyadh (watched by a shell-shocked US President Joe Biden), followed by talks with Iran’s president and rounded off with a telephone conversation with the Egyptian president.
In the space of 48 hours or so, Putin touched base with his Emirati, Saudi, Iranian, and Egyptian colleagues who officially entered the portals of the BRICS on 1 January.
The evolving US intervention in the West Asian crisis can be understood from a geopolitical perspective only by factoring in Biden’s visceral hostility toward Russia. BRICS is in Washington’s crosshairs. The US understands perfectly well that the extra large presence of West Asian and Arab nations in BRICS — four out of ten member states — is central to Putin’s grand project to re-structure the world order and bury US exceptionalism and hegemony.
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran are major oil producing countries. Russia has been rather explicit that during its 2024 chairmanship of BRICS, it will push for the creation of a currency to challenge the petrodollar. Without doubt, the BRICS currency will be at the center stage of the grouping’s summit due to be hosted by Putin in Kazan, Russia in October.
In a special address on 1 January, marking the start of Russia’s BRICS Chairmanship, Putin stated his commitment to “enhancing the role of BRICS in the international monetary system, expanding both interbank cooperation and the use of national currencies in mutual trade.”
If a BRICS currency is used instead of the dollar, there could be significant impact on several financial sectors of the US economy, such as energy and commodity markets, international trade and investment, capital markets, technology and fintech, consumer goods and retail, travel and tourism, and so on.
The banking sector could take the first hit that might eventually spill over to the markets. And if Washington fails to fund its mammoth deficit, prices of all commodities could skyrocket or even reach hyperinflation triggering a crash of the US economy.
Meanwhile, the eruption of the Israel-Palestine conflict has given the US an alibi — ‘Israel’s self-defense’ — to claw its way back on the greasy pole of West Asian politics. Washington has multiple concerns, but at its core are the twin objectives of resuscitating the Abraham Accords (anchored on Saudi-Israeli proximity) and the concurrent sabotage of the Beijing-mediated Saudi-Iranian rapprochement.
The Biden administration was counting on the fact that an Israeli-Saudi deal would provide legitimacy to Tel Aviv and proclaim to the Islamic world that there was no religious justification for hostility towards Israel. But Washington senses that post-7 October it would not be able to secure a Saudi-Israel deal during this Biden term, and all that could be coaxed out of Riyadh is a door left ajar for future discussion on the topic. No doubt, it is a major blow to the US strategy to liquidate the Palestinian question.
In a medium term perspective, if the Russian-Saudi mechanism known as OPEC+ liberates the world oil market from US control, BRICS drives a dagger into the heart of US hegemony which is anchored on the dollar being the ‘world currency.’
Saudi Arabia recently signed a currency swap deal worth $7 billion with China in an attempt to shift more of their trade away from the dollar. The People’s Bank of China said in a statement that the swap arrangement will “help strengthen financial cooperation” and “facilitate more convenient trade and investment” between the countries.
Going forward, sensitive Saudi-Chinese transactions in strategic areas such as defense, nuclear technology, among others, will henceforth take place below the US radar. From a Chinese perspective, if its strategic trade is sufficiently insulated from any US-led program of anti-China sanctions, Beijing can position itself confidently to confront US power in the Indo-Pacific. This is a telling example of how the US strategy for the Indo-Pacific will lose traction as a result of its waning influence in West Asia.
The conventional wisdom is that preoccupation in volatile West Asia distracts Washington from paying attention to the Indo-Pacific and China. In reality, though, the waning influence in West Asia is complicating the capacity of the US to counter China both in the region as well as in the Indo-Pacific. The developments are moving in a direction where the credentials of the US as a great power are at an inflection point in West Asia – and that realization has leaked into other geographic regions around the world.
Way back in 2007, the distinguished political scientists John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, wrote with great prescience in their famous 34,000-word essay entitled The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy that Israel has become a ‘strategic liability’ for the United States, but retains its strong support because of a wealthy, well-organized, and bewitching lobby that has a ‘stranglehold’ on Congress and US elites.
The authors warned that Israel and its lobby bear outsized their responsibility for persuading the Bush Administration to invade Iraq and, perhaps one day soon, to attack the nuclear facilities of Iran.
Interestingly, on New Year’s Eve, in a special report based on extensive briefing by top US officials, the New York Times highlighted that “No other episode [as the war in Gaza] in the past half-century has tested the ties between the United States and Israel in such an intense and consequential way.”
Clearly, even as Israel’s barbaric actions in Gaza and its colonial project in the occupied West Bank are exposed and laid bare, and the Israeli state’s campaign to force Palestinian population migration are in full view, two of the US strategic objectives in the region are unravelling: first, the restoration of Israel’s military superiority in the balance of forces regionally and vis-a-vis the Axis of Resistance, in particular; and second, the resuscitation of the Abraham Accords where the crown jewels would have been a Saudi-Israeli treaty.
Viewed from another angle, the directions in which West Asia’s crisis unfolds are being keenly watched by the world community, especially those in the Asia-Pacific region. Most notable here is that Russia and China have given the US a free hand to navigate its military moves – unchallenged, so far, in the Red Sea. This means that any conflagration in the region will be synonymous with a catastrophic breakdown of US strategy.
Soon after the US defeat in Afghanistan in Central Asia, and coinciding with an ignominious ending of the US-led proxy war by NATO against Russia in Eurasia, a violent, grotesque setback in West Asia will send a resounding message across all of Asia that the US-led bandwagon has run out of steam. Among the end users of this startling message, the countries of ASEAN stand at the forefront. The bottom line is that the overlapping tumultuous events in Eurasia and West Asia are poised to coalesce into a climactic moment for world politics.
≈≈≈≈
AHH: Will Gaza help accelerate the birth of the new BRICS currency?? India has swivelled back into the BRICS fold, marked by Jaishankar’s spectacular visit to to Moscow and praise by Global Times; conversely, Biden and the Five Eyes are skipping the Quad Summit for a second straight year…
Parts of the Epstein files are released. Beyond the usual distraction, and to settle scores within the Swamp, perhaps a faction wishes to save the western world from the thermonuclear holocaust at its doorstep. It could be an attempt to expose the Israel Lobby and jettison the crazed Zionists of all persuasions, focusing on the Jewish frontmen and Mossad’s central role in the western imperium.
Last week, South Africa became the first country to file a suit against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague. In the 84-page suit which South Africa filed with the court on December 29, it details evidence of brutality being perpetrated in Gaza and asks the Court – the United Nations body for resolving interstate disputes – to urgently declare that Israel has breached its responsibilities under international law since October 7.
South Africa has accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, in violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention which defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”.
Jordan’s minister of Foreign Affairs, Ayman Safadi, announced that his country backs South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the ICJ. He added that the Jordanian government is working on a legal file to follow up on the case. Turkey, Malaysia, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) had announced that they back the case too.
Genocidal actions listed in the suit include the killing of Palestinians in Gaza in large numbers, especially children; the destruction of their homes; their expulsion and displacement; as well as enforcing a blockade on food, water, and medical assistance to the strip.
Israel and South Africa are both parties to the ICJ, meaning its rulings are binding on both of them. But while the ICJ has more weight than the UN Security Council where Israel is tightly shielded by the US, the court lacks enforcement power. In fact, the ICJ’s orders have been ignored in some cases with no serious consequences. South Africa has also specially requested that the ICJ move urgently to prevent Israel from committing further crimes in the strip – likely by issuing an order for Tel Aviv to halt its invasion. That request will be prioritised, the ICJ said in a statement, but did not specify a timeline.
The initial meetings will be public and will be held on January 11-12. Israel reportedly appointed prominent US lawyer and Israel advocate Alan Dershowitz as their council. Yes, that Dershowitz, who currently is high profile in the Epstein papers and where he, it is alleged, did the things that Epstein and his woman handler was famous for setting up to do. “Have you condemned Hamas yet”?, is his hackneyed schtick, an attempt to whitewash himself? Questioned about his Epstein connections he responded by ranting that feminists should condemn Hamas based on an issue that is debunked completely.
Where the ICC is not a court that the ordinary person trusts, South Africa has an aspect going for it and that is the arrest warrant that this court issued before the South African BRICS summit, where South Africa had to decide whether they would arrest Mr Putin under this warrant, or not. This was an absurd position to be in. South Africa has refused in the past to carry out arrests of this nature.
From John J. Mearsheimer
I am writing to flag a truly important document that should be widely circulated and read carefully by anyone interested in the ongoing Gaza War.
Specifically, I am referring to the 84-page “application” that South Africa filed with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 29 December 2023, accusing Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza.1 It maintains that Israel’s actions since the war began on 7 October 2023 “are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnic … group in the Gaza Strip.” (1) That charge fits clearly under the definition of genocide in the Geneva Convention, to which Israel is a signatory.2
The application is a superb description of what Israel is doing in Gaza. It is comprehensive, well-written, well-argued, and thoroughly documented. The application has three main components.
First, it describes in detail the horrors that the IDF has inflicted on the Palestinians since 7 October 2023 and explains why much more death and destruction is in store for them.
Second, the application provides a substantial body of evidence showing that Israeli leaders have genocidal intent toward the Palestinians. (59-69) Indeed, the comments of Israeli leaders – all scrupulously documented – are shocking. One is reminded of how the Nazis talked about dealing with Jews when reading how Israelis in “positions of the highest responsibility” talk about dealing with the Palestinians. (59) In essence, the document argues that Israel’s actions in Gaza, combined with its leaders’ statements of intent, make it clear that Israeli policy is “calculated to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians in Gaza.” (39)
Third, the document goes to considerable lengths to put the Gaza war in a broader historical context, making it clear that Israel has treated the Palestinians in Gaza like caged animals for many years. It quotes from numerous UN reports detailing Israel’s cruel treatment of the Palestinians. In short, the application makes clear that what the Israelis have done in Gaza since 7 October is a more extreme version of what they were doing well before 7 October.
There is no question that many of the facts described in the South African document have previously been reported in the media. What makes the application so important, however, is that it brings all those facts together in one place and provides an overarching and thoroughly supported description of the Israeli genocide. In other words, it provides the big picture while not neglecting the details.
Unsurprisingly, the Israeli government has labelled the charges a “blood libel” that “has no factual and judicial basis.” Moreover, Israel claims that “South Africa is collaborating with a terror group that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel.”3 A close reading of the document, however, makes it clear that there is no basis for these assertions. In fact, it is hard to see how Israel will be able to defend itself in a rational-legal way when the proceedings begin. After all, brute facts are hard to dispute.
Let me offer a few additional observations regarding the South African charges.
First, the document emphasizes that genocide Is distinct from other war crimes and crimes against humanity, although “there is often a close connection between all such acts.” (1) For example, targeting a civilian population to help win a war – as occurred when Britain and the United States bombed German and Japanese cities in World War II – is a war crime, but not genocide. Britain and the United States were not trying to destroy “a substantial part” of, or all the people in those targeted states. Ethnic cleansing underpinned by selective violence is also a war crime, although it is also not genocide, an action that Omer Bartov, the Israeli-born Holocaust expert, calls “the crime of all crimes.”4
For the record, I believed Israel was guilty of serious war crimes–but not genocide—during the first two months of the war, even though there was growing evidence of what Bartov has called “genocidal intent” on the part of Israeli leaders.5 But it became clear to me after the 24-30 November 2023 truce ended and Israel went back on the offensive, that Israeli leaders were in fact seeking to physically destroy a substantial portion of Gaza’s Palestinian population.
Second, even though the South African application focuses on Israel, it has huge implications for the United States, especially President Biden and his principal lieutenants. Why? Because there is little doubt that the Biden administration is complicitous in Israel’s genocide, which is also a punishable act according to the Genocide Convention. Despite his admission that Israel is engaged in “indiscriminate bombing,” President Biden has also stated that “we’re not going to do a damn thing other than protect Israel. Not a single thing.”6 He has been true to his word, going so far as to bypass Congress twice to quickly get additional armaments to Israel. Leaving aside the legal implications of his behavior, Biden’s name – and America’s name – will be forever associated with what is likely to become one of the textbook cases of attempted genocide.
Third, I never imagined I would see the day when Israel, a country filled with Holocaust survivors and their descendants, would face a serious charge of genocide. Regardless of how this case plays out in the ICJ – and here I am fully aware of the maneuvers that the United States and Israel will employ to avoid a fair trial – in the future Israel will be widely regarded as principally responsible for one of the canonical cases of genocide.
Fourth, the South African document emphasizes that there is no reason to think this genocide is going to end soon, unless the ICJ successfully intervenes. It twice quotes the words of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on 25 December 2023 to drive that point home: “We are not stopping, we are continuing to fight, and we are deepening the fighting in the coming days, and this will be a long battle and it is not close to being over.” (8, 82) Let us hope South Africa and the IJC bring a halt to the fighting, but in the final analysis the power of international courts to coerce countries like Israel and the United States is extremely limited.
Finally, the United States is a liberal democracy that is filled with intellectuals, newspaper editors, policymakers, pundits, and scholars who routinely proclaim their deep commitment to protecting human rights around the world. They tend to be highly vocal when countries commit war crimes, especially if the United States or any of its allies are involved. In the case of Israel’s genocide, however, most of the human rights mavens in the liberal mainstream have said little about Israel’s savage actions in Gaza or the genocidal rhetoric of its leaders. Hopefully, they will explain their disturbing silence at some point. Regardless, history will not be kind to them, as they said hardly a word while their country was complicit in a horrible crime, perpetrated right out in the open for all to see.
By Hamada Abu Sleyma – The last survivor of an Israeli airstrike
Intro by Peter Koenig
“I wish I could have died with them” – crying Hamada Abu Sleyma told Al-Mayadeen Media Network, an independent Arab satellite news channel. He said he just left home for 5 minutes trying to buy some bread from a nearby bakery, when an Israeli airstrike hit his family’s house, destroyed it completely, and buried his entire family alive.
He reckoned they are all dead. He built his tent on the rubble of his family house, as he wanted to be close to his loved ones, even in death – and just in case, he said, tears in his eyes, I may hear calls for help from under the debris.
This 2-min video-clip speaks for itself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2us2uYyplM , recorded by Al-Mayadeen Media Network.
There are simply no words to describe the ever-increasing intensity of the horror, the atrocities, the relentless, merciless genocide – targeting mostly civilian populations, and in particular women and children. It is clearly an act of eradicating and brutally eliminating Palestinian people. Targeting children and women is wiping out the next generation – children and the bearers of children.
Up to now, more than 22,000 people were murdered by the Zionist-directed Israel Defense Forces (IDF); and there is no end in sight for the killing. To the contrary, the Biden Administration has just declared gearing up American armament for the Middle East, by sending two aircraft carriers, loaded with about 50 fully armed war planes to the Med-Sea and the Gulf area. Nuclear weapons were not mentioned, but they are for sure part and parcel of the weaponry – ready to step up the killing – and risking a never-seen before worldwide catastrophe.
When will the world be interfering in this atrocious grand-scale homicide?
World wake up!
Intervene!
The killing orgy you are allowing to happen today to Palestine, may hit YOU tomorrow.
——
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
Russia’s Roscongress is hard at work setting up 82 events within the framework of the chairmanship and others as SPIEF sideline events. I expect that we will have BRICS events very frequently and sidelined with many others throughout the year.
Under Russia’s leadership it is a mini-country:
National Brands Fair and BRICS Creative Industries Forum will be organized on the sidelines of the SPIEF 2024. (https://forumspb.com/en/)
Conference and film screenings “Special Language of National Cinema of BRICS Countries” will take place at the 22nd Spirit of Fire International Debut Film Festival. (https://ugra.world/en/festival/)
The XV International IT-Forum with BRICS and SCO Participation will host the forum and competition of creative innovations of BRICS countries BRICS CREATEC.
If you recall, he said that his speech will be too long and he will continue today.
—o0o—
Since October 8, we have entered into combat with the enemy in the south over a stretch of more than 100 km.
The Islamic Resistance carried out more than 670 operations in 3 months, targeting 48 border sites more than once.
The Islamic Resistance executed 494 targetings, including 50 border points targeted more than once.
The Islamic Resistance also targeted technical and intelligence equipment along the border, completely destroying them.
“Israeli” soldiers fled from the sites towards the settlements, fearing the advancement of the fighters towards the sites and their occupation.
A large number of vehicles and tanks were destroyed along the border.
The operations were very draining for the enemy, who practiced extreme secrecy on their large losses.
The enemy does not acknowledge any killed or wounded, which is part of their policy of general secrecy about their losses.
Experts in the entity say that the losses of the enemy’s army are three times more than the announced numbers.
In 8 hospitals in the north alone, the statistics show that there are more than 2,000 wounded soldiers.
What is happening on the northern front is a true humiliation of the enemy’s army.
The Islamic Resistance did not target the inhabitants of the settlements, although they are occupiers. The displaced from these areas exert pressure on the government of the occupation.
From the beginning, we stated that the objective of the front in the south is to pressure the government of the enemy to stop the aggression on Gaza and to relieve the burden on the resistance there.
We are facing a real opportunity to liberate every inch of our Lebanese land and prevent the enemy from violating our borders and airspace.
Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (2/3):
—
Regarding Netanyahu’s statement about Hezbollah’s tent (https://t.me/PalestineResist/13558): This is stupidity, ignorance, and foolishness to talk about the tent. Talk about 48 border sites being destroyed, 11 rear sites being destroyed, 17 settlements being attacked, 50 enemy border points, and your soldiers hiding like mice. Is the resistance, which carries out this scale of operations every day, really deterred? The tent is a thing of the past; today, there is a real war on the borders.
When targeting occurs in Lebanon, particularly in the southern suburbs [Dahiye], we cannot accept such a significant and dangerous breach.
The killing of Sheikh Saleh Al-Arouri, a friend, a beloved, and a dear person with whom I had a high degree of friendship, love, understanding, and comprehension, I tell you for certain: this will not go unanswered or unpunished. (https://t.me/PalestineResist/25208)
We will not use the phrase “in the appropriate time and place.” The battlefield will respond, and this response is inevitably coming. We cannot remain silent over a breach of this gravity because this means that all of Lebanon, the cities, and the figures will become exposed.
The magnitude of the evils resulting from remaining silent over this breach is greater than any risks that may come from the response. Therefore, the decision is for the battlefield.
The American administration is concerned about the expansion of the war in the region because it has no interest in it.
The United States does not want to expand the war as it is preoccupied with the Ukrainian front and is preparing for a strategic defeat against Russia.
Today, there is an opportunity to rid Iraq of the presence of American forces and to expose the American narrative of fighting “ISIS.”
The Americans operate “ISIS” in Iran and then claim they have no relation to the bombing in Kerman. It is your creation that committed it.
Who is activating “ISIS” today in Syria? Look to the American forces, who are nurturing “ISIS” in Syria, providing support, and releasing its members from prisons.
The opportunity for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq today will be followed by the withdrawal of American forces from east of the Euphrates, and this is one of the national blessings of solidarity with Gaza.
Today, there is a historic opportunity in front of the Iraqi people for these criminal occupiers, these killers who spilled the blood of Iraqis, Syrians, and Lebanese, and who are full partners in all the crimes currently being committed in Gaza, Palestine, and Lebanon, to leave.
Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (3/3):
—
Those who belittle the actions of the Axis of Resistance today are the ones who have contributed nothing since the aggression began on Gaza.
The silent and failing regimes were surprised by what the Yemenis did in the Red Sea.
Sanaa’s stance has led many Yemeni factions to reconsider their position towards Ansarallah.
The government of Sanaa and Ansarallah are no longer just an internal faction, but a part of an international equation that the world stands before with great attention.
The massive turnout in Yemen is a message to the United States: You are not facing a government or a faction, but tens of millions of the Yemeni people with a history full of victories and inflicting defeats on aggressors.
To the families of the martyrs of the Islamic Resistance: If not for my security circumstances, what I wish and hope for is to stand beside you and to kiss your hands and foreheads.
To those steadfast in the frontline villages and the environment that pays the direct price with their homes and livelihoods, this is a patient environment, accountable, patient, insightful, and knows what this battle means.
O our people in the south, if it had been decreed for the enemy to defeat the resistance in Gaza and displace its people, the turn after Gaza would be in south Lebanon, specifically south of the Litani. You are the ones who broke their ambitions.
To the fighters, we salute them with respect, appreciation, and honor, and pray for their steadfastness and victory. May Allah guide their aim and all their shots, and may He help them to create this victory for Lebanon, Palestine, and the entire nation.
Today’s massive million-person march in support of Palestine in Sana’a, Yemen, under the slogan “The blood of the free on the path to victory,” with the participation of the Yemeni Air Force. Similarly, large marches are taking place in other cities across Yemen.
video Nicolás Maduro | Entrevista con Ignacio Ramonet
Ignacio Ramonet (IR ): Mr. President, good evening. Thank you very much for accepting this invitation to this interview, which is already like number seven or eight that we have done as the first interview of the year.
President Nicolás Maduro (NM): Well, this interview is very good because it always serves as a reflective balance of all these difficult years, full of efforts, sacrifices. It serves as a balance sheet, and also as a perspective for the future. So always at your disposal, Ramonet.
“We have solved the Canserbero enigma”
IR: Thank you very much. This interview, in fact, has the objective of taking stock of the year a little. In particular, the balance sheet of the achievements, the victories, the advances that have occurred in Venezuela. And also if you could define some perspectives. We are going to see it throughout the interview. But, if you allow, first I would like to start with something that is a little outside our topic, but that has had a great impact, especially on the millions of young people who are admirers of the Venezuelan singer-rapper Canserbero. A few days ago we learned that the “Canserbero enigma” has been solved. It was thought that Canserbero had committed suicide, but the Venezuelan Prosecutor’s Office has revealed that he was, in fact, murdered. How could you comment on this information?
NM: Yes, it has truly been a scientific, professional work of reconstruction of the events, of the facts, which has led to a forceful, definitive conclusion, of who are the intellectual and material authors responsible for the murder of this young artist, of this Venezuelan creator who in such a short time of musical career as a composer had such a great impact on youth. And he still has it, and more than in his youth. Ramonet, he impressed me (…) We, Cilia and I, have grandsons and granddaughters of all ages, and our grandchildren are eight, nine, ten, twelve, thirteen years old, Fourteen, fifteen years old are connoisseurs and followers of the art, music, composition, and lyrics of Canserbero. I’m very surprised.
IR: Especially since he died about eight years ago, right?
NM: Nine years ago now. And it surprises me because I confess to you I am a musical man, I am more into salsa, rock, although I am aware of current trends (…) In the year 2023, I listened on Spotify and I have a very popular, popular playlist, very full of music of all kinds. But I, until maybe two years ago, didn’t know who Canserbero was… And I found out because my grandchildren explained it to me, and they told me song by song, we analyzed song by song. And from there an interest in the art of Canserbero was born in me. On some occasion I spoke with the attorney general, also an admirer of Canserbero’s art, and after putting together a set of elements that made up a solid hypothesis about what had happened… All the media and networks had tarnished Canserbero’s name, they had said that he was a murderer… Even after his death, the Public Ministry even accused him of murder.
IR: He was accused of having committed a homicide before his suicide.
NM: Yes, and then later they imposed the complete thesis of homicide, suicide, schizophrenia and madness. And despite that stain that was cast on him, unfair, brutal, despite that, what his name, his lyrics, his art did grow and Canserbero today is recognized in the world as, if not the main, one of the main rappers in the Spanish language. So the investigation was opened by the Public Ministry. I expressed my support, and gave the prosecutor as always, but in this particular case, all my support. He did all the investigations with the most advanced forensic science, criminology. And the results have been overwhelming. Justice has been done, the name of a young noble Venezuelan creator has been vindicated, and I would say what he has done is growing now.
I spoke with her relatives the day Attorney General Tarek William Saab gave the results, with the videos of the confession of the murderer and the murderer, of the two murderers, and I spoke with her family, and her family felt relieved. His father Cheo, his sisters, his nieces. I gave them a hug over the phone. And I told them, well, he is a strong spirit, wherever Canserbero is he is a very strong spirit. And now his name will increase among the youth of Venezuela, Latin America, the Caribbean, and much beyond. So justice has been done, which speaks very well of the Public Ministry of Venezuela.
“We have greatly energized foreign policy”
IR: This has been one of the achievements of these last days of the year 2023, but as we said there have been others. 2023 was a symbolic year because it was the tenth year of your Government. In particular I would like to emphasize some international contacts that you have had, some trips abroad, meetings. In particular several meetings with President Gustavo Petro of Colombia, who organized a ” Conference on Venezuela in Bogotá”; a meeting with President Lula, who has returned to power. Recently in Brazil, you were at the meeting that Lula organized on South America; other strategic trips, in particular to Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and above all the very important trip to China, your meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. How are these contacts, these trips integrated into the traditional geopolitics of the diplomacy of the Bolivarian Revolution?
A New World Balance is Taking Place
NM: In the world there is already a new era. The era of the Western empires is already passing, definitely, and the last of the empires, Westerners, the American empire, is in a process of historical decline that is structural, it is definitive. The United States will always be a power if it remains united, if several independent states do not emerge from there. It is one of the possible, probable trends that are predicted within a few decades. It’s like the United Kingdom; Great Britain was a military, economic, commercial, naval super empire… And well, it ceased, fell, declined… But it is still a powerful, important country.
Today, a world of greater balance has emerged, as the Liberator Simón Bolívar dreamed of. Incidentally, we are in the Birthplace of our hero, of our father, the Liberator Simón Bolívar, and from very early in the 19th century, he spoke of the need to “build a universe of balance”, a “world of balance”. And that was when the Liberator conceived the strategy that we could call today the “strategy of a multipolar world,” where our America, liberated by its sword, by its army, by our army, was one of the great blocks. In fact the Grand Colombia was founded in the Orinoco, on December 17, 1819. It was born as a power, an Atlantic, Caribbean, Pacific, Amazonian, Andean power, which encompassed what we are today Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and part of Central America and Ecuador. It was born as a territorial, population, military, and economic power.
IR: Like another Brazil almost…
NM: Yes, practically, and also having two arms, one over the Caribbean Sea and the Atlantic, and the other over the Pacific, having the entire Andes Mountains, having a gigantic space over the Amazon.
And that power was called, as the Liberator attempted at the Congress of Panama in 1826, to constitute a powerful bloc of nations, a union of republics… Treason prevailed, imperial intrigue prevailed, and Bolívar’s project was stabbed, it was betrayed, it was sullied, it was forgotten… And then, from where a powerful bloc should have been born, there remained ten, fifteen, twenty “republiquitas”, we could say in quotes, with respect to all, but fifteen “republiquitas”, everyone on their own, everyone was dominated.
So the concept of the “balance of the universe”, of a “multipolar world” that was the great dream of the giant, of our Liberator, is seeing its emergence today. And we are attentive. Commander Hugo Chávez spoke of a “new world geopolitics”, and thus established it: Bolivarian peace diplomacy. Its crisscrossing axis is the construction of a new world geopolitics, a new axis of world power, and the insertion of Venezuela into that axis.
From Latin America in the first place, from South America, from the Caribbean and from Latin America and the Caribbean to the world. That is why, this year, we have greatly energized our foreign policy. We participate in the attempt that Lula has made to re-found Unasur, a very important one that is advancing step by step, not without threats or imperial conspiracies, so that those do not happen. We have participated in the consolidation of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States this year, a solid Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). We have participated in the Palenque Summit with the president of Mexico López Obrador, to talk about the entire issue of climate change, migration, development, independence. And we received the support of all of Central America and part of South America on the issue of sanctions, to demand the lifting of the sanctions.
“Our visit to China was monumental”
And at a global level we have consolidated our relationship this year to a great degree with Turkey, with India, with Russia, with China. Our visit to China was monumental. I have gone to China as chancellor six, seven times, accompanying Commander Chávez, and then as president I have also gone five, six times. And I tell you, the level of relations, agreements signed, and policies defined between President Xi Jinping, between China and Venezuela in this six-day visit, has no comparison, has no parallel. First, we elevate the relationship to a high-level strategic relationship “foolproof and for all times.”
IR: Is that the expression that appears in the document?
NM: Yes, that is the expression, it is a concept that, for the first time, China attributes to a relationship jointly, to a country in Latin America and the Caribbean. Which raises the whole level. So I would say that we are advancing in the midst of the imperial siege, in the midst of the permanent attack, we are advancing in weaving the new world.
Venezuela humbly, modestly, yes, with the greatness of Bolívar’s thought, with the greatness of Chávez ‘s new global geopolitics, we are persevering in the construction of a multipolar world, a world of truly free countries and peoples.
“They already tried to kill Alex Saab by order of Iván Duque”
IR: Mr. President, among the achievements of your Government, I would like to cite three recent ones. First: the Barbados Agreements in October, which have made it possible to establish an agreement with the extra-parliamentary opposition. Second: The referendum on Guyana Essequiba on December 3, which has been an enormous victory in terms of mobilization. And third, the recent release of diplomat Alex Saab.
On this last issue, on the other two, we will return later – I would like you to complete for us, because you have already made a statement about it, some details about how and how difficult the negotiation was to obtain the release of Alex Saab.
NM: First, as we have said: Alex Saab is a businessman of Colombian origin, who settled in Venezuela and began to develop a set of very important investments. At one point, in 2011, he joined the plans of which would be the Great Venezuela Housing Mission. Later, in the stage that it was my turn to direct, he became involved in social plans, but above all he began playing a very important, growing role when criminal sanctions arrived.
IR: Starting in 2016.
NM: Yes, 2016, 2017, 2018, because he became involved… I have started to think… First he is Colombian, he has Colombian blood. Secondly, he has Palestinian blood, that’s where that streak of rebellion comes from. And he began to work with great skill to overcome the sanctions that were being taken against Venezuela.
IR: On your own initiative? Out of patriotism?
NM: On my own initiative and also due to a set of policies that I implemented, calling on the private sectors so that, from capital, from private investment, we could move forward, given that all our bank accounts had been stolen, frozen, Ramonet. You have to see that a country freezes all our bank accounts, not only freezes them but steals all its money, more than 21 billion dollars, freezes our properties abroad, prohibits us from selling our products abroad to the world. They persecute our main industry, the oil industry, which made us lose, I always say it because there may be people who do not listen to it, it made us lose 99% of the country’s income, we went from 54,000 million dollars approximately, one year, to 700 million dollars the following year… And the manifest, direct objective of imperialism was to collapse our society and proceed to a violent change of government, what they call in their strategic manuals, a “regime change”. And that’s good, as Fidel said; Fidel always told us: “Crises create men,” “they create leadership.”
I would say that, in that crisis, a man emerged: Alex Saab, and he began with imports brought from his capital, he began to bring food, the CLAP boxes (Local Supply and Production Committee) in the difficult times of 2017, 2018. And that’s why they punished him and his entire family, his brothers, his sister, his father, his mother, they punished everyone. And then they start to persecute him… And they also start to persecute the companies where he, in Mexico and other countries, made the CLAP boxes, and threaten them with different sanctions.
When 2019 and especially 2020 arrived, he had been playing an important role in three key areas, especially in 2020, when the quarantine and the Covid pandemic arrived. One, to continue playing a very important role in guaranteeing the CLAP, at that time we were still not producing the CLAP in Venezuela, as we had to later, fortunately… Thanks to the efforts of thousands of agricultural producers, peasants, from the Venezuelan countryside. Today we are producing 85% of the food in Venezuela, an agricultural miracle achieved by who? By the workers, by the producers… But not at that time. We brought 90% of the CLAP boxes from abroad to serve 7 million families. And he was a key man in the articulation of those imports.
But also, given the blockade, we had the refinery, the four refineries in Venezuela stopped, we did not get a spare part, we could not buy it, if we got it, say, if we got this spare part in such a country, we did not have a bank account to pay for it, because of the sanctions… Then we made triangulations to resolve the issue and recover the four refineries in a miraculous and heroic way, thanks to the engineering and knowledge of the Venezuelan oil workers, and the support of our friends in the world, important friends in the world. And then Alex Saab was a man to start bringing fuel to Venezuela.
And furthermore, he had made the connections in the world to bring medicines to the most needy patients, and particularly the key medicines for the issue of the coronavirus pandemic. That’s when they kidnapped him.
IR: In Cape Verde.
NM: Yes, in Cape Verde. Two days before they had tried to kill him. That has never been said… Two days before, a group of criminals hired by Iván Duque from Colombia tried to kill Alex Saab in his house, in Caracas… He miraculously saved his own life. And then he, with the drive that carries him, because he is an enterprising man, of drive, of initiative, I would say reckless, I would tell you that Alex Saab has the temerity of a Che Guevara to face risks and dangers. He left, he was going to Iran. Why was he going to Iran? To guarantee gasoline for a year for Venezuela, 2020, 2021, while we recovered the refinery. Why was he going to Iran? To get triangulated medicines from Iran. And on the way they capture him, they kidnap him without any type of police order.
IR: Without a court order…
NM: No, there was no international arrest warrant in the first place. Secondly, he had the protection of a diplomatic passport, a diplomatic official of a legitimate government, recognized by the United Nations. When they kidnapped him, they violated the conventions that protect diplomatic immunity in the world, something very serious. And then, well, everything that is already known: the torture…
The first thing they tried – as he explained – in that month of July, in the middle of the quarantine, they asked him to, with a call, to stop the gasoline boats; that, with a call, to stop the shipments of medicines… There is a key medicine, Ramonet, which is Remdesivir, which had just emerged then as the great antiviral against the coronavirus. And they were desperate to stop it. With Remdesivir, when it arrived in Caracas, in July 2020 and until today, thousands of lives of very serious patients who were intubated throughout the country were saved. And they also wanted Alex Saab to stop the CLAP boxes with a call, so that there would be what?
Mortality due to lack of medicine, famine and zero gasoline, as we were almost… In fact, I can tell you that of the five ships that he hired – we paid him but he triangulated them – of the five gasoline ships that came only two ships were able to arrive in June 2020… Unforgettable! It was a party for Venezuela… The other three ships were stolen by the United States … Stolen! They took them to the United States … Pirates, privateers, thieves! Then came the whole stage of torture so that he would give validity to the infamies against us, to the lies that are still going around… Because garbage portals of the sewer, such as the Semana de Colombia sewer, which is a sewer of the Colombian drug trafficking oligarchy, Semana magazine still writes: “Maduro’s front man Alex.” I’ve never had a front man! I have never had a bank account abroad. I have never had companies or properties, nor do I want to have them in my life, ever… My relationships with national and international businessmen have been and are work relationships for the country; and it was so much so that imperialism could never show, in three and a half years of having him kidnapped, it could never show a single false piece of evidence, a false paper about the supposed front men, dirty deals and all the rot that they invent in the sewer of their justice and in the sewer of their media.
So we never leave anyone behind, we never abandon anyone… Ever! We were always, we were at the side of his family, to his wife Camila who was a housewife, from a housewife she became a leader of a powerful movement, the Free Alex Saab movement; we were at the side of his sons, of his daughters, of his entire family, next to his family; in a loving way… In a special way Cilia who practically talked every week with Camilla, we had information here, there. And as I told Alex when he got out of the car and I waited for him there at the golden door of the Miraflores Palace: “Alex, I knew that this day you were going to arrive. And it came.” A miracle? A miracle like only revolutionaries, who are firm and who confront the empire with the truth, can do. A miracle.
IR: It was a beautiful victory, President. Throughout the world, many people were happy about that release, because they had campaigned to denounce all the falsehoods that were said about Alex Saab.
NM: Ramonet, I can’t say… but I received words of congratulations from people you can’t even imagine, who are surely seeing this, from the world, you can’t even imagine. People who sent me congratulations. From people in the United States of America. I’m not going to say names of great world artists… Some of them I don’t even know. And I have received messages from here, messages from there. Saying: this is how you treat an innocent man. We made an exchange that was worked on, as José Martí said: “It had to be done in silence.” With the prudence of the case, with the diplomacy of the case and we managed to miraculously free an innocent man. And in the exchange we handed over a group of convicted and confessed terrorists who had committed crimes and crimes in the country, convicted and confessed. It was the price we paid for the kidnapping. For the freedom of the kidnapped. And I think it was well worth it.
“We are building a new diversified economic model that gives us absolute independence from the entire world”
IR: Mr. President, continuing with the balance of the year: you defined eight very important lines of work for 2023. And among them the guidelines of the economy. I would like to ask you, what assessment do you make of that approach? What are the main achievements achieved in these eight lines of work?
NM: Look, I think that 2023 is a step forward too. We have ten quarters of continuous economic growth that began at the end of 2021. And we have managed to maintain growth in what I defined as the Bolivarian Economic Agenda, 18 engines, the 18 engines go step by step. These 18 engines need public policies, incentives, investment, national market, international market, good public management, good private management, good coordination.
I believe that we have achieved perfect coordination with all the country’s internal economic actors, and I believe that we have a very high dialogue and understanding with international economic actors who are arriving with new investments. It is a great achievement of these years, which will be consolidated in 2023. I have some important numbers here for you.
“ten consecutive quarters of growth”
IR: Growth in 2022 was 12% or so.
NM: Correct.
IR: In 2023, what growth has Venezuela had?
NM: The Central Bank has not given figures yet, although they tell me that ECLAC’s expectation of 4.5% could be met. There are ten consecutive quarters of growth. Still in the middle of the siege, and with our own investment.
A 5% growth in agricultural activity. We already have five consecutive quarters of agricultural activity growing more than five points, producing our food. And even exporting part of that food.
A sustained growth of 4% for ten quarters of all private manufacturing activity in the country, in a sustained, sustainable recovery, still has much room to grow the entire manufacturing sector.
An approximate growth of 4% in commercial activity until the third quarter. This fourth quarter that just ended now in December is a much higher level, there has been maddening commercial activity, with impressive strength.
Manufacturing production of food and beverages has grown above 1.6%. Well, here I have other information. I’m not going to overwhelm you with all the data.
IR: The trend is very positive…
NM: Yes, the trend is positive. In the fishing catch, in the recovery of the country’s fishing capacity, this year we have grown 25%. In the aquaculture activity, which is also an activity to which we have paid special attention, this year we grew by 20%. In the shrimp sector, which is an export sector, it grew 98% in the year 2023. An increase in industrial, agro-industrial production… And the arrival of important European, American, Chinese, Indian firms, etc., to invest in oil, gas and basic companies.
It means that, under the conditions established by our Constitution and our laws, we are advancing. Tax collection this year grew by 25.8%. I would still say, according to the needs of the country and the expectations of what our social plans for recovery of the social welfare state have to be, tax collection still – although has grown quite a bit this year – it still has a lot of ground to gain, to guarantee income that allows us to improve the income of workers, social investment.
This year we are exceeding, up to the month of November, the collection of 5,181 million. It means that there is a set of very important elements, exchange rate stability, the definitive expiration of hyperinflation, we have stopped inflation as a structural evil of the hundred-year-old economy, and with the policies we are implementing we have serious prospects of improving that element, that variable in the months and years to come.
The credit portfolio increased by 91% compared to 2022. 91%. They are still modest figures that are around 1,400 million dollars. Venezuela would need four thousand, six thousand, eight billion dollars, the credit portfolio, or much more for investment; but it is something that has been achieved in a sustained, sustained manner.
IR: And all this in the context of a blockaded and besieged country. Which has more merit.
NM: That’s important to mention. Because the country, despite the progress we have made in the Barbados Agreements that we are going to talk about, and the conversations with the United States government, Venezuela today does not have accounts abroad, today it continues to be a persecuted and besieged country. And we have achieved all this with our own efforts, we alone, the Venezuelans, I can tell you, I tell you with pride. We have achieved all this with our own work. The private sector, small, medium, large, with some investment that has been coming from abroad, with public policies that are consensual, correct, relevant, fair, we have been achieving it with our own efforts, practically alone in this world.
IR: Without significant foreign investment?
NM: And saying as the great Ho Chi Minh said in Vietnam, thinking with our own head, walking with our own feet and building with our own hands, without depending on anyone. Do you know what one feels? That we are in a stage – and I tell you here in the house where Bolívar, the giant of America, was born – a stage where we are building a new diversified economic model that gives us absolute independence from the entire world, if necessary. Another element for your analysis, and for the analysis of all those in the world who read us here.
In the year 2023, Venezuela achieved the highest level of internal supply in its internal market in the last twenty-five years; 97% supply, mainly with its own production, and with the activity of the private economic sectors with complementary imports. With a very clear policy of what is imported, what is not imported, and protection of the national producer.
So I think we are taking certain steps. I always say, of course there is still a long way to go, especially to generate the wealth that we need to impact salaries, income. We have done our best to improve the comprehensive income of workers, the minimum comprehensive income of workers. And also completing a circuit with the Great Missions and Missions to protect public health, public education. With the construction of 500,000 homes per year to protect, with the CLAP and food programs, the people’s right to food. To put the human being at the center and protect them comprehensively while we recover the capacity, not only to generate and produce goods, products, services, but also liquid wealth, which is where our main effort is directed, and I know that we are going to achieve it. I’m sure of that.
We have reduced crime and dismantled the prison mafias
IR: Mr. President, there is another important achievement that you have not mentioned, which is security. For a long time one of the most systematic criticisms of the international media, to criticize the Bolivarian revolution, was to say that Venezuela was a very insecure, very dangerous country, that Caracas was a city dominated by crime, by delinquency. All that to some extent has changed. Today Caracas is an increasingly peaceful city, increasingly safer, the nights of Caracas have come back to life, tourists, travelers, and foreign correspondents confirm this. It is a huge achievement. Could you explain to us, how was this that seemed almost impossible achieved?
NM: Well, tremendous work has been done based on a concept that is the Peace Quadrants. The Peace Quadrants are a territorial concept. Today we have three thousand Quadrants of Peace.
IR: Throughout the country?
NM: Yes, throughout the country. The Peace Quadrant brings together who? It brings together the police and security forces, it brings together popular power, all popular power in its diversity, and it brings together all the institutions that have to do with security. The Peace Quadrants have provided a contribution to liberate the territories where there was the highest crime rate and to establish the operating rules of peace communities; quadrants of peace, communities of peace, I think that is one of the elements.
The other element has to do with intelligence work to dismantle the most dangerous criminal gangs, which are like gangs of a new generation, more armed, more organized gangs, with a lot of money. And we have done intelligence work and surgical strikes against the gangs in different cities and places in the country. For example: in Caracas, we remember the surgical strike that we gave to the gang of a neighborhood that was known in the world, which was Cota 905. That meant that, in Caracas, climates of coexistence, tranquility, and peace were established; because there was a hotbed there, Cota 905, it was an incredible hotbed, connected to the criminal gangs of Colombia in the time of Iván Duque. When we entered his lair, the first thing we found was about twenty Colombian paramilitaries on a mountain, training for a supposed “popular insurrection” in Caracas that they were going to lead; to tell you something.
And thirdly, this year 2023, progress was made in dismantling prison mafias, from very emblematic prisons in the center of the country, in the west, in the Andes, in the east, in the south of the country.
And I think it has been a very important blow to put an end to those prison mafias, to take away that center of crime. It is a policy, we call it Operation Gran Cacique Guaicaipuro, that will be maintained.
So, in that sense, I have great confidence that we are going to continue advancing in Venezuela as a territory of security, a territory of peace. And I always make a call to the people, this does not depend on one man, this depends on the joint effort that we make in the Peace Quadrants, it is the formula.
I have even told some Latin American governments. I’m not going to say names. I have told some Latin American governments: I would like to share with you the experience of the Peace Quadrants so that you can see that the fusion and union in the territory of the forces of order, the police forces and the social organization – in the case of Venezuela of popular power – gives great results.
“The president of Guyana is making fun of Lula, Celac and Caricom…”
IR: Mr. President, another important achievement, we mentioned before, is the recent referendum on Guyana Essequiba, which has been a success because the support has shown that the population has contributed to that demand. The success of that referendum forced the president of Guyana to sit down with you to talk directly about the fate of Guyana Essequiba. But since then there has been the sending of a British warship, which you have denounced. So, in these circumstances, how do you see the future of the negotiations with Guyana over Guyana Essequiba?
NM: At this moment, we could say, we are going through a moment of turbulence. Because Guyana acts not like the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, Guyana is acting like “British Guyana”, accepting that a warship goes to its coasts and from its coasts threatens Venezuela. Because that warship, since it left for its coasts, went with a voice of threat to Venezuela. And the impertinent, insolent statements of the British Foreign Ministry have been to reaffirm its threat to Venezuela. So they act, the president of Guyana acts like a president of a colonial British Guyana. He acts like a tied, subjugated country. I don’t accept his excuses, I don’t accept them! He tries to excuse himself, President Irfaan Ali, saying that Guyana will never threaten Venezuela. But it is not he who has uttered a word of threat, it is his owners, it is the old and declined and rotting ex-British empire that has sent a ship… They believe that Venezuela is the Venezuela in 1902, when they came with their ships to bombard Maracaibo, Puerto Cabello, La Guaira; when they came to massacre the people of Venezuela to impose the Arbitration Award of 1899, to collect the illegal, immoral debts of the 19th century. No, Venezuela today is not the one of 1902. The Venezuela that Cipriano Castro had. No no. It is a Venezuela that has military power to respond. And I say it with humility, with simplicity. Because I know the Venezuelan military very well. And I know that they give their lives to defend the sovereignty of this country, to protect this country. I have told you, we are a people of peace. For the good, everything. For the hard way, don’t try us. Don’t try us!
So what is the government in London doing and what is the President of Guyana doing? Make fun of President Lula, make fun of CELAC president Ralph Gonsalves, make fun of all the Caricom countries… That’s what they’ve done, make fun of them. They have mocked by threatening Venezuela with a military ship. They have mocked, and they have kicked the Argyle Agreement, they have kicked it.
Right now we are in a situation of turbulence. That we know how to face. Because we were not born on the day of cowards. Did you hear Ramonet? I was not born on the day of cowards, and I know very well as head of state and commander in chief of the Armed Forces what I have to do to defend the dignity of Venezuela. And here no one is going to come and threaten us with ships. Not today nor ever. This is not Venezuela in 1902. Make no mistake about Venezuela. Do not get it wrong!
“With the US we have always sought dialogue, understanding, coexistence”
IR: Mr. President, after the Barbados Agreements, with the extra-parliamentary opposition, the Biden Administration was forced to suspend part of the sanctions against Venezuela What next steps do you foresee on the path to normalization of relations with the United States?
NM: First, two things must be said. First, I have promoted dialogue more than a thousand times with all sectors of the opposition. These dialogues with the extremist Guaidosista sector of the far-right opposition, as I call it, which is the spoiled and preferred opposition of the United States, is the pro-American, pitiyanqui opposition… Gathered in the Unitary Platform, the PUV. These dialogues I have promoted them and we support them permanently, always and without stopping. Those are the public dialogues that are known.
But in private dialogues I have met with all of them. In the year 2020, 2021. They spoke bad things about Guaidó to me. I told them: act, but they didn’t dare. And they take Guaidó out when he is already rotting garbage, Guaidó already smells very bad, and the gringos take him out of the country, they take him to Miami, multimillionaire as he is, he robbed half the world, he robbed the gringos, he robbed the opposition, robbed everyone; and they removed him because his discredit in that sector of the opposition was already unbearable. But we have always had dialogue with them. Even though sectors of that opposition sit down to talk but continue conspiring below, they always continue conspiring below. To seek to carry out a coup d’état in Venezuela, to seek to kill me, etc. But I believe in dialogue, permanently.
And secondly with the United States. Commander Chávez always sought and taught me to seek dialogue, understanding, and coexistence with the United States of America. And that’s what we’ve always done. What the commander did with Bill Clinton. With George W. Bush twice, even though Bush led a coup here on April 11-13, 2002. It is what he sought with Barack Obama, the first Obama term. The second Obama term was my turn, and that second Obama is the one who took the decree declaring Venezuela an “enemy of the United States. ” Face to face, face to face, Obama told me: “Maduro, that was a mistake, I’m going to correct it.” He didn’t correct it. I said, “Obama, the problem is not you, the problem is who comes after you, who can use that decree to threaten us, sanction us or invade us.” And that’s what happened.
With Donald Trump we had the relationship that everyone knows. He took 930 sanctions measures against Venezuela. He put a price on my head, on this little head you see here, they put a price on it. They tried to kill me in 2018, August 4, from the White House they tried to kill me. The day of the drone attack they were in the White House, today that truth is known, waiting for the result of the attack. They tried to invade us several times, they prepared mercenaries from Colombia. And yet we always sought dialogue and had ties of dialogue with the Trump government, so much so that we almost had an exchange ready to free Alex Saab in those final days of Trump, before the elections. So when Biden arrives, too. We have always wanted a dialogue. I hope it progresses. Hopefully.
We have done our best to establish a new era in relations with the United States.
IR: Are there planned stages?
NM: There are common ideas, there is a route, an established roadmap. But we could not say, Ramonet, that the United States has lifted any sanctions on Venezuela. On the contrary, the sanctions are in force. What the United States has given are licenses as if Venezuela were a US colony. Some licenses, like the time of the Guipuzcoan Company, which had complete control of this country and gave export and import licenses, right? At that time of the so-called white Creoles, until the white Creoles got tired of the Guipuzcoan Company and declared the independence of all of America. More or less something like that. The model that the United States intends to apply is a Guipuzcoan Company-type model against Venezuela. Giving license.
But we are very firm. And we say it to all the governments of Latin America, CELAC and the world: Venezuela demands the complete and permanent lifting of all illegal, immoral and criminal sanctions on the economy and society. All. And that is going to be our goal. And we are not going to rest, we are going to persevere as we always do until we achieve it. And on the way there, seeing the magic ball, I think we are going to achieve it.
“The BRICS are the future of humanity”
IR: President, today is January 1st and as of today, the BRICS, that organization formed by Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa that have constituted a kind of new power or counterpower, a bit in line with what you mentioned before, about this new multipolar geopolitics. As of today, six new countries have joined or about to join. In fact, five specifically are incorporated: Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Ethiopia. Because Argentina was to join but the new president Javier Milei declined the invitation. On the one hand, I would like you to give us your opinion on the importance of the BRICS. And on the other hand, if Venezuela could join these new expanded BRICS?
NM: The BRICS are the future of humanity, the BRICS are already a definitive economic power, they have a powerful bank, I was at the bank’s headquarters in Shanghai with its president Dilma Rousseff, we have good relations, moving forward, with the Bank of the BRICS. I couldn’t go to the South Africa Summit due to a very bad ear infection that I had, unfortunately. At the South Africa Summit, Venezuela was accepted as a partner. And I hope that at the next Russia Summit with the favor of God, always God ahead, Venezuela joins the BRICS+ as a permanent member.
We bet on the BRICS as part of that new world, the new world balance, as part of the Bolivarian geopolitical concept of a world of balance, a world of equals. And also as part of the future of humanity for the development of BRICS investments in Venezuela, for the development of large markets for Venezuelan products, for the development of multi-diverse relationships culturally, politically, institutionally, socially. They are great civilizations, the Chinese, Russian, Indian civilization, our sister Brazil, our sister South Africa, Africa! The five countries are great civilizations, and we are part of the mestizo civilization of South America, the Caribbean, and Latin America. So the BRICS fill us with emotion.
The step that Javier Milei has taken for Argentina is to take Argentina to the 19th century. I have been saying it. I say it to the Argentines and I say it to the world, the Milei project is a construct that they have created to get their claws into Argentina, take it out of the multipolar world, turn it into a vassal of the imperial unipolar world, and turn it into a new colony from South America, destroy the State, destroy its economy, destroy its identity; and the step she has taken to remove Argentina from that power that is the BRICS is one of the most clumsy and imbecilic things that Milei has done against Argentina. Because by removing Argentina from the BRICS he is acting against the Argentinians, against the Argentine worker, against the Argentine businessman. There it is demonstrated what a retrograde colonial project of the 19th century it is, a project that has failed since its inception. And it demonstrates what Bolivarian diplomacy is, world geopolitics, the new geopolitics that, from Venezuela, with our revolution we are carrying forward.
So I aspire sooner rather than later to go from being a member of the BRICS to being a full member of the BRICS.
“What is being committed in Palestine has no name…”
IR: Mr. President, the world today lives impacted by two major conflicts: Ukraine and Gaza. Regarding Ukraine, from the first moment, Venezuela decided not to take sides, defending a diplomatic project to search for a negotiated solution. And regarding the Palestine-Israel conflict, since 2009 Caracas broke relations with Israel. Do you consider that Venezuela, in both cases, made the right decision? On the other hand, how do you see the evolution of these two conflicts?
NM: I think that these two wars are linked by the big business of the American military apparatus and the Israeli military apparatus, which are totally linked. The big owners of the American military apparatus are Israel’s investors. And I think that these two wars have benefited the manufacturers of blood, death, weapons.
A war is a threat against Russia… For two entire decades, Russia has been warning against the threat of the strategic trap that they were trying to make from Ukraine, and from the countries of Eastern Europe, and simply the attitude of the fachos [slang for arrogant and presumptuous people], the Milei of Ukraine, the fachos of Ukraine, and the entire confessed neo-Nazi group… They are confessed neo-Nazis, the entire group that stormed power in Kiev in 2014, what they did was put themselves at the service of the provocation strategy against Russia.
All wars should be avoided, and in the case of the war in Ukraine a peace solution should be sought, but they don’t want to look for it, they want to bring Russia to its knees and humiliate it. And at this point, Russia is winning the war against all of NATO, despite all its military spending. In the midst of an enormous effort because it has been sanctioned economically, President Vladimir Putin said recently, Russia won the economic war against sanctions, and Russia today has better economic indicators of growth, economic stability, and more economic flourishing than all of Europe, even than the United States, today. Which says the great internal strength of Russia as a power nation, a productive nation, of its economy. And the West is simply obsessed with Russophobia, with the idea of destroying Russia. There is only one solution: to sit down and talk with Putin, with Russia, on the basis of respect and reach an agreement that satisfies the need to guarantee security and peace for Russia and the entire region.
In the case of the conflict in Palestine, there is no longer any doubt. It is a genocide against a people. A genocide that is more than seventy-five years old is now open, brutal. And there is practically nothing and no one to raise a voice. The worst thing about the genocide is the complicit silence that exists with this genocide. The complicit silence of the European elites. The complicit activity of American elites manufacturing weapons and weapons and weapons to bomb and kill innocent Palestinians. More than twenty-one thousand Palestinians murdered. Eleven thousand of them children. It seems that they went after the children, to exterminate them. More than six thousand women.
In truth, what is being committed in Palestine has no name, it is only comparable to the Jewish Holocaust itself that the Jewish people experienced in the time of Hitler, in the Nazi era. International justice should work. But we simply do not see the face of international justice. A genocide in broad daylight broadcast live and direct on social networks. And nothing happens.
We will see… because all these genocides, all these brutalities may not be paid for now, perhaps they will be paid for in the future. And the world that is emerging will one day pass judgment on all those who promoted this genocide today. We are supportive. Especially during this entire Christmas season. We have been very aware of the boys and girls of Palestine. There where the baby Jesus was born, Christmas could not be saved, Ramonet, on December 24 all the places in Bethlehem closed. And the manger with the baby Jesus surrounded by tanks. That is the symbol: the massacred child, Herod again. But we will see what the future holds for us in the struggle and resistance of the Palestinian people, and the struggle and resistance of our people.
“Whoever wins the battle in the networks, in the streets, in the media, and on the walls, will win the battle of ideas, as Fidel said, will win the political battle”
IR: Mr. President, to finish, I would like to ask you a question that is outside of politics. Of all the presidents I know, you are the one who has reflected the most on the relationship with the media. You have a very successful television program that you recently launched, Con Maduro plus, and it is very present on the networks. What is your relationship with the media like? What objectives are you looking for? And what relationship do you think a leader should have with the media today?
NM: It is vital to be able to communicate. And as you explain it yourself, I heard it from you: we are in a new communication era. You explain it yourself, I have taken it as an example and explained it to our people. There have been five great communication moments in humanity.
The first when humanity, homo sapiens, began to speak and communicate by word, in all the places where homo sapiens existed on planet Earth. The second, when Homo Sapiens began to write. And we began to communicate through writing. First of symbols and then of writing, in China, in India, etc. Third, when the printing press came and then it was possible to write, and books and newspapers came out and a newspaper could circulate from one continent to another. Fourth, a communication moment closely linked to the 20th century, the emergence of cinema, radio, and television, which were dominant practically throughout the 20th century and part of the 21st century. Our commander Chávez was a master in the management of traditional media and was the initiator of the Twitter era, a master with @chavezcandanga, in the first massive social network that was Twitter.
And we are in a fifth communicational moment, decisive, total, dominant: that of social networks. Today, what is Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and what is now called X to a lesser extent, and YouTube are the dominant social networks. Where people interact for hours, where people get informed, and where people communicate. Any human being in the most remote neighborhood of Caracas, of Shanghai, of Mexico City, of New York, at this hour that we are speaking, grabs their Instagram, grabs their TikTok, grabs their Facebook and sends a message. And many times it happens that that message goes viral. Sometimes it goes viral because of the content, the striking nature of what it releases. Other times it goes viral due to the algorithms of the owners themselves, of which they are invisible owners.
Before you knew who owned Venevisión here in Venezuela, who owned Televen, who owned I don’t know what radio station, the owner of “El Nacional”, Miguel Otero Silva, your friend. Now you don’t know where he lives, or who the owner is, who is the boss of TikTok in Venezuela. Where? Tell me. If you have a complaint, if TikTok did this, this and this against my family, where do I go? What law regulates it? That is a topic that must be studied.
That’s why I say we have to build a new system. I have told the people of Venezuela: we must build a new communication system, of permanent influence. And I have called it the RCMP system – Redes, Calles, Medios y Paredes [Networks, Streets, Media and Walls]. I’ll leave it there for you. And I make my effort, I make my contribution to keep a TikTok alive, active, attractive with things to maintain my other social networks, to maintain a different voice in those networks that transnational powers dominate, and to communicate on the networks. But we cannot stop there, we must continue communicating in the streets, and in traditional media, and on the walls, so that the walls also speak.
So it is a vital issue of the new era that must not be neglected, it is a priority. Whoever wins the battle in the networks, in the streets, in the media, and on the walls, will win the battle of ideas, as Fidel said, will win the political battle, will win the cultural war. It is decisive.
“Chavismo has not defined who will be the presidential candidate” but “This year 2024, the Venezuelan people are going to teach the oligarchic right a new lesson”
IR: Mr. President, last question: 2024 is going to be an exceptional electoral year in the world. There are going to be elections in almost seventy-five countries. More than 4 billion people will be mobilized for the elections. Elections in the United States, in Russia, in India, in Ukraine. In Latin America there are going to be elections in Mexico, in Uruguay, in Panama, in El Salvador, in the Dominican Republic…and also in Venezuela. The opposition has already nominated about nine candidates, it seems. And analysts take your candidacy for granted… So I would like to ask you if you will, in fact, be Chavismo’s candidate for the 2024 presidential election?
NM: What I can tell you is that it is still premature. The year is just beginning. Only God knows… No Diosdado, God. Let’s hope that the electoral scenarios of the process that will take place this year are defined, and I am sure that, with God’s blessing, we will make the best decision.
I am president not because I have an ego, so that one day I said: “I want to be president.” Or because I have blue blood. Either my last name Maduro, blue blood, masters of the valley, or I was born to be president, like these political scumbags of the rancid oligarchy, who believe they are predestined to be presidents because they have blue blood and a last name. I am of the man in the street, in life I have found ways to defend an idea, a cause, a project. And on that path we met the greatest teacher, the teacher of teachers, unforgettable our beloved commander Hugo Chávez, our father, a father for all, who built a project, brought back Bolívar, Bolívar once again. He brought Bolívar to the 21st century and turned it into a project of Patria Grande, into a project of the country, he turned it into the conscience of the people.
We, or at least I, I say we because I am part of a collective, I am part of a historical cause. I am not me, I am part of a historical cause, I am part of a national project, I am part of a powerful popular movement of millions of men and women. I am part of a team: the Military Political High Command of the Revolution. I do not owe it to myself, I do not impose an ego, a predestination. No. Why was I president? Well, because Commander Chávez, at a given moment, had to make a decision due to a very serious illness… And so it was, and the people ratified it in heroic elections, April 14, 2013. And then I underwent the tests of a brutal war, and when 2017 arrived – remember the guarimbas, four months of violence, coup attempts, attempts to kill me – we brought the Constituent Assembly. Peace was imposed with the Constitution in hand. And then we similarly won the gubernatorial elections. We gave what is called in Venezuela a “pela” to the entire united opposition. They had been emboldened. I remember Ramos Allup (of the Democratic Action party): “Of twenty-three governorships we are going to win twenty-five,” said Ramos Allup.
Of twenty-three we won nineteen… The largest and most important states in the country… Popular miracle, Chavista miracle. And then on December 10 of that year we won the mayoralties, 80% of the mayoralties. And in 2018, when 2018 dawned, we held a debate in the Venezuelan popular movement, in popular power, in the Great Patriotic Pole, in the glorious United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), and for them I went again candidate. Because they decided it, not because I said, “I am predestined”, “I have blue blood”, “I am cooler”, “I am indispensable”.
So here, in this decision about my eventual candidacy in 2024, neither personal ambitions, nor individualistic ambitions, nor ego, nor blue blood, will never come before the interests of the country. And when the decision is made, whatever it may be, we will all go out to conquer… What I can tell you today, what I can tell you today, is that this year 2024, the people of Venezuela are going to give a new lesson to the empires of the world, to the oligarchic right, to the extremists, who will not forget it for decades.
The popular movement, the popular forces and our entire country are preparing for a great electoral victory and for a new time of revolution to come with the Simón Bolívar National Plan, and with the historical projects that Commander Hugo Chávez left us. I can assure you of that: 2024 will be a year of great triumphs that will open the doors to great achievements in the future for 2025 and beyond.
IR: Well, thank you very much, Mr. President. I just wish you a happy new year, and the best for you, for your family, for your country. Hoping for a new date next year.
NM: Sure. See you later. Happy New Year.
A day after a US strike assassinated Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) commander Talib Al-Saedi (Abu Taqwa) in Iraq, Prime Minister Al-Sudani announced this morning intentions to set a date for a bilateral committee to discuss the “final termination of the presence of coalition forces in Iraq.”
He added, “We affirm our firm position regarding the termination of the presence of the international coalition after the end of the justifications.”
Al-Sudani stated, “The attack that led to the martyrdom of Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis and Qassem Soleimani represented a blow to all the norms and laws that govern our relationship with Washington,” and noted, “The Popular Mobilization Forces represent an official presence affiliated with the state and subject to it, and it is an integral part of our armed forces.”
As of today, there remain 2,500 US soldiers in the country under the pretext of “fighting ISIS.” (https://t.me/PalestineResist/25286) In reality, these criminal occupiers are in Iraq to impede anti-colonial resistance work in the region. In Syria, there are 900 US forces who continue to exploit the nation’s resources, stealing the majority of its oil.
The PMF is a coalition of dozens of a resistance groups that successfully defeated ISIS in Iraq in recent years. In 2019, PMF was integrated into the Iraqi Armed Forces, thus making any attack on its leaders an attack on an official Iraqi body. Notably, the martyr Abu Taqwa was a Nujaba movement commander (https://t.me/PalestineResist/25194), a part of PMF.
It should be noted that, since October 18th, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, which is also a coalition, has carried out nearly 150 operations targeting US bases in Iraq and Syria, as well as the zionist entity directly (“Eilat (https://t.me/PalestineResist/23699)” four times, the occupied Golan Heights (https://t.me/PalestineResist/24679), and sites near the Dead Sea (https://t.me/PalestineResist/17900)). Recently, the operations have escalated in quantity and quality, causing significant damage to the US and affecting the zionist entity it guards. These operations are carried out explicitly in support of Gaza as part of a support front such as Yemen’s and Lebanon’s.
While the Islamic Resistance in Iraq is not the PMF, there is overlap in groups, such as Kataeb Hezbollah (which holds “israeli” spy Elizabeth Tsurkov prisoner, Al-Nujaba Movement (to which Abu Taqwa belongs), and others, operating outside the official PMF framework. Both PMF and Islamic Resistance in Iraq have offered martyrs during Al-Aqsa Flood, with eight PMF members ascending on November 22nd, and five Islamic Resistance cadre ascending on December 5th.
And soon after this address:
In continuation of our path in resisting the American occupation forces in Iraq and the region, and in response to the massacres of the zionist entity against our people in Gaza, the fighters of the Islamic Resistance in Iraq attacked, with drones, two American occupation bases deep in Syria, namely Al-Tanf Base and Al-Shaddadi Base.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry has ordered its embassies across the globe to pressure their host countries to reject South Africa’s genocide case against it at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Axios has reported, citing an urgent diplomatic cable. The cable, which was sent out by the Foreign Ministry on Thursday, stresses that Israel’s “strategic goals” are for the ICJ to reject South Africa’s request for an injunction, refrain from determining that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and acknowledge that the IDF’s actions in the enclave comply with international law, Axios said in an article on Saturday.
The Foreign Ministry wants other countries to back its claim that South Africa’s allegations are “absurd and baseless.” According to the Foreign Ministry, Israeli diplomats must pressure their counterparts and high-level politicians in host countries to issue “immediate and unequivocal public statement along the following lines: To publicly and clearly state that YOUR COUNTRY rejects the outragest, absurd and baseless allegations made against Israel.”
Claims of any moral high ground by the West will be met with widespread ridicule. Countries of the global South are simply not afraid to stand up anymore.
Pretoria addressed the ICJ last week, claiming that Israel’s ongoing attacks on Gaza are “genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part” of the Palestinian population. South Africa wants the Hague-based court to issue an injunction ordering the IDF to suspend its military campaign in the enclave. More than 22,600 people have been killed in Gaza over the past three months, according to the local health ministry.
“A ruling by the court could have significant potential implications that are not only in the legal world but have practical bilateral, multilateral, economic, security ramifications,” the document, copies of which were seen by the outlet, read.
It’s also important for foreign nations “to publicly acknowledge that Israel is working to increase the humanitarian aid to Gaza, as well as to minimize damage to civilians, while acting in self-defense after the horrible October 7 attack by a genocidal terrorist organization [Hamas],” the cable read.
Next Thursday will be a historic day, as Israel, now a rogue state, will appear for the first time in its history before the International Court of Justice in The Hague. They’ve always hidden behind the US and created a filthy environment filled with lies and somehow avoided this action in all the previous killing sprees called ‘haircutting wars against the Gaza strip. They are involved directly in genociding the Palestinians and have done so for a long time. They are committing war crimes against the Palestinian people and now attempting to steal their land.
A big wail has gone up in the israeli circles. They want a newspaper, the British Sunday Times to apologize for this cartoon. I believe we should spread it widely and for the first time in many years, I thank the cartoonist of an MSM news outlet. We will probably receive a takedown notice.
A very superb interview. Evgeny Shostakov, in conversation with Sergey Karaganov
You may remember Karaganov‘s previous interview – https://globalsouth.co/2023/06/15/russia-is-abuzz-the-use-of-nuclear-weapons-can-save-humanity-from-a-global-catastrophe-sergey-karaganov/
In terms of being a global centre of power, the Old World is finished. Moscow understands this, but our former partners remain in denial.
Not long ago, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said: “The European Union must be ready for war by the end of the decade.” Berlin has started talking about the return of universal military service and preparations for a confrontation with Moscow. There are similar sentiments in Poland. But is it only because of the events in Ukraine?
What is the reason for the upsurge in fighting talk in Europe?
Leading Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta talks to international relations expert Sergey Karaganov, who is the honorary chairman of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, an academic supervisor at the School of International Economics and Foreign Affairs Higher School of Economics (HSE) in Moscow, and a former Kremlin advisor.
— Evgeny Shostakov: Mr. Karaganov, given the current difficult foreign policy situation, is there a need for a conceptually different theory of deterrence against Russia’s enemies in order to stop the growing confrontation at an early stage, and to discourage our adversaries from fueling conflicts?
— The elites of Western Europe – and especially in Germany – are in a state of historical failure. The main basis of their 500-year domination [of the world] was military superiority, on which the economic, political and cultural dominance of the West was built. But this has been knocked out from under them. With the help of this advantage, they manipulated the world’s resources in their favor. First they plundered their colonies, and later they did the same, but with more sophisticated methods.
Today’s Western elites are failing to address a range of growing problems in their societies. These include a shrinking middle class and rising inequality. Almost all their initiatives are failing. The European Union, as everyone knows, is slowly but surely sprawling out. That is why its ruling class has been hostile to Russia for about 15 years now.
They need an external enemy; Josep Borrell [the EU’s top foreign affairs official] called the world around the bloc a jungle last year. Indeed, in the past, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that the sanctions adopted by the EU [against Russia] were necessary first and foremost to unite the European Union and prevent it from collapsing.
The German and Western European elites have an inferiority complex in, what is for them, a now-monstrous situation, where their part of the world is being overtaken by everyone. Not only by the Chinese and the Americans, but also by many other countries. Thanks to Russia’s liberation of the world from the ‘Western yoke’, Western Europe is no longer lording it over the states of the Global South, or as I call them, the countries of the world majority.
The threat Western Europe now presents is that the Old World has lost its fear of armed conflict. And that is very dangerous. At the same time, the West of Europe, let me remind you, has been the source of the worst disasters in human history.
Now in Ukraine there is a struggle not only for Russia’s interests, for the interests of its security, but also to prevent a new global confrontation. The threat is growing. This is also due to the West’s desperate attempts at counter-attacks to maintain its dominance. Today’s Western European elites are failing and losing influence in the world to a much greater extent than their American counterparts.
Russia is fighting its own battle and fighting it successfully. We are acting confidently enough to sober up these Western elites, lest they unleash another world conflict in despair at their failures. We must not forget that these same people’s predecessors unleashed two world wars within one generation in the last century. Now, the quality of these elites is even lower than it was then.
— Are you talking about the spiritual and political defeat of Western Europe as a fait accompli?
— Yes, and it is frightening. After all, we are also part of European culture. But I hope that, through a series of crises, healthy forces will prevail on that side of the continent in about 20 years, let’s say. And it will wake up from its failure, including its moral failure.
— For the time being, we are witnessing the formation of a new Iron Curtain in relation to Russia. The West is trying to “erase” our country, including in the fields of culture and values. There is deliberate dehumanization of Russians in the media. Should we react in reverse and “cancel” the West?
— Absolutely not. The West is now closing the Iron Curtain, first of all because we in Russia are the real Europeans. We remain healthy. And they want to exclude these healthy forces. Secondly, the West is closing this curtain, even more tightly than during the Cold War, in order to mobilize its population for hostilities. But we do not need a military confrontation with the West, so we will rely on a policy of containment to prevent the worst.
Of course, we will not cancel anything, including our European story. Yes, we have completed our European journey [in terms of integration]. I think it has dragged on a bit, maybe for a century. But without European inoculation, without European culture, we would not have become such a great power. We would not have had Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Pushkin or Blok.
So we will keep European culture, which the West of our continent seems to be trying to abandon. But I hope that it will not destroy itself completely, in this regard. Because Western Europe is not only abandoning Russian culture, it is abandoning its own culture. It is cancelling a culture that is largely based on love and Christian values. It is cancelling its history, destroying its monuments. However, we will not reject our European roots.
I have always been against looking at the West with mere squeamishness. You should not do that. Then we would be like them. And they are now sliding towards an inevitable march towards fascism. We do not need all the contagions that have been and are growing out of the west of Europe. Including, once again, the growing contagion of fascism.
— The year 2023 saw the unfreezing of old conflicts and the demonstrative creation of the conditions for new ones – the predictable explosion of the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation, a series of wars in Africa, and more localized clashes in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Will this trend continue?
— This trend will not become an avalanche next year. But it is quite obvious that it will increase, because the tectonic plates under the world system have shifted. Russia is much better prepared for this period than it was a few years ago. The military operation we are conducting in Ukraine is aimed, among other things, at preparing the country for life in the very dangerous world of the future.
We are purifying our elite, getting rid of corrupt, pro-Western elements. We are reviving our economy. We are reviving our military. We are reviving the Russian spirit. We are now much better prepared to defend our interests in the world than we were a few years ago.
We live in a resurgent country that looks boldly to the future. The military operation is helping us to purge ourselves of Westerners and Westernizers, to find our new place in history. And finally, to strengthen ourselves militarily.
— Do you agree that from 2024 the world will enter a period of prolonged conflict? Does humanity today have the political will to change this situation?
— Of course we have entered an era of protracted conflicts. But we are much better prepared for them than ever before. It seems to me that by pursuing a course of containing the West and building relations with brotherly China, we are now becoming an axis of the world that can prevent everyone from sliding into a global catastrophe. But this requires efforts to sober up our opponents in the West.
We have entered a struggle to save the world. Perhaps Russia’s mission is to free our planet from the ‘Western yoke’, to save it from the difficulties that will arise from changes that are already causing a lot of friction. The threat comes in no small part from the desperate counterattack of the West, which is clinging to its 500-year-old dominance, which has allowed it to plunder the world.
We see that new values have emerged in the West, including the denial of everything human and divine in man. Western elites have begun to nurture these anti-values and to suppress normal values. So we have a difficult period ahead of us, but I hope that we will preserve ourselves and help the world to save traditional humanity.
One of the many problems facing the world today is, of course, that the global economy is in a systemic crisis because of the endless growth of consumption. This destroys nature itself. Man was not created to consume; to see the meaning of existence in buying new things.
— In an interview with Interfax, our Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov linked the possible future abandonment of the anti-Russian course of the United States and its subordinates to a “generational change” in the West. But could a change of elites in the West, if it happens, provide an impetus to defuse tensions? Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, born in 1980, for example, is a member of the new generation, but her views are more radical than those of other ‘hawks’ of the past. In your view, are there any reasonable, and diplomatic, politicians left in the West?
— I think that today in the West we are dealing with two generations of elites who are already quite degraded. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that we will be able to reach an agreement with them. However, I still believe that societies and peoples, including those in Western Europe, will return to normal values.
Of course, this will require a change in generations of elites. I agree with Sergey Ryabkov that it will take a long time, but I hope that the Western European countries, and perhaps the US too, will not fall into a hopeless state, and healthy national forces will return to power across Europe.
However, I do not believe that real, pragmatic, and I repeat, national forces can come to power in Western Europe in the near future. So I believe that if we ever talk about normal relations between Russia and the West [returning], it will take at least 20 years.
We must also realize that we no longer need the West. We have taken all we could from this wonderful European journey that Peter the Great started. Now we must return to ourselves, to the origins of Russia’s greatness. That is, of course, the development of Siberia. Its new development, which means reaching new horizons.
We must remember that we are not so much a European country as an Eurasian one. I will never tire of reminding you that Alexander Nevsky spent a year and a half traveling through Central Asia and then Southern Siberia on his way to Karakorum, the capital of the Mongolian Empire. In fact, he was the first Russian Siberian.
By returning to Siberia, to the Urals, by building new roads, new industries, we are returning to ourselves, to the roots of our 500 years of greatness. It was only after Siberia was opened up that Russia found the strength and opportunity to become a great power.
In the foreseeable future, unfortunately, there can be no serious interstate arms limitation agreements in principle.
— How reasonable is it to forget Europe for decades?
— Under no circumstances should we forget the old sacred stones of Europe that Dostoyevsky spoke of. They are part of our self-awareness. I myself love Europe, and Venice in particular. It was through this city that the Silk Road passed, and through it the great Asian civilizations. At that time, by the way, they surpassed European civilization in their development.
Even 150-200 years ago, looking towards Europe was a sign of modernization and progress. But for a long time now, and even more so today, it has been a sign of intellectual and moral backwardness. We should not deny our European roots; we should treat them with care. After all, Europe has given us a lot. But Russia must move forward. And forward does not mean to the West, but to the East and the South. That is where the future of humanity lies.
— The Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty expires in 2026. What comes next? Given the legal nihilism of the West, can we count on new interstate military agreements? Or is humanity condemned to an uncontrollable arms race until the establishment of a new world order and, consequently, a new status quo?
— It is pointless to negotiate with the current Western elites. In my writings I urge the Western oligarchy to replace these people, because they are dangerous to themselves, and I hope that sooner or later such a process will begin. Because the current group are so deeply degraded that it is impossible to negotiate with them. Of course, you have to talk to them. After all, there are other threats besides nuclear weapons.
There’s the drone revolution. Cyber weapons have emerged. There is artificial intelligence. Biological weapons have appeared which can also threaten humanity with terrible problems. Russia needs to develop a new strategy to contain all these threats.
We are working on it, including at the new Institute of International Military Economics and Strategy, and will continue to do so with the intellectual elites of the countries of the world majority. These are, first and foremost, our Chinese and Indian friends. We will discuss it with our Pakistani and Arab colleagues. So far, the West has nothing constructive to offer us. But we will not close our doors.
In the foreseeable future, unfortunately, there can be no serious interstate agreements on arms limitation in principle. Simply because we do not even know what to limit and how to limit it. But we need to develop new approaches and instill more realistic views in our partners around the world. It is not even technically possible to count on arms limitation agreements in the coming years. It would simply be a waste of time.
However, it may be possible to conduct some pro forma negotiations. For example, trying to ban new areas of the arms race. I’m particularly concerned about biological weapons, and weapons in space. Something can be done in those areas. But what Russia needs now is to develop a new concept of deterrence, which will have not only military but also psychological, political and moral aspects.
— Are assessments that the West has come to terms with Kiev’s defeat too premature? And the idea that the Global South is confidently defeating the Western world?
— The US benefits from the confrontation in Ukraine. [Meanwhile] for the Western European elites, it is the only way to avoid moral collapse. That is why they will support the conflict in Ukraine for a long time to come. In such a situation, we need to act decisively both on the ground and in the area of strategic deterrence in order to achieve our goals as soon as possible. At the same time, it is important to understand that the majority of the world will not fight against the West.
Many countries are interested in developing trade and other relations with it. Therefore, the World Majority is a partner but not an ally of Russia. We have to be tough, but calculated. I am almost certain that with the right policy of containment and an active policy on the fringes of Ukraine, we can break the will of the West’s dangerous resistance.
In today’s world, it’s every man for himself. It is a wonderful multi-polar, multi-colored world. This does not mean that in 20 years there will not be some blocs, including a conditional pro-Russian bloc. We have to find ourselves, to understand who we are.
A great Eurasian power, North Eurasia. A liberator of nations, a guarantor of peace and a military-political pivot of the world majority. This is our destiny.
In addition, we are uniquely prepared for this world because of the cultural openness we have gained from our history. We are religiously open. We are nationally open. These are all things we are now defending.
More and more, we realize that the most important thing about us is the Russian spirit and Russian culture. We are all Russians – Russian Russians, Russian Tatars, Russian Chechens, Russian Yakuts…
I think we are finding ourselves again. And I enter the New Year with a sense of spiritual uplift and optimism. Russia is being reborn. It is absolutely obvious.
Washington and its allies will regret it if they make good on their threats
By Abdel Bari Atwan at Rai Al Youm
In its all-out defence of Israel’s interests and support for its three-month-old war of extermination on the Gaza Strip, the US is rapidly heading into a military trap laid by the Yemenis in the Arabian and Red Seas.
The Yemenis, true to their Arab and Islamic values and in solidarity with Gaza, closed the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb strait to Israeli shipping and vessels taking goods to Israeli-occupied ports. They vowed to maintain this blockade until the Israeli assault is halted and all aid convoys are allowed into the Strip.
They were as good as their word. They intercepted several Israeli, Israeli-owned, or Israel-bound vessels, undeterred by threats from the US, and went even further by launching missiles and drones towards US warships in the Red Sea.
The Biden administration, in response, made two bad moves, which it could end up paying dearly for.
First, the US navy sank three Yemeni boats on Sunday, killing ten crew members, after they approached an American warship, which proceeded to fire on them.
Second, the US put together a coalition of 20 states (later reduced to 12) ostensibly to protect freedom of navigation in the Red Sea—in reality, to protect Israeli ships and shipping. This coalition (including Bahrain, Australia, Canada, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, the UK, Denmark, and the Netherlands) threatened Yemen with dire consequences if it did not stop harassing Red Sea shipping.
President Biden held consultations with his national security team to discuss options for deterring the Yemenis after sending the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower to the vicinity to back up his threats.
But Yemen’s naval forces took no notice at all. On Wednesday, their missiles targeted a container vessel, and a couple of days ago struck a Haifa-bound car transporter after its crew ignored orders to turn back. Images were posted on social media showing the ship in flames.
Ansarullah leader Abdelmalik al-Houthi responded to the US’ threats by warning that any aggression against Yemeni forces or boats “will not go unanswered.” He called on supporters to take to the streets in mass demonstrations to reaffirm the Yemeni people’s solidarity with the Palestinians and refusal to yield to the threats of the arrogant.
The hostile US stance towards Yemen in support of Israel’s occupation and massacres could cause major losses for it and its allies. The Yemeni people, heirs to an 8,000-year-old civilization, are renowned for their pride and resilience and their history of never submitting to any foreign aggressor or invader, whether a global empire or a neighbouring power. The US will not be an exception.
The Yemenis are forbearing. Their patience knows no bounds. They value sacrifice and martyrdom and keep fighting off their enemies to the end — until victory. That is why membership of the US naval coalition dwindled to 12. The first to withdraw was France, out of fear, or rather, to avoid inevitable defeat.
It is telling that the coalition did not include a single Arab or African Red Sea littoral state, notably Egypt or Saudi Arabia. Important countries like Spain opposed it because they did not want to support a state that was committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. The only Arab state that broke this consensus was the Kingdom of Bahrain.
If the US gets entangled in a war against Yemen, it will regret it. It will recall its fiascos in Afghanistan and Vietnam and join Yemen’s long list of defeated aggressors.
By Bobana M. Andjelkovic at Geopolitica.ru
In Memory of Hajj Qassem: “Enemy’s defeat is absolute. I want to tell the enemy that all the factors of defeat are within you and you can never retreat from your devilish mindset and issues causing your defeat.”
General Qassem Soleimani, February 28th, 2019
During Iran-Iraqi war, Hafez al-Assad was asked: “Why do you – you, who are an Arab and one of the heads of Ba’th party- support the Iranian government against Saddam in the war?” Hafez al-Assad replied: “A day will come in history when only Iranians will defend you while the Arabs will plunge their daggers in the chests of Syrians.”
The role of General Soleimani and Iran in general in Syria only proves Hafez al-Assad was right. The same goes for Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. The Axis of Resistance’s mutual goal is liberation of Palestine. General Soleimani’s doctrine of asymmetric warfare is based on two different approaches in defeating the enemy – the Zionist entity as the source of evil in West Asia (and its ally, Western Crime Syndicate, deeply interlaced with the Zionist entity). One approach means defeating the enemy without conventional warfare and the other means defeating it by using irregular or asymmetric warfare tactics in six fronts – Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza Strip and the West Bank. All six fronts have been gradually activated since the beginning of Al-Aqsa Flood operation on October 7th last year.
After the assassination of Hajj Qassem n 2020, Head of IRGC’s Quds Forces, Brigadier General Esmail Ghaani said: “The minimum retribution for us is to remove America from the region.”. Soon after, Iraqi parliament approved a non-binding resolution calling for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the country. Illegal US military posts and bases throughout West Asia are the same legitimate targets as well as illegal Zionist settlements in occupied Palestine, Lebanon and in Golan Heights.
Although Western crime syndicate was accusing General Soleimani of instigating sectarianism within Muslim world (while, actually, they were doing so), it appears that Hajj Qassem became an inspiring figure for the Muslims, both Shia and Sunni. Their inevitable approaching and gathering is a legacy of military, diplomatic and religious wisdom of General Soleimani. A certain Jonathan Coleman wrote in January 2020 that “US can gain strategic leverage in his [General Soleimani] absence from the battlefield.” It also appears to be completely false. There is no any “leverage” US can gain from anything happening in West Asia. It can only lose as it would be right and just. The same goes for EU, UK and its other cronies.
The behaviour of the Zionist regime in occupied Palestine reflects the core of globalism and the values of Western crime syndicate and summarizes the last three decades of its international policy throughout the world. So-called “rules based order” unfolds as dictatorship of the criminal group organized on a global scale. It has its fluid scope of rules applied opportunistically and world should accept to obey those rules as orders.
One question occurs: under which circumstances, occupier has a right to self-defence when confronted by occupied people who want to end the occupation? Does that constantly repeated mantra by Western/Zionist media that Zionists have right to defend themselves, because they were attacked (were they?) serve only as a pretext to introduce new rule in “rules based order” that even territories officially occupied can become colonies of the occupier, who bypasses international law and customs of war.
On the eve of the anniversary of the assassination of General Soleimani, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and their associates, Saleh el-Arouri, deputy director of HAMAS’ Politburo and his three assistants were assassinated by a drone in Beirut’s office. El-Arouri was one of the founders of HAMAS’ military wing, Al Qassam Brigades, and spent 15 years in Zionist prison. This assassination happened only a week after Seyyed Razi Mousavi, senior IRGC military advisor in Syria and close associate of general Soleimani was assassinated in Damascus. Even before the beginning of Al-Aqsa Flood operation, Hassan Sayyed Nasrallah announced that any attack on The Axis of Resistance members or their leaders will bring huge retaliation.
All six fronts are activated. Zionist terrorist armed groups which present themselves as military are incapable to cope with The Resistance in six battlefields. Their friends, clients, allies, puppets, masters, mercenaries (transported from Ukraine) and others are not ready to enter any bigger mess although they support deranged Zionist regime.
Both Western crime syndicate and Zionists suffer from a mania of pursuit. They are still in shock and can not figure out how imprisoned people succeeded to launch multi-front operation against the occupation. So, it must not be them. It must be Hezbollah. And Iran. And maybe Russia, too. Not to mention soil-isolated Houthis who blocked Red Sea and there is nothing the Zionist regime or Westerners can do. Except for terrorist-like assassinations which they will be found accountable for.
The assassination of three Zionist hostages by Zionist terrorist army, thinking they are Palestinians, points again at mania of pursuit and at the self-destructive nature of Zionist entity and those who run that slaughtering madhouse. It reminds of a similar story when two groups of Ukronazi fugitives in France got in fight thinking one of another they are Russians.
Haaretz: “Dozens of Israeli psychiatrists have left for Britain, escaping the increasing workload amid rising cases of psychological issues among IOF soldiers returning from the Gaza Strip.”
Hajj Qassem was right: the defeat lies within enemy’s devilish nature which will lead it to its imminent (self)destruction, sooner or later. As well as their Western allies’.
≈≈≈≈
The wisdom of Syria is profound, generation after generation! This in spite of the continuous and satanic enmity of the powerful combined West for over two centuries, and through their offices the marshalled forces of most of mankind during that same timespan. Just a decade ago, almost 100 banners marched into Syria, determined to carry out “Assad Must Go.” All to no avail, as with Yemen!
Note Syria is the bridge, the hand of friendship from the lost arab world, that gave Iran hope that honorable arabs remained in the fallen material world, bringing out the glorious fruit of Soleimani, who then assumed leadership of the Resistance Axis now on the cusp of achieving all its objectives.
The cameras are on, otherwise I would make a certain gesture here now; you all know what kind of gesture it is.
I think that the realisation is starting to dawn on them, and the rhetoric is changing: those who were talking just yesterday about the need to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia are now looking for the right words on how to quickly end the conflict. We also want to end the conflict, as quickly as possible, but only on our terms. We have no desire to fight endlessly, but we are not going to cede our positions either. You fought there, you were wounded there; are we going to surrender everything now? The cameras are on, otherwise I would make a certain gesture here now; you all know what kind of gesture it is. So, it is not going to happen.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73205
The President visited Branch No 2 of the National Medical Research Centre of High Medical Technologies – Vishnevsky Central Military Clinical Hospital of the Russian Federation Defence Ministry, where the Armed Forces military personnel injured during the special military operation are undergoing treatment.
Together with State Secretary – Deputy Defence Minister Nikolai Pankov, Vladimir Putin inspected the transcranial magnetic stimulation unit, the therapy pool, the therapy gymnastics room, the hydropathic, as well as the rehabilitation educational centre, physical therapy rooms, and a housing consultation centre for military personnel.
The President was briefed about the way the issues of housing provision for military personnel are being resolved, and how the work of military medical commissions is organised.
After that, Vladimir Putin met with military personnel.
* * *
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Hello, guys! Glad to see you. I would like to congratulate you on the New Year.
How is your treatment here going?
Remark: Excellent.
Vladimir Putin: I walked around here, from what I have seen the equipment looks solid, this is clear of course. But, first and foremost, it must be used effectively. I hope, it does.
Remarks: Yes.
Vladimir Putin: You know, of course, I wanted to come here and congratulate you on the New Year, but there was also something I wanted to see. You might have seen me on Direct Line, at least some of it; it is impossible to watch it in its entirety, four hours, it is crazy just how long it is. But there were things that concerned the Armed Forces and you directly: for example, people asked whether you really had to return to your units after your wounds and treatment and even rehabilitation to obtain the corresponding medical certificates there and even be cleared by military medical commissions. The Defence Ministry denies this, saying it does not happen, at least, not now. Moreover, they said – as I requested some time ago – that housing issues are being resolved during treatment and our service personnel undergo additional training to be able to continue serving, if they want, even those who sustained severe injuries, at military enlistment offices and so forth.
I wanted to hear from you what is really going on, if this is so, if you need to go somewhere else to obtain the necessary documents and certificates. No? So, do you get everything here? The military medical commission examination, all the documents – everything is done here, right?
Remarks: Yes.
Vladimir Putin: Are housing issues being resolved too?
Remarks: Yes.
Remark: Already been resolved.
Vladimir Putin: Ok, I see. They have been resolved for you and they are being resolved for our other fighters. At least, the system for resolving housing issues has been created and it is working, that is the most important thing, right?
And you are also receiving some additional professional training to allow those willing to continue their service in the Armed Forces but in different positions, health permitting. Is that so? Is that the reality?
Remark: Yes.
Vladimir Putin: Thank you. So, how is it going?
Remark: Good.
Vladimir Putin: This is one of the best medical institutions of the Defence Ministry. Not all of them are so well-equipped, so shiny, so to speak. But gradually the Ministry will bring everything up to the standard, to this level in terms of quality.
Any questions you want to ask me, guys? Don’t be shy.
Alexander Dublyanin: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief,
During the special military operation we are liberating Russian territory. How do you feel about Western countries helping our enemy?
Vladimir Putin: The point is not that they are helping our enemy. They are our enemy. They are solving their own problems with their hands. That is what it is all about. This has been the case for centuries, unfortunately, and continues to be the case today.
Ukraine itself is not our enemy whereas those who want to destroy Russian statehood and to achieve, as they say, a strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield, are mainly in the West, but still, there are different people there. There are people who sympathise with us and who are with us at heart. But there are the elites who think the existence of Russia (at least in its current state and size) is unacceptable. They want to disintegrate it. As a matter of fact, you are young people, some have read about this, perhaps: they do not hide it. They speak and write about this publicly, and have been doing it for decades, if we are talking about contemporary history. For decades, they have simply been writing frankly about it: divide Russia into five parts, one is too much. I can talk about this till morning, but it is obvious.
Therefore, they have been nurturing the Kiev regime for quite a long time, precisely to create this conflict. Unfortunately for us, they have achieved this: they started this conflict and are trying to achieve their objective, namely the task of fighting Russia, with the help of Ukrainians.
You probably see on the battlefield that they are gradually losing their zest. When a projectile flies, it is difficult to understand whether they are losing it or not, but in general you probably know that the situation on the battlefield is changing. This is despite the fact that the entire “civilised” West is fighting us.
You, too, have probably heard many times: the Ukrainian army expends 5,000–6,000 155-calibre shells there per day of combat operations, and the United States produces 14,000 per month. Per month! And they use 5,000 per day. Yes, they are planning to increase it during 2024, but still, they produced 14,000–15,000, they will produce up to 20,000. But if you use 5,000 a day, then the supply depletes quite quickly. It is close to that now. And we are building up and will continue to, exponentially at that. They were supplied with more than 400 tanks (450 or whatever it is), and in a year we will produce and overhaul 1,600. This is not a state secret; in fact, there will be probably more. It is like this almost across the board. Therefore, though it has been their goal to deal with Russia from time immemorial, we will deal with them faster, it seems.
And the most important thing we have is, of course, what I have spoken about repeatedly: the unity of our people and society, because there is an understanding of how important the job you are doing on the battlefield is in the armed struggle for our country and our future. That is what’s most important. The point is not that we do not like that they are supplying Ukraine, that’s not the core of the problem. The problem is not with Ukraine, but with those who are trying to destroy Russia using Ukraine. That is the problem. But they will fail: it is simply out of the question, absolutely out of the question.
I think that the realisation is starting to dawn on them, and the rhetoric is changing: those who were talking just yesterday about the need to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia are now looking for the right words on how to quickly end the conflict. We also want to end the conflict, as quickly as possible, but only on our terms. We have no desire to fight endlessly, but we are not going to cede our positions either. You fought there, you were wounded there; are we going to surrender everything now? The cameras are on, otherwise I would make a certain gesture here now; you all know what kind of gesture it is. So, it is not going to happen.
So, what else? Yes, please.
Denis Shamalyuk: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief,
I am Sergeant Shamalyuk. I have a question. From the very beginning of the special operation, our enemies have been constantly and regularly shelling the territories near the border, killing civilians and children, destroying villages and cities. I have the following question for you. Do you think it is possible and necessary to take tougher measures against the adversary so that the thought does not even cross their minds to commit these atrocities?
Vladimir Putin: What has happened in Belgorod is of course a terrorist attack. Why? Because of what they have done under the cover of two missiles – I think it was Olkha: they fired from multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS). You, as military people, know what MLRS is. This weapon is not selective, it hits areas. This weapon struck right in the centre of the city, where people were walking before the New Year. It was a targeted strike on the civilian population. Of course, this is a terrorist attack; there is no other way to describe it.
Should we respond in kind? Of course, we can hit squares in Kiev or any other city. But Denis, there are children walking there, mothers with strollers. I understand, because I am quite angry, too, but I want to ask you: do we need to do this, target the squares?
Denis Shamalyuk: No, I am not saying that it should [be] against the civilian population, but specifically against military infrastructure…
Vladimir Putin: That is what we are doing.
Denis Shamalyuk: So that they will not be able to come round and respond.
Vladimir Putin: Yes, but that is exactly what we are doing. We strike with high-precision weapons at locations where they make decisions, where military personnel and mercenaries gather, at other similar centres, and at military facilities, above all. These blows can really be felt. We will continue to do this. You probably noticed that the very next day after these attacks were carried out. I think they are continuing today, and tomorrow, too.
Do you know why they are doing it? They want to intimidate us and to create some uncertainty within our country. For our part, we will increase the strikes that I have mentioned. Of course, not a single crime like that, and this is certainly a crime against the civilian population, will go unpunished, this is for sure, there can be no doubt.
Denis Shamalyuk: Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: Please.
Ivan Shushakov: May I?
Vladimir Putin: Yes, please.
Ivan Shushakov: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief,
Major Shushakov.
For two years now, our country has been fighting for its future. Please tell me, how do you assess the progress of the special military operation?
Vladimir Putin: I have already said this, I can repeat, but you can feel this yourselves. Our Armed Forces are getting more capable and prepared to use advanced weapons than any other army in the world.
First, we have weapons that are not available in any army in the world, and second, we can use everything that is being developed and produced. Third, everything that is being developed is being produced and supplied rather fast. I know, there is probably not enough on the front lines, and they would like more of all the latest stuff there, such as drones, as well as more means of suppressing enemy drones, which are flying over you like flies. I understand everything, but still, what is being produced appears quickly enough.
You know what else is rather important? Modern means of warfare and their effectiveness depend on how quickly an army can find out what is the most important thing at this moment and respond in terms of producing and introducing that in combat as quickly as possible.
We are doing this better and better, probably better than anywhere else. And these are very huge advantages that our Armed Forces are gaining. I think that no one else could do the same today. And these capabilities of the Russian Armed Forces are constantly increasing, multiple times over. So, in general, you are already a senior officer, so you know, we try not to give high marks…
Ivan Shushakov: Exactly.
Vladimir Putin: Satisfactory.
Please.
Alexander Davydov: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief, may I ask a question, sir?
We can see that you are very busy. How do you manage to maintain such high performance?
Vladimir Putin: Meeting you gives me strength. I am not joking. I am being honest. When I meet people like you, it gives me extra strength and confidence that we are doing the right thing.
Alexander Davydov: Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: This is a very important element. In fact, I am not being ironic, this is an important element, for me, at least.
Please.
Yevgeny Korsun: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief,
Guards junior sergeant Korsun.
Mr President, first of all, Happy New Year.
My question is, what are the results of the past year and what are the real plans for this year? What should everyone, not just the Armed Forces and military personnel, be prepared for?
Vladimir Putin: The country in general, right?
Yevgeny Korsun: Yes. Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: You know, as far as the results of last year are concerned, I spoke about this on Direct Line, what can I say. The most important thing is that you keep everything tight at the front and, moreover, the practical strategic initiative is in our hands today. Senior commanders have learned to act carefully instead of carrying out combat missions at any cost. At least that is what they report to me. I always insist that everything must be done and any offensive operations carried out after the adversary has sustained heavy fire. This is what concerns the battlefield.
Talking about the country as a whole, of course, the fundamental thing is not only that we preserved the country’s economy, we did not allow it to be destroyed, which is what the enemy was counting on – this is also in response to your question. It was not Ukraine that hoped to destroy our economy; it is not capable of doing it. It has already been completely destroyed itself; there is nothing left there, it lives entirely on handouts. All its leaders travel around with hat in hand, begging for an extra million dollars.
Our situation is completely different. In 2022, our economy contracted by 2.1 percent. But recently, the Government has reported to me – the calculations are ongoing, and new data appear – the latest data are that it declined not 2.1 but 1.2 percent. This is of essence. In 2023 year, the economy grew 3.5 percent. Gross domestic product (GDP), the main economic indicator, is how much the country has produced. You can use money to calculate how much you produced, plus 3.5 percent. And the decline was 1.2 percent. We made up for the decline and moved forward. This is an absolutely fundamental matter. This is the first point, and it is a very important one.
This shows that the economy is stable. Inflation has gone up a little, which means prices have risen, but we are keeping everything under control. You know, we have never seen anything like this. We have always noted with sadness that our main revenues come from oil and gas. For the first time in many years, the growth of processing industries in our economic structure far exceeds revenues from oil and gas. I think that oil and gas revenues grew three percent, while the processing industry has yielded many times more. This has never happened before. This indicates that we are undergoing structural changes in the economy. It is very important.
And why is that? When Western companies left our market, they apparently expected that everything would collapse overnight: businesses would shutter and thousands of people would be left without work. And, in the best-case scenario for the adversary in the broad sense of the word: for the opponents of Russia in general, and not just on the battlefield, people will take to the streets and demand bread and work.
We have the lowest unemployment rate in the history of Russia: 2.9 percent, which has never happened before. And real incomes of the population have grown (there is such a thing as real disposable income of the population) and real wages have grown, and quite significantly. All this suggests that we have a stable economy and stable financial system.
Russia was disconnected from the international payment system known as SWIFT. Apparently, they hoped that everything would collapse here too. We supply our traditional export goods, but what about the settlements? However, everything works.
Everyone thought that enterprises would stop because they stopped supplying us with components, but it turns out that everything is possible. Yes, there are problems, but nevertheless they are being addressed.
Small and medium-sized businesses are also working effectively. Some foreign enterprises have left, but our businesses have taken their place. Firstly, there are highly qualified personnel who have not left; there are good production managers in a variety of sectors both in industry and in the services sector, and everything works. This is the most important thing: the stability of the country’s economy and financial system because this is the foundation for everything.
And, of course, as I have already said, the number of weapons produced in Russia has increased multiple times over, including when I talk about the growth of industrial production, but not only: one third of the growth was achieved in civilian production branches, which is very important. So, the stability of the financial and economic system and the real sector of the economy is probably the most important thing.
In addition to this, we are implementing all our previously planned projects. In terms of infrastructure, as you understand, this means trillions, and we are building roads and opening new routes every week. This is very important, because it is not just to take one ride there and back. A road means life, and economic life too begins with it: small and medium-sized businesses appear immediately, because there was no other way to get there, but now it is possible. A completely different picture of the world emerges.
Despite the difficulties involved, housing issues are gradually being resolved in the country. Social issues are also very important. Many of you have families and children, right? And there is maternity capital, which no one is shutting down. The country continues to meet all social commitments in full. Moreover, we have created quite a powerful and balanced system of support for families with children (this is very important for the future of the country), starting from the woman’s pregnancy until the child is 18 years old. This is important for real people, and therefore for the country as a whole.
So, strange as it may seem, despite the fact that we are in a state of armed conflict, all the main indicators of the country’s viability and effectiveness have gone up. And this is probably the most important indicator of Russia’s situation.
Yevgeny Korsun: Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: What else? Is that all?
Happy New Year to you. All the best. Best wishes. Get well!
I chose mainly technical issues from Godfree Roberts newsletter for this time, and as usual, it is astonishing.
A quick reference to corn and wheat US-China corn imports fell 83% in August YoY, while corn imports from Brazil went from zero last August to 580,000 metric tons in August 2023. Imports of Brazilian corn are expected to reach 1.22 MMT in September and US imports drop to 70,000 metric tons. Read article →
The reason why I start with that is that BRICS with the mix of membership countries currently, are qualified to open their own grain bourse.
—
US treasuries are no longer the bedrock of global portfolios.
China’s eonomy grew by $1.6 trillion PPP. US GDP grew by $300 billion:
SOE salaries are double private enterprise wages.
The $212 million Meridian Space Weather Monitoring network links 300 instruments – including some of the world’s most powerful – to provide all-time, all-weather monitoring of space weather, which disrupts satellite operations and knocks out power grids on Earth.
Huawei’s 7nm chip renders US chip blockade obsolete, its NearLink is six times faster than WiFi, its revenues hit $1 billon, it has taken Apple’s #1 spot. Its 2019 Mate30 had 42% domestic content, the 2023 Mate60 is 90% domestic, thanks to its own, $30 billion chip fab network.
China leads the world in expanding semiconductor production, with 18 new fabs beginning production in 2024.
First ever integrated neuro-memristor improves learning ability, cuts energy consumption. 1,000 layers, billions of synapses will obsolete circuit boards.
Mach 30 Wind Tunnel tests scramjet’s high-speed oblique detonation wave engine.
Remote Sensing Satellite #41 monitors US military 24×7, using onboard AI.
First 232 layer stacked flash memory–made by YMTC.
New high-rate quantum key distribution record.
First superionic hydride ion conductor at ambient conditions.
First primate brain-computer interface offers hope for robotic limbs.
First human kidneys grown in pig embryos.
First chimeric monkey live birth.
First high-temperature gas-cooled reactor, HTGR, produces 200,000 kW for the grid.
7,000 ft. physics laboratory is the world’s deepest, largest underground lab.
After #1 Nature and #2 Science, China’s Young Science is the world’s #3 journal.
America’s Frontier exascale computer has 10,000 nodes. Sunway’s has 2 million cores across 40,000 nodes.
First high-energy lasers stay cool, generate laser beams for as long as desired.CATL batteries get 400 km on 15 min. charge, 700 km. on a regular charge across all temperature ranges.
First high-orbit Synthetic Aperture Radar satellite provides all-weather, all-day observations.
Only China has a complete industrial IC chain.
LandSpace’s world-first, liquid oxygen methane rocket lifts 6 tonne payload into a sun-synchronous orbit (SSO).
China installed 290,000 industrial robots, as much as the rest of the world combined.
754 million 5G subscribers, 3.2 million base stations, 8,000 ‘5G+ Industrial Internet’ projects, 1,800 5G factories, and 5G industry applications integrated into 67 national economic categories, with 100,000 application cases.
Chinese chip foundries bought 62% of machinery equipment domestically this year, 47% last year.
With $228 Bn R&D budget, 3 million Chinese corporate scientists applied for 29,853 AI-related patents in 2022, compared to USA’s 16,805, Japan’s 8,870 and S. Korea’s 7,899.
China is far ahead of US in GPS inertial navigation, magnetic field, multispectral and hyperspectral imaging sensors, radar systems, and sonar and acoustic sensors – and even in quantum sensors, atomic clocks, and gravitational sensors.
235 Chinese EV models average $35,000. Americans 51 EVs average $70,000.
It would be one thing if China’s performance in these industries was proportional to the size of its economy. But location quotients (LQ) show China punches 47% above its weight, the US 17% below. Read article →
China now dominates the strategically important industries in ITIF’s Hamilton Index, producing more than any other nation in absolute terms and more than all but a few others in relative terms. Its gains are coming at the expense of the United States and other G7 and OECD economies, and time is running short for policymakers to mount an industrial comeback. Read article →
Newly installed PV hits 80 million kW, up 154%. PV now generates 266 billion kWh in H1, up 30% YoY. PV capacity hits 500 GW.
China produces 30,000 tons of green hydrogen annually.
Giant Rice hybrid has a bumper crop.
Seawater aquafarming in Xinjiang?
Wind provides 15% of China’s energy.
Gasoline demand peaked in 2023. Diesel peaks in 2024.
—
Godfree’s newsletter is available here: https://www.herecomeschina.com/order-page/
An American appeals to Taiwan: Don’t vote to be Ukraine 2.0
On January 13, the people of Taiwan, officially designated the Republic of China (ROC), will elect a new president and unicameral legislature known as the Legislative Yuan. The election hinges on the question of Taiwan’s policy toward the mainland, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). That polin
A member of our China Writer’s Group, John Walsh, updated the situation in Asia Times –
The first video shows the fear. The second video describes the fear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW_vxfYqURI
There remain honorable journalists even within discredited Five Eyes media organs such as British-Qatari Al Jazeera. One is the Mountain of Gaza, Wael Al-Dahdouh. His family was carefully assassinated, picked off one by one over the last 2.5 months, by the cowardly Anglo-Zionists in order to silence his popular and potent voice bringing the news from within the hell of Gaza.
In the excellent introduction by Kevork Almassian, note the centrality of Syria to the entire Resistance front. In location as conduit from Iran to both Hezbollah and Palestinians on the Mediterranean coast; in steady steely temperament against all odds and pressures; as bridge between Persia and Arabs, Shia and Sunni; as the immovable Rock in the Road to Al-Quds/Jerusalem. For over a half-century, Syria has blocked the expansion of Erez Israel and the liquidation of the Palestinian Cause. Glory to Damascus, the oldest continuously settled human city, full of forbearance, full of wisdom.
“The Yemenis intervention in support of Gaza by targeting ships in the Red Sea has disrupted global trade and effectively taken shipping back 200 years”
Approximately 2 years ago Mr Putin made a comment at a Valdai Club discussion to the effect that Valdai should create a multinational profile and Valdai should go on the road. For anyone watching carefully, just recently Dr S Jaishankar visited Moscow to high praise from all parties. A part of Valdai is in India, gluing the relationship.
BRICS is not only doing trade in local currencies and dropping SWIFT out of the plan, they are also connecting their thinktanks
“The first Valdai Club Russia-India conference, organised jointly with the Club’s partner, the Vivekananda Foundation, was held on January 8 in New Delhi.
The one-day programme included an open discussion, a meeting with representatives of the National Security Advisory Council, an opening session and two thematic sessions, at which experts discussed the following issues:
Trends in the transformation of the world order (multipolarity, regional and international security, sanctions);
Bilateral relations between Russia and India.
The Vivekananda International Foundation is a New Delhi-based think tank which was established by leading Indian security experts, diplomats and philanthropists. Its goal is to develop innovative approaches to India’s security and welfare that will enable it to play a worthy role in global affairs.”
The first presentation is very valuable, more so for the fact that we always have somewhat of a suspicious attitude towards India.
Fyodor Lukyanov (http://valdaiclub.com/about/experts/338/) @ru_global, Research Director of the Valdai Discussion Club:
This is a big day for the Valdai Club because the idea of launching something significant in India has been floated in our environments since quite a while.
Russia and India are two countries which play a very important role in the international system whatever they do. The very fact of India’s and Russia’s existence on the map is very important for other players.
Today’s world is changing profoundly. Four years ago, when the Covid-19 pandemic started, no-one could understand what it was. When people realized the scale, it became a turning point in the world development.
Liberal globalization that started in the 1980s and early 1990s, which seemed essential and historically objective, was switched off globally in March 2020.
The world didn’t collapse after that. The whole international system quickly started to adapt to this new situation. That was the beginning of a new era.
What happened later — including the military collision between Russia and the west in Ukraine, and what we see now in the Middle East, and many other local conflicts — was the continuation of the end of globalization as we knew it.
The Daily Chronicles are snippets of the most important news across the world for this and each day as it rolls in – as such, this thread is non-structured with the latest news on top. Facts without the fluff but there is plenty of fluff when necessary.
Jan 13
I have some other priorities today and it might slide till tomorrow. So during this busy time expect some silence from me. I will have my tablet but will be busy.
Jan 12
BREAKING: American and British warplanes renew their bombing of Yemen’s capital of Sana’a with a number of raids.
Jan 12
Here is where we are. This world will never allow this hegemon to lead the way, ever again! This is our revolution!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv8FBjo1Y8I
Jan 12
This will make some of us very sad. Gonzalo Lira has died.
Jan 12
(I hope! from his lips to God’s ears!)
Jan 12
Interesting comments after israel’s response to the ICJ
South Africa’s Minister of Justice, Ronald Lamola, says Israel failed to respond to the genocide case and it seems unable to condemn the practices of its soldiers.
South Africa’s legal team: If Israel was right, it would have allowed international investigation teams to enter Gaza.
During the hearing today at the ICJ court, the Israeli legal team claims that the Israeli army hasn’t bombed any hospitals in Gaza.
Israeli legal defense team at the International Court of Justice in The Hague: “Israel did not prevent the entry of aid to Gaza, and Egypt is fully responsible for the Rafah crossing; it could have allowed aid in from the first day.” (it is always the other guy’s fault – sure israel did not bomb hospitals and ambulances )
Lets waste some time for israel. Let’s dissemble whole affair – should Germany open this and court agrees, the rest of the worl will follow and in 12years or so +-, the case will still continue. The court did sa ‘a single oral representation’. “Germany rejects South Africa’s allegation against Israel and to speak for Israel at the ICJ. Germany’s spokesperson, Steffen Hebestreit, states: “We firmly reject the accusation of genocide made against Israel. It has no basis whatsoever. We will, therefore, speak as a third party in the main hearing before the International Court of Justice.”
Kremlin condemns ‘illegal’ Western attacks in Yemen
https://www.rt.com/news/590525-kremlin-yemen-strikes-illegal/
On the situation in Yemen:
– The US and UK launched strikes on Yemen. The Houthis fired rockets in response.
– The attacks by Washington and London were aimed at 12 targets in Yemen and were carried out by Tomahawk missiles
– According to the Pentagon, 100 naval and air missiles were fired at Yemen. There were 20 airstrikes in total, after which the attacks stopped
– The Netherlands, Australia, Canada and Bahrain are involved in providing logistical, intelligence and other forms of support to the aggressor
– Washington has finished striking Yemen’s Houthi positions, but the United States “reserves the right to respond if threats continue”
– The Houthis confirm that they will continue their anti-Israeli operations in the Red Sea no matter what
– Democrats criticized Biden for not receiving congressional approval for the operation. Republican Senator Rand Paul also said that Biden is again acting without a constitutional mandate. Congressmen Divided In Opinions Joe himself condemned Trump’s decision to strike Iran four years ago. + Let me remind you that there is a “War Powers Act” that appeared after Vietnam
– The Houthis claim that they sank the first American ship with its crew. There are no confirming photos or videos yet. The Americans deny everything.
– Russia has requested an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council for Friday in connection with the strikes by the United States and its allies on Yemen
israel is improving and upgrading aaaalllll of the human needs in Gaza. They are so kind. So far I don’t think I can listen any longer to the lies. A Point in law – israel is so good and so kind and so attentive to the needs of the Gazans, that there is no need for provisional measures because israel has been so good and facilitated so many humanitarian actions – in some previous case this court accepted a similar argument. Israel is as pure as the driven snow – so how is it most of Gaza lies in ruins? It is all Hamas!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6CEKVSjg7o
Arguing against the ICJ issuing provisional measures to halt attacks on Gaza, Israel’s legal team says, “The scope and intensity” of Israel’s operations have already been decreasing and claims that Israel’s repeated pledges to observe international law are enough to make provisional measures.
The one thing that stands out is that the israeli tactics do not change – first invoke the holocaust and then paint itself as the perpetual victim and then attack the other guy who, no doubt, is guilty :
“Honorable court, on October 7, thousands of Hamas terrorists broke into Israel in the middle of a holiday, what the citizens of Israel experienced was murder, biggest murder of Jews since the Holocaust
In light of the Holocaust, it is not surprising that Israel immediately signed the Convention against Genocide. For some of us, the phrase “never again” may be a slogan, but not for Israel. Israel needs to defend itself both before the International Court of Justice and against the war imposed on it by Hamas
As in any war, the citizens suffer and it’s terrible. South Africa in its approach to the tribunal denies the legitimacy of Israel’s existence for 75 years – Becker.”
Don’t say these things about us! says israel. It will tarnish their reputation. Up to now, it seems as if they have not realized that there is no ‘reputation’ remaining.
Israel’s legal team says that South Africa’s request that the court order Israel to preserve evidence of potential crimes has no basis, and “no proof was offered that Israel was destroying evidence in Gaza.”
Such an order would be an “unprincipled and unnecessary tarnishing of reputation”, they added.
Jan 11 – I am not sure if this news is valid or hot air
British media claim that the US and Britain will attack Yemen in the coming hours and will bomb the country.
Ansar Allah continue their mobilization methodically. Iran stated that an attack on Yemen would be a significant mistake for the US.
It is expected that U.S. President Joe Biden will make a statement in the coming hours, and the American reconnaissance aircraft RC-135W is already flying towards Yemen.
Update from various Yemen sources – The American-British aggression on Yemen targeted the airport in the Abs District and the Taiz Airport in the Taiziyah District. We will continue our operations in the Red Sea until the end of the aggression on Gaza. If Washington and London expand the battle, we will strike their bases in the region.
Yes, there are western strikes on Yemen – Military sources in Yemen reporting the declaration of a state of alert throughout the country. Ansar Allah declared that if Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar allow their airspace for an attack on Yemen, these countries will be considered at war with Yemen.
Following Iran, Syria also declared full support for the actions of Yemen.
Warplanes have entered Yemen’s air defense identification zone.
https://www.rt.com/news/590482-yemen-strikes-live-updates/
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2024/01/11/718027/Houthi-US-Yemen-Red-Sea-strikes-Saudi-peace-talks
Fog of war and both sides are firing missiles
Jan 11
Take a look at this Gravity 1 rocket, the world’s most powerful solid-propellant launch vehicle and can be launched from a ship. It made its debut flight from China on Thursday.
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202401/11/WS659f8403a3105f21a507bccf.html
https://www.space.com/china-orienspace-gravity-1-rocket-launch-success-video
Its payload today was three commercial weather satelites – these babies were born and sent off to do their work, problem-free.
Jan 11 – Up to now: Countries in support …
1) Egypt
2) Algeria
3) Bahrain
4) Bangladesh
5) Brazil
6) Comoros
7) Djibouti
8) Iran
9) Iraq
10) Jordan
11) Kuwait
12) Lebanon
13) Libya
14) Malaysia
15) Maldives
16) Morocco
17) Mauritania
18) Namibia
19) Nicaragua
20) Oman
21) Pakistan
22) Palestine
23) Qatar
24) Saudi Arabia
25) Somalia
26) Sudan
27) Syria
28) Tunisia
29) Turkey
30) UAE
31) Venezuela
32) Yemen
Jan 11
The whole world is truly watching! The South African case so far is very thorough and calls out the genocide as a genocide – exactly what it is. The attorney speaking now stated that israel has no defence. One is – genocide is not defensible under any circumstances.
Jan 11
Dutch election winner Geert Wilders tweets “100% support for Israel” in response to an article claiming the Jewish state’s reputation is at stake on genocide charges in The Hague.
Israel will get nowhere with this attitude against the darlings of the world, in terms of the belief that racism was defeated there. “Israel accuses South Africa of being the “legal arm” of Hamas”, AFP reports.
Jan 10
Lets continue with the list
The Arab League announces support for South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the ICJ.
Iran has voiced its support for South Africa’s decision to file a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over crimes of genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, stating that the Tel Aviv regime has committed a raft of crimes against Gazans in flagrant violation of international conventions.
The Parliamentary Union of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has called for Israeli leaders to be prosecuted for the regime’s crimes against the besieged Gaza Strip
San Francisco voted yesterday 8-3 in support of a ceasefire resolution, becoming the largest city in the US to call for an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.
In a statement issued by the Colombian government, it stated that it hopes that, after the hearings, the Court will rule without delay on the request for urgent provisional measures requested by South Africa and adopt decisions that will allow the bloodbath in Gaza and the occupied territories to cease.
…more than 1,400 Finnish music industry professionals have signed a petition urging a ban on Israel from Eurovision over war crimes in Gaza.
Jan 9
The UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) is biased and dominated by the Western colonial powers.
South Africa’s case accusing Israel of genocide is very strong, but the sad reality is politics drives ICJ rulings, not facts.
The ICJ has 15 judges from these countries:
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 10, 2024
Ben adds: “Given their geopolitical orientation and UN votes, it is essentially guaranteed that the US, Germany, France, Australia, India, Japan, and Slovakia will vote against South Africa’s ICJ case, or abstain.
This means all 8 other members would have to vote for it, which is unlikely.”
I question India as a start and perhaps one or two more. Take a look at what Belgium says a little further down.
Jan 9
Ecuador is in chaos being taken over by drug cartels. Thanks to “free market capitalism” & pro-US puppet leaders, this small South American country is being destroyed. Homicide rate has grown staggering sixfold since 2017, when US puppet Moreno took office. This guy also betrayed Julian Assange, who was in the Ecuadorean embassy in London.
Peru sheepishly had to confess because they cannot do otherwise, that the weapons used by the cartels came in through Peru. If you remember I reported on the Peru coup. https://globalsouth.co/2023/01/20/perus-us-backed-coup/ https://globalsouth.co/2023/01/14/peru/ https://globalsouth.co/2022/12/15/peru-the-cia-coup/
Good grief. The weapons used in today’s gang violence in Ecuador came from the Peruvian military
— Ollie Vargas (@OllieVargas79) January 9, 2024
I guess one coup to another will do it …
If I am not mistaken (and I think I`m not) these countries are being Monroed.
Ecuador’s President, Daniel Noboa:
Born on November 30, 1987, in MIAMI, FLORIDA
2010: degree in business administration from NYY STERN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
2019: MBA from NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
2020: Studied at HARVARD
2022: Masters in “Political Communication and Strategic Governance” from GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
PRO MILEI, PRO ZELENSKY, ANTI RUSSIA
Father, Álvaro Noboa, owns Noboa Corporation, a BANANA EXPORTER
Jan 9
The United States does not support a ceasefire in Gaza at this time, White House Coordinator for Strategic Coordinations John Kirby said on Tuesday.
“We do not support a ceasefire at this time,” said Kirby during a press briefing.
(That tells all again, right there! and the image)
Israel’s Foreign Ministry officially thanks Blinken for performing metzitzah b’peh on Netanyahu https://t.co/yVDfFqtric
— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) January 9, 2024
Maldives just backed South Africa’s ICJ Genocide case against Israel
So far we have -:
Malaysia
Turkey
Jordan
Bolivia
Maldives
Venezuela
The OIC (made up of 57 member countries)
Nicaragua endorsed a few hours ago
Belgium is talking to their goverment to endorse. “Belgium cannot stand by and watch the immense human suffering in Gaza. We must act against the threat of genocide”.
Ireland South MEP Grace O’Sullivan announces support for South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the ICJ, stressing that “We have an obligation to act when confronted with the horrific video evidence, victim testimony and deplorable statements from Israeli Ministers.”
(At this stage endorsement seem to be the correct word and they are now streaming in!)
Jan 9
Jan 9
This is the week. On the 11th and 12th Israel will be in the dock at the Hague at the ICJ. Many parts of our world are sending groups to view first hand. Israel is not happy and they are spitting like a bunch of writhing snakes in a hole. With US support, they’ve always been able to avoid any consequences of their actions. Just the fact of hauling them in front of a court shames them because God gave them the land is their false belief and nobody may criticize them and they are of course the victims.
Jan 9 – This is important
China has been working for years to finalize this code of conduct. If there is progress it would be a very positive move for the South China Sea.
Indonesia is ready to work with countries to finalize South China Sea code.
Indonesia’s Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi said her country is ready to work with other Southeast Asian nations to finalize a long-delayed code of conduct for the South China Sea, where many of its neighbors have overlapping claims with China.
“On South China Sea, Indonesia is ready to work together with all ASEAN member states including the Philippines to finalize the Code of Conduct as soon as possible,” Retno said at a joint press conference with Filipino counterpart Enrique Manalo in Manila, ahead of a visit by Indonesian President Joko Widodo.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China have for years been trying to create a framework to negotiate a code of conduct, a plan dating as far back as 2002. However, progress has been slow despite commitments by all parties to advance and expedite the process. The main sticking point has been the Philippines.
On January 10, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke over the phone (https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1924819/)with Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China
The Ministers summed up and spoke positively of the key outcomes of cooperation in 2023, expressing satisfaction with the high tempo of the political dialogue and practical cooperation, which are marked by stability and positive dynamics amid the global geopolitical instability.
They focused on the implementation of agreements reached at the top political level and highlighted the importance of Russian-Chinese strategic interaction to create a just multipolar international order and, in particular, to ensure that the foundations of Eurasian security are solid.
They noted that bilateral trade and economic cooperation has successfully overcome external challenges, with Russia-China trade passing the $200 billion mark as of the end of the year.
Sergey Lavrov and Wang Yi touched on a number of priority items on the international agenda, including the Ukraine crisis, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the situation surrounding the Korean Peninsula and the Asia-Pacific region in general.
They underscored their rejection of the Western bloc’s confrontational policy towards Russia and China, and the attempts to hold back their development using sanctions, deliberate provocations and other illegitimate means.
They also noted the purely constructive nature of interaction between Moscow and Beijing within the #UN, the #SCO, #BRICS and other multilateral formats, which is not directed against third countries. The Chinese side expressed support for Russia’s BRICS chairmanship. The Ministers exchanged views on ways to facilitate China’s contacts with the #CIS.
Read in full (https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1924819/)
Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi) 