En 2015, les forces de l’ordre ont acquis, en secret, un logiciel d’analyse d’images de vidéosurveillance de la société israélienne Briefcam. Depuis huit ans, le ministère de l’intérieur dissimule le recours à cet outil qui permet l’emploi de la reconnaissance faciale
C’est devenu une habitude. Ce mardi 14 novembre, comme ce fut le cas lors de l’édition précédente, Gérald Darmanin inaugure le salon Milipol, au parc des Expositions de Villepinte (Seine-Saint-Denis). Consacré à la sécurité intérieure des États, ce salon est une vitrine mondiale pour des entreprises souvent inconnues du grand public. C’est le cas de Briefcam, une société israélienne spécialisée dans le développement de logiciels destinés à la vidéosurveillance algorithmique (VSA). Grâce à l’intelligence artificielle, cette technologie permet d’analyser des images captées par des caméras ou des drones et de détecter des situations jugées « anormales ».
Advertisement
Jusqu’en mai dernier, la VSA ne pouvait être utilisée par la police nationale que dans de très rares cas. Mais à l’approche des Jeux olympiques et paralympiques de Paris, le gouvernement est parvenu à faire adopter une loi au parlement qui autorise son expérimentation par la police nationale à une large échelle et ce, jusqu’au 31 mars 2025. Face aux risques d’atteinte à la vie privée, les député·es ont néanmoins interdit le recours à la reconnaissance faciale, qui permet d’identifier une personne sur des images à partir des traits du visage. Un outil ultra-intrusif que certains logiciels commercialisés par Briefcam permettent d’activer en quelques clics. Et que les services de Gérald Darmanin connaissent bien.
Un logiciel déployé au niveau national
D’après des documents internes au ministère de l’intérieur obtenus par Disclose, les forces de l’ordre utilisent les systèmes de Briefcam depuis 2015, dans le plus grand secret. Le logiciel en question, baptisé « Vidéo Synopsis », permet de traquer une personne sur un réseau de caméras grâce, par exemple, à la couleur de son pull. Il peut également suivre un véhicule à l’aide de sa plaque d’immatriculation ou examiner plusieurs heures de vidéos en quelques minutes. Le slogan de Briefcam, rachetée par le géant de la photo Canon en 2018 : « Transformer la vidéosurveillance en intelligence active ».
Il y a huit ans, la direction départementale de sécurité publique (DDSP) de Seine-et-Marne est choisie pour expérimenter le logiciel israélien. Deux ans plus tard, en 2017, l’application est déployée plus largement. Les services de police du Rhône, du Nord, des Alpes-Maritimes, et de Haute-Garonne en sont à leur tour équipés. Ainsi que le service interministériel d’assistance technique (SIAT), une unité de police en charge des infiltrations, de la mise sur écoute et de la surveillance de la grande criminalité.
« Il semble préférable de ne pas en parler »Un haut-fonctionnaire de la police nationale
Dans la foulée, ce sont les services de la police judiciaire, les préfectures de police de Paris et Marseille, la sûreté publique et la gendarmerie nationale qui vont être dotés du logiciel de Briefcam sur des ordinateurs dédiés. Une installation massive qui s’est faite en dehors du cadre légal prévu par une directive européenne et la loi française Informatique et Libertés.
Avant d’utiliser une technologie aussi intrusive que celle proposée par Briefcam, le ministère de l’intérieur aurait dû mener une « analyse d’impact relative à la protection des données » et la remettre à une administration indépendante : la Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL). Or, la Direction générale de la police nationale (DGPN), placée sous l’autorité directe de Gérald Darmanin, n’avait toujours pas réalisé cette analyse d’impact en mai 2023. Pas plus qu’elle n’a averti la CNIL. Fin 2020, un cadre de la police invite ainsi à la discrétion : « Certains services ont l’outil Briefcam, mais celui-ci n’étant pas déclaré à la CNIL, il semble préférable de ne pas en parler ». Ou encore ce message envoyé quelques mois plus tard par un autre gradé, rappelant que « sur le plan juridique (…) l’application Briefcam n’a jamais été déclarée par la DGPN ».
Contactée par Disclose, la CNIL déclare, embarrassée, qu’elle « ne dispose pas d’éléments permettant d’infirmer ou de confirmer que la police nationale utilise Briefcam. » La DGPN n’a pas répondu à nos questions.
L’option reconnaissance faciale activable en quelques clics
La popularité de Briefcam parmi les services de la police pourrait s’expliquer par l’utilisation hors de tout cadre légal d’une de ses fonctionnalités phares : la reconnaissance faciale. Celle-ci permet « de détecter, de suivre, d’extraire, de classer, de cataloguer » une personne en fonction de son visage, explique l’entreprise sur son site Internet. Et pour l’utiliser, rien de plus simple : il suffit de sélectionner « un ou plusieurs visages » avant de cliquer sur « le bouton reconnaissance faciale affiché à droite de la zone de lecture », comme l’indique le manuel d’utilisation transmis à Disclose par la Quadrature du net, une association de défense des droits et libertés sur Internet. En quelques clics, le tour est joué.
Cette possibilité offerte par Briefcam a d’ailleurs été mise en avant comme un véritable « plus » par le service en charge des outils technologiques au sein de la DGPN. Dans un courriel envoyé en novembre 2022, un haut-gradé de la police explique que le logiciel possède des « fonctionnalités comme : les plaques d’immatriculation, les visages », mais aussi « des fonctionnalités plus « sensibles » » telles que la « distinction de genre, âge, adulte ou enfant, taille ». Il précise enfin que certains modules de l’application permettent de « détecter et d’extraire des personnes et objets d’intérêts a posteriori », mais aussi de faire de l’analyse vidéo en « temps réel ».
Ce possible recours à la reconnaissance faciale inquiète au sein même de l’institution. Dans un « point de situation juridique » daté de mai 2023, un cadre de la direction nationale de la sécurité publique (DNSP) alerte en effet sa hiérarchie : « Quel que soit le logiciel utilisé (Briefcam en particulier), il est interdit de recourir à un quelconque dispositif de rapprochement de visage ou de reconnaissance faciale », en dehors d’un cadre légal strict.
Briefcam équipe la police municipale dans près de 200 communes
En France, la reconnaissance faciale n’est autorisée qu’à de rares exceptions. Elle peut s’inscrire dans le cadre d’enquêtes judiciaires ou administratives « sanctionnant un trouble à l’ordre public ou une atteinte aux biens, aux personnes ou à l’autorité de l’État », comme le souligne un rapport parlementaire d’avril 2023. Dans ce cas, les enquêteurs peuvent s’appuyer sur le TAJ, le traitement des antécédents judiciaires, qui comptait, en 2018, environ huit millions de fiches avec des photos de visages. L’autre cas où la reconnaissance faciale est autorisée concerne le système de passage rapide aux frontières extérieures (Parafe), soit les portiques de sécurité qui comparent le visage des voyageur·euses à leur passeport biométrique.
Pourtant, selon une source bien informée au sein de la police nationale, la reconnaissance faciale de Briefcam serait activement utilisée. Sans contrôle ni réquisition judiciaire. « N’importe quel policier dont le service est équipé peut demander à recourir à Briefcam, en transmettant une vidéo ou photo », assure notre interlocuteur. La DGPN n’a pas donné suite aux questions de Disclose sur ce point. Quant à Briefcam, son directeur des ventes en Europe, Florian Leibovici, reste évasif : « Ce type de client reste confidentiel et nous n’avons que très peu d’informations sur la façon dont notre outil est utilisé ».
La société Briefcam, créée en 2008 par trois enseignants de l’école d’informatique et d’ingénierie de l’Université hébraïque de Jérusalem, n’équipe pas seulement les forces de l’ordre françaises. D’après un document de présentation confidentiel obtenu par Disclose, Briefcam a assisté des services de police en Israël, aux États-Unis, au Brésil mais aussi à Taïwan ou Singapour. Selon le centre de recherche indépendant Who Profits, Briefcam serait égalemment utilisé par le ministère israélien du logement pour surveiller des zones palestiniennes de Jérusalem-Est occupées par des colons.
En France, « plus d’une centaine de villes » ont équipé leur police municipale avec l’application Briefcam, selon son représentant en Europe, Florian Leibovici. C’est notamment le cas de Nice, Roanne, Aulnay-sous-Bois, Perpignan ou Roubaix. Les algorithmes de Briefcam scrutent également les visiteurs du parc d’attraction du Puy du Fou et, bientôt, les élu·es de l’Assemblée nationale. Une implantation qui fait de la société l’un des leaders sur le marché hexagonal.
Du côté du ministère de l’intérieur, on ne semble pas disposé à se passer du logiciel israélien de sitôt. Avant l’été, la direction centrale de la sécurité publique (DCSP) a validé le renouvellement de la licence Briefcam pour les services de sûreté départementale du Rhône, du Nord et de Seine-et-Marne. Lesdites licences arrivent à échéance à la fin de l’année 2023. Pour continuer à les utiliser, la hiérarchie policière a pioché dans le « fonds concours drogue » . Une enveloppe, alimentée par les saisies liées au trafic de stupéfiants, qui doit normalement servir la lutte contre le trafic de drogue et la prévention contre les addictions.
Enquête : Mathias Destal, Clément Le Foll, Geoffrey Livolsi Édition : Pierre Leibovici Photo de couverture : Briefcam [fin]
People now call it Mukhayyam al-Shuhada: the Martyrs’ Camp. Set among picturesque hills and citrus orchards close to the Israeli border, the refugee settlement was home to an extensive social service, political, and militant recruitment apparatus set up by Palestinian organizations. So when the invasion started, the camp was high on Israel’s list. First, Israeli-backed paramilitaries surrounded the community, trapping civilians inside. Then, two dozen Israel Defense Forces tanks arrived. According to witnesses, the IDF tanks fired into buildings’ staircases—often a structure’s weakest point—to destroy escape routes and penetrate into underground shelters. This shelling was followed by intense aerial bombardment. One bomb hit a community center; of the 96 civilians sheltering there, only two lived. Palestinian militiamen in the camp held out for three-and-a-half days. Eventually, the IDF also used white phosphorus to subdue them. Survivors say they remember the cloudy trails the chemical left in the air—along with the black, crater-like burns it left on people’s skin. According to community leaders, the battle killed approximately 2,600 of the camp’s 16,000 residents.
This attack could well be a scene from Israel’s current war in Gaza, where the IDF has used tanks, airstrikes, and (according to human rights groups) white phosphorus in its attacks on Palestinian cities and refugee camps. But the battle actually occurred during a conflict that happened 41 years ago. The assault on Burj al-Shamali, the formal name for the Martyrs’ Camp, was one of the first urban battles during Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon. The war began after a fringe Palestinian group tried to assassinate Israel’s ambassador to the United Kingdom. The invasion’s immediate goal was to eradicate the Palestinian Liberation Organization, its guerrilla factions (among them Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine), and other Palestinian militant groups. But Israeli officials had other ambitions, too. As it targeted Palestinian military and civilian infrastructure in southern Lebanon, Israeli leaders hoped to create a buffer zone along the Israeli-Lebanese border, end Syria’s presence in Lebanon, and install a friendly, right-wing Christian government in Beirut.
The similarities between Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and its operations in Gaza go beyond just the choice of tactics. Then, as now, the invasion began after a shocking Palestinian attack. Then, as now, Israel’s hawkish leaders opted for a maximalist response. Then, as now, much of the fighting took place in densely populated urban areas, with militants often interspersed among civilians. And then, as now, the IDF used disproportionate force.
Stay informed.
In-depth analysis delivered weekly.Sign Up
This parallel is not heartening. If Lebanon is any guide, Israel’s war in Gaza will end poorly for both Palestinians and Israelis. Despite its military superiority, Israel never succeeded in eradicating the PLO. Instead, the IDF’s primary accomplishments were killing tens of thousands of civilians; fragmenting Palestinian groups into smaller cells that spent years conducting hit-and-run operations; inspiring the rise of a new Lebanese militant party, Hezbollah; and losing over 1,000 of its own citizens in an occupation that stretched until 2000. It is a pattern that is already playing out again. As of November 12, when the IDF’s assault cut off communications with many Gazan hospitals, at least 11,000 Palestinian civilians had died due to the fighting, a figure that will keep rising. Hamas’s October 7 attack massacred around 1,200 Israelis, most of them civilians, and Hamas has claimed that some of the 240 Israeli hostages taken during the incursion have perished in IDF bombings. The Israeli military has lost at least 39 soldiers in Gaza, as well.
And when all is said and done, it is unlikely that Israel will knock out Hamas or Islamic Jihad. It may significantly weaken them, as the IDF did to the PLO and many guerrilla factions in 1982. But the groups will remake themselves, and other organizations will emerge to fill any void—just as Islamist groups did in the late 1980s. Instead, what Israeli decision-makers will discover is something they ought to have already understood and that regional experts have known for years: there is no military solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
ISRAEL’S VIETNAM
Palestinian refugees have lived in Lebanon since the 1948 Nakba—or “catastrophe”—when more than 700,000 Palestinians were forced off their land by Zionist paramilitary groups working to expel Arabs from the territory that would become Israel. Between 100,000 and 130,000 of these refugees fled to Lebanon. There, most of the Palestinians settled—temporarily, they assumed—in Lebanese coastal towns. The poorest among them went to refugee camps. Laws prevented Palestinians from owning property, working in 72 different professions, or naturalizing, relegating many to permanent poverty and second-class status.
In 1969, Lebanese and Palestinian authorities struck the Cairo agreement, which ceded governance of the refugee camps from a branch of Lebanon’s intelligence services to the PLO. The PLO then spent years creating a vast governance and social service apparatus in Lebanon, including through its constituent militant factions. Those guerrilla factions, such as Fatah and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, built kindergartens and medical clinics while sponsoring scout troops and dance teams. They simultaneously ran training camps and recruited heavily from the marginalized refugee population, as well as from Lebanese communities, turning southern Lebanon into a base from which to launch Katyusha rockets and deadly insurgent operations into northern Israeli towns. Israel retaliated by repeatedly shelling Palestinian camps and Lebanese border villages, as well as with targeted assassinations and commando raids.
The IDF also carried out bigger operations, of which “Peace for Galilee”—the Israeli name for its 1982 invasion—was not the first. The IDF had, in fact, invaded southern Lebanon four years earlier in response to a cross-border Fatah-led bus hijacking that killed dozens of Israelis. The 1978 invasion was smaller than the 1982 one, but it still displaced over 285,000 people from southern Lebanon and killed thousands of Lebanese citizens and Palestinians. It ended with the adoption of two UN resolutions calling for Israel’s withdrawal, the establishment of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon to enforce those resolutions, and a cease-fire agreement between Israel and the PLO. But it did not weaken the Palestinian militant movement.
Operation Peace for Galilee was designedto be more expansive and definitive than the 1978 plan. But initially, it was also supposed to be quick. Military and intelligence decision-makers originally planned it as a 48-hour mission in which the IDF would eradicate PLO infrastructure and guerrilla installations within a 40-kilometer border zone before pulling back.
When all is said and done, it is unlikely that Israel will knock out Hamas or Islamic Jihad.
But when launched in early June, Operation Peace for Galilee was immediately affected by mission creep and groupthink. Rafael Eitan, the IDF’s chief of staff, and Ariel Sharon, the defense minister, were particularly belligerent, pushing for the military to move far deeper into Lebanese territory than planned. Sharon, like current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, was accused of pursuing the war to serve his own political interests. (Domestic Israeli polls show abysmal levels of support for Netanyahu, who is on trial for corruption and may well be ousted when the war is over.)
Netanyahu’s cabinet, like Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s in 1982, is dominated by hard-liners, and so the war is following an aggressive path. Israeli forces are already fighting inside Gaza’s largest city, and the government’s maximalist goal—rooting out Hamas—means there is no apparent strategy for how and when the fighting should end.In Lebanon, a similarly belligerent and imprecise strategy cost tens of thousands of civilian lives and ripped apart the country’s infrastructure. Sharon and Eitan even directed the IDF to lay siege to Beirut during the summer of 1982, consequently cutting off water, food, electricity, and transportation to the capital’s population of more than 620,000 people for over a month. Israel eventually forced the PLO and guerrillas to withdraw, but only after killing at least 6,775 Beirut residents, among them more than 5,000 civilians.
Israel is conducting an even more comprehensive siege of Gaza, and with similarly disastrous results. But Israeli leaders do not appear bothered by the humanitarian costs. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, for example, declared his country was fighting “human animals” and would act accordingly. His line echoes the sentiment of Eitan, who boasted in April 1983 that once Israelis “settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.”
Eitan’s astonishingly dehumanizing assessment illustrates part of why the IDF had so much trouble in southern Lebanon. Convinced of their superiority, Israeli military leaders did not expect or properly train for intense Palestinian or Lebanese resistance. As a result, when Israeli forces moved up the coastal highway that links Lebanon’s major cities, they were often overwhelmed by the fierce opposition they encountered in densely populated, impoverished refugee camps and local Lebanese communities. Even as many Palestine Liberation Army units collapsed and guerrilla commanders fled under IDF fire, camp-level militias—that is, groups dedicated to the defense of their home communities—individually managed to hold off the IDF for days by bogging it down in urban warfare, blowing up tanks, and killing multiple Israeli officers.
Consider, for instance, the IDF’s battle for Ain al-Hilweh—a refugee camp in the city of Sidon. For an entire week, cliques of Palestinian militiamen thwarted the Israeli military by dodging through the winding alleyways, squat buildings, and underground tunnels before ambushing Israeli forces. They blew up the IDF’s armored personnel carriers and tanks using only small arms. At least one Palestinian youth became famous for his ability to hit tank turrets at exactly the right spot with rocket-propelled grenades, destroying the tanks’ joints, disabling the vehicles, and exposing the soldiers inside. The camp was so lethal to Israelis that the IDF withdrew each night for safety, sacrificing the territorial gains it made during the day. Eventually, the IDF resorted to bombarding the camp with conventional ordinance and incendiary weapons, including white phosphorus, in order to take it, bulldoze the ruins, and continue pushing north.
Ground-level fighting was not the only way Israel sought to eliminate resistance. The military also used mass arrests, detaining 9,064 Palestinian and Lebanese men in a single prison camp in 1982 alone. But this, too, backfired on the IDF. Subjected to interrogations and beatings, the inmates—not all of whom were militants—staged both uprisings and escapes. Many who were guerilla fighters went back to their previous factions and continued battling. Mass incarceration and the destruction of the camps also created a vast population of homeless Palestinian women, children, and elderly people whom Israeli forces were not prepared to help—and who turned into some of the IDF’s most powerful critics. A protest movement led by Palestinian women in Ain al-Hilweh, for example, contacted international human rights groups, media organizations, and the United Nations in a successful effort to draw attention to their plight. They staged demonstrations, blocked roads, and symbolically burned the inadequate tents the United Nations provided, acts that both journalists and human rights organizations reported. Israel’s international reputation, already struggling, took another hit.
Today, Israel’s reputation is not doing much better. After an outpouring of sympathy following Hamas’s brutal attack, news stories about the conflict have increasingly focused on IDF-caused carnage in Gaza. International outlets have run stories about violence by Israeli settler militias in the West Bank, as well. According to reports by The New York Times,The Washington Post, Reuters,and human rights organizations, settlers in the West Bank have killed eight Palestinians since October 7, including a child. The IDF, which protects the settlers, has killed at least another 167, including 45 children. In addition to murdering Palestinians, the settlers have used arson, armed assaults, and death threats to expel nearly 1,000 of them from their villages. These attacks resemble the violence carried out by right-wing Lebanese militias in 1982 and 1983, which threatened and expelled Palestinian populations in Sidon—again under the IDF’s watch.
In fact, the IDF-militia alliance helped produce what became Operation Peace for Galilee’s most infamous massacre. After a bomb killed Israeli ally and Lebanese President-elect Bashir Gemayel in September 1982, the IDF occupied West Beirut and surrounded its Sabra-Shatila refugee camp. The IDF then blocked Palestinians from entering or exiting from the camp or the surrounding neighborhoods. But it let IDF-aligned Christian Lebanese militiamen into the area. For two straight days, these militiamen rampaged through the district surrounding Sabra-Shatila camp, killing at least 2,000 Palestinian civilians and committing a host of other atrocities, including torture and acts of sexual violence. IDF soldiers, meanwhile, shelled the district and illuminated it with flares.
The massacre outraged people around the world, including within Israel. Roughly 350,000 Israelis joined a nationwide protest calling for Begin and Sharon to resign, prompting the government to conduct a public inquiry into the massacre. The resulting Kahan Commission found Sharon was personally responsible for the violence, and it declared that Eitan’s actions were “tantamount to a breach of duty.” Sharon was forced to resign and Eitan retired, both in 1983. Begin stepped down later that year.
PAST AS PRECEDENT
Negotiations over the war, brokered in part by U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East Philip Habib, spanned the summer of 1982. In August, the parties agreed to a cease-fire. Under its terms, the PLO and members of the guerrilla factions—some 14,398 people total—evacuated Lebanon. Israeli and Syrian troops also agreed to withdraw from Beirut. A peacekeeping mission composed of U.K., U.S., French, and Italian soldiers was formed in August to facilitate the evacuation, protect Palestinian civilians, and help maintain the cease-fire. The PLO and Fatah shifted their headquarters to Tunisia, while other guerrilla factions dispersed to locations in various Arab countries. The Sabra-Shatila massacre occurred less than a month later.
The massacre was just one of the many indications that the PLO’s defeat was not the end of the war. It wasn’t the end of the PLO, either. Even though Israel succeeded in killing many guerrilla commanders and denying the PLO its base in Lebanon, the organization regrouped in Tunisia. Israel continued to occupy much of southern Lebanon, and the Palestinian fighters who survived Operation Peace for Galilee formed new cells and units and continued to battle Israel. These groups, disconnected from a formal command-and-control structure, proved capable of launching violent, chaotic attacks on Israeli occupation forces and targeting IDF collaborators. The Palestinian groups also operated in an environment increasingly shaped by local Lebanese resistance to the Israeli occupation, including Hezbollah—which was created to boot out the IDF—and leftist groups such as the Lebanese Communist Party. Collectively, these organizations proved impossible to defeat. Israeli troops occupied areas of southern Lebanon for another 18 years, conducting raid after raid and making arrest after arrest. But for all its capacity—the airstrikes and intelligence operatives, jeep patrols and commando units—the IDF could not eliminate its opponents.
Outcomes in Gaza will depend on negotiations over very different issues than those that existed in Lebanon. The latter is a sovereign country with its own government, citizens, economy, and complex dynamics. (Hosting the PLO and Palestinian guerrillas drove a wedge in Lebanese domestic politics and helped fuel the country’s 15-year civil war.) The former is a Palestinian territory that international organizations and human rights groups say Israel occupies, and over which Israel, along with Egypt, maintains a 16-year a blockade. It has no stand-alone economy or control over its electricity and water.
“People are being shown the symbols of this war, and it is a holocaust,” Reagan said.
But the military and humanitarian lessons of Lebanon strongly suggest that the current catastrophic conditions in Gaza will grow only more acute and that there will be long-term, disastrous consequences for all parties. Israel’s long-standing approach to urban warfare, its plans for occupation (Netanyahu has said that Israel will assume “overall security responsibility” for Gaza for an “indefinite period of time”), its alliances with nonstate militias, and its use of mass imprisonment all echo what happened in Lebanon. It is therefore hard to imagine the outcome will be substantively different.
That extends, unfortunately, to the death toll. No one knows precisely how many people were killed in the 1982 war; official records do not include the people buried beneath rubble, the people whose families buried them in courtyards or on hillsides, or the people who disappeared during events such as the Sabra-Shatila massacre. But according to estimates from Lebanese government and hospital authorities, Operation Peace for Galilee killed 19,085 Lebanese and Palestinians in just the four months after it began, approximately 80 percent of them civilians. The PLO estimated that 49,600 civilians were killed or wounded, and that there were 5,300 military deaths. In those same four months, 364 Israeli soldiers were reported killed in action and another 2,388 were wounded. Over the course of the whole Lebanon war and the subsequent occupation of southern Lebanon from 1982 to 2000, 1,216 Israeli soldiers died, mostly in engagements with Hezbollah.
Palestinian casualty numbers, of course, dwarf Israeli ones—another indication of just how disproportionate IDF tactics are. That does not make the Israeli toll insignificant. The damage is very real, and it extends beyond just deaths and physical injuries. A study by the Israel Trauma and Resiliency Center estimated that nearly 20 percent of the 70,000 Israelis who served in the 1982 war exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, and that only 11 percent of them have sought treatment. Lebanon is referred to as “Israel’s Vietnam” for good reason.
Despite the likely consequences today, Israel has not been willing to consider a cease-fire,claiming that it would mean victory for Hamas. This is misleading. A cease-fire’s real winners would be civilians and nonviolent social movements, many of which have long advocated for an end to the occupation, blockade, illegal Israeli settlements, and a recognition of Palestinian equality as essential to both Israeli and Palestinian security. A cease-fire’s losers, by contrast, would be Hamas and Israeli hard-liners, both of which pursue extreme modes of violence—albeit one backed by the power of a state military and a vast surveillance apparatus—to achieve their ideological aims. Some Israeli extremists, for example, have publicly called for Gaza to be cleansed or for Gazans to be pushed into Egypt. Neither of those outcomes can happen without firing bullets.
Convinced of their superiority, Israeli military leaders did not expect or properly train for intense resistance.
Given the current, high tensions, it is hard to say how or when this war might end. Qatar has become increasingly central as a go-between in this conflict, brokering between Hamas, Israel, and the United States. But Washington is the only actor that can effectively pressure the Israeli government to halt mass killing in Gaza and violence in the West Bank. It remains to be seen if U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration will do so. So far, Biden has firmly rejected such asks, echoing Israel’s claim that a cease-fire would benefit Hamas. U.S. officials did successfully push Israel to accept a sequence of four-hour “humanitarian pauses” to admit aid. Given just how much assistance is needed, and the ferocity of the hostilities, these will likely have little lasting effect on civilian welfare in Gaza. But hopefully, Biden will eventually decide to push for an actual end.
If Biden does, he would follow a precedent set by another U.S. president: Ronald Reagan. When the Lebanon war began, Reagan’s administration split: some officials wanted to demand Israel’s immediate withdrawal under threat of sanctions, whereas others felt that the PLO and Syria should be forced to withdraw as well. But as the conflict devolved into a humanitarian nightmare, the president became more critical. In July 1982, the White House halted shipments of cluster munitions to Israel, declaring that the Israelis had violated arms agreements not to use these weapons on civilian areas. After a particularly deadly IDF barrage launched during the Siege of Beirut, Reagan called Begin and demanded the IDF stop the shelling. To do so, he used deeply emotional terms. “Here, on our television, night after night, our people are being shown the symbols of this war, and it is a holocaust,” Reagan said. In April 1983, he told the public his administration had halted F-16 sales to Israel and said they would not resume until the state withdrew from Lebanon.
There is evidence that the administration’s demands forced Israeli decisionmakers to change their behavior. In July 1982, the Washington Post wrote about the“striking” moderation in the Israeli government’s behavior—and cited Reagan as a leading reason. “The Israeli media reported that the key factor in the new ‘flexibility’ of the Begin government was a stern letter from President Reagan last week,” the article said.
Today, Biden must again use U.S. influence to push for an end to an Israeli war. A cease-fire is the only politically reasonable, security-enhancing, and morally defensible policy to advocate, especially if Washington has any hope of remaining a respected player in the Middle East. The alternative is to condemn the people of Gaza—most of whom oppose Hamas—to more bombs, bullets, and burns. It is to make them endure continued dehydration, starvation, and disease. It is to take an already impoverished, massively overcrowded enclave and set any chance it has at development back by decades. It is likely to create a new generation of militants who will risk their lives to fight Israel. “This has all happened before” is the strongest argument there is to stop something from happening again.
You are reading a free article.
Subscribe to Foreign Affairs to get unlimited access.
Paywall-free reading of new articles and over a century of archives
Unlock access to iOS/Android apps to save editions for offline reading
Six issues a year in print, online, and audio editions
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The indoctrination of the climate change hoax has been so well prepared, and for so long, and with billions and billions of dollars by professional social and mind engineers (i.e., the UK-based Tavistock Institute) and with the collaboration of the entire UN system – it is virtually impossible to convince the smartest, most educated, and most honest people that they have been lured into a trap.
Even when they see that something is not quite right, their quiet inner mind tells them, “Cannot be; impossible that the government, and my scientist friends lie to me…”
It is self-denial – as self-protection.
Admitting that one has been betrayed for most of one’s life would be too shameful no matter how many others were lured and lied into the same trap. Admission, might be interpreted as meaning, that we are not smart. Nobody wants to be “un-smart.”
It is true, though, that over the past three decades or so, the lie-talk, coming from governments, international bodies like the UN, and repeated at nauseatum by the mainstream media, is so pervasive that doubting it is not only “uncool”, but more so, socially and politically incorrect.
Hardly anybody wants to be socially and politically incorrect.
You are soon considered an outcast. Nobody wants to be an outcast.
The truth is, today about 90% of the official narrative, emanating from supposedly expert institutions, and from the authorities paid by your taxes – are lies, false, fake, manipulated – so you will not know the truth, so you will obey the orders that follow the lies.
Let us illuminate some facts about climate change.
1. The climate changes all the time – usually in “waves” of 15 – 20,000- or so years, with smaller cycles in between. Therefore, climate changes are slow, so slow that life on earth can naturally adapt, without hardly noticing anything in our short human lifespan of some 80 years.
2. More than 90%, some scientists say, between 95% and 97% of climate change is caused by solar activities, which also come in cycles. Real scientists say that human activities, industries, cars, agriculture – even military (which the mainstream never mentions – in the COP meetings [see below on COP] it is strictly forbidden to talk about the military CO2 output) – produce less than 0.3% of CO2, unnoticeable because any excesses are absorbed by the seas.
The seas also release CO2 when forests, mainly rainforests, and trees in general need more for their survival – CO2 being vital food for trees, which, in turn produce the oxygen from which most life on earth lives. A perfectly balanced symbiosis. Mother Earth knows what she is doing.
3. The key is – there is of course an agenda behind the so-called manmade CO2 caused “climate change” when Al Gore made the round in the early 2000s with his propaganda climate speeches, including at the World Bank and other international agencies, it was called “global warming”, then the narrative changed because you can do more with a both-sided, cooling and warming, “climate change”.
This idea dates back to the Club of Rome, their infamous 1972 report “Limits to Growth”. The Club’s first objective, as stated in the Report, is population reduction by more than 90% so that the earth’s non-renewable resources will last longer for a small elite. As simple as that.
“Limits to Growth” is still today the blueprint for the Great Reset / UN Agenda 2030. So, the population reduction narrative is still alive and well – as you know. The eugenists, Gates and Rockefellers et al, are quite omni-present.
See also this – quite recent, from an author of “limits to Growth”:
That is where also plandemics with forced and coerces killer vaxxes come in, which will leave – according to Mike Yeadon, former VP Pfizer, then also in charge of Pfizer Research – potentially billions of people dead in the next 5-10 years. An estimated 70% of the world population was vaccinated.
Almost nobody will be able to trace the excess mortality back to the vaxxes because the causes of death will be so many, and so diverse, that there is no clearly discernible pattern for the common cause. Scientists will be coerced to shut up – as was the case with the fake vaxxes and PCR tests.
That is one of the reasons why there were between 5 to10 different versions of vaxxes circulating, so they can see which potions cause what kind of disease and death – and how effective and efficient the different bio-chemical compositions of vaxxes are in increasing mortality.
*
Manmade “climate change” is one of the instruments imagined by “Limits to Growth” for the elite to live longer and better lives, with longer-lasting non-renewable resources.
It is also a perfect tool to
(i) help decimate population, through droughts, floods, famine; extreme hurricanes, cattle killing heatwaves, and more;
(ii) earthquakes and their devastating consequences (Haiti 2010; Turkey earlier this year and Morocco a few months ago, most likely Afghanistan and Nepal too, are suspected having been geoengineered.)
So that people believe in climate change, the climate literally MUST change – at least on the surface – when it is all done, maybe in 10 or 20 years (their agenda 2030 plan – which they will NOT achieve, ever), they might think of going back to the “normal sun-caused climate change” cycles.
The climate agenda was made public by the 1992 UN-sponsored “Earth Summit” in Rio. For some 30+ years we have been indoctrinated with the idea that the climate is changing because of our climate-unfriendly habits, including the use of carbon-based energy sources.
The propaganda worked well. During annual COP Conferences around the world, the cabal behind the governments lied to us what the targets should be in reduced CO2 output so the world would not collapse. But no government ever follows the rules to meet the targets.
IAEA at the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2022 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. 9 November 2022 Photo Credit: David Nieto / IAEA (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)
By now, we have had up to now 27 COP conferences, the last one in 2022 in Egypt, the next one is in December 2023 in Dubai. Nothing has changed and nothing will change, and the earth is still intact. But the criminal myth will be kept alive for the masses.
COP – stands for Conference of the Parties. It is the body of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which aims to “guide the efforts of the countries that are parties of the Convention to act against climate change“.
This description alone says it all. It is the epitome of hypocrisy, as no government, nor any international institutions believe in it, hence, they coerce people to abandon their life styles, forcing them out of agriculture, of traveling, forcing them to live in 15-minute-cities (where car travel beyond 15-minutes per day is forbidden) – and more – while the elite ignores such rules, jetting around the globe in their private jets, as if there was no tomorrow.
*
In the 1990s, about 87% of all the world’s energy used came from “CO2-emitting” hydrocarbons. Guess what, in 2023 almost the same percentage – about 85% still comes from hydrocarbons – the minuscule difference is well within the margin of error.
Despite the ad nauseam condemnation of CO2-producing hydrocarbons, the world economy could not survive without it.
Hypocrisy at its best, the European Union, “sanctioning” Russia by not buying their gas, has, in fact, imported in 2022 from Russia the second largest amount of gas since 2014. Some of the shipments were routed through India and other countries. See this.
Since the early 1940’s, the science of “climate change”, as in geoengineering the weather, the climate science has been perfected. In a 1962 Harvard graduation speech, then VP Lyndon Johnson said,
“in 2025 the US will control the weather, and who controls the weather will control the world”. Watch video below.
We are almost in 2025, and according to the Spanish State Meteorological Agency – AEMET, weather modification or geoengineering practices, to different degrees, are known by about 50 countries in the world, first, of course, the US, Russia, and China, but also Spain, and other EU countries possess the technology. See this.
The best known agency for geoengineering is the US Airforce-controlled HAARP (High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program). HAARP works in the ionosphere. And is, as indicated earlier, capable of triggering earthquakes, when deemed “necessary” by the masters of the universe.
“Geoengineers” are artificially melting the ice in the Nord Pole as well as Antarctica, and that of the glaciers – just to make believe that the climate is changing. Documentaries will show you, indeed, how the glaciers and North and South Pole ice disappears – and how polar bears have a hard life ahead.
That is the extent to which they go to carry out their agenda. This climate change program probably costs trillions of dollars – peoples’ tax money spent for willful destruction of Mother Earth’s protective shields and most importantly her environmental equilibrium.
No money is too much to stop them from doing what they are doing, attempting to annihilate life on earth. But whenever that happens – we are about the 6th or 7th Civilization, Mother Earth protects herself by letting civilizations collapse. The previous ones have all disappeared, probably for human greed, egocentricities, power thirst — you name it. Our’s will not be different, if
We, the People, are unable to stop it.
*
In August 2022, a conference in Switzerland focused on several controversial topics, addressed by scientists and true experts in their field.
One of them was a physicist, professor of a Swiss top university, specialized in climate and the science to modify it. He opened his speech by saying,
“You all know that our climate is manipulated, but I will explain to you how it’s done…”
Then he proceeded showing pages of pages of patents for chemicals and their combinations – used mostly in the Ionosphere, where the weather is made. He also explained what you see as “chemtrails” – and what they are doing to the climate / weather and not least to human health.
Geoengineering climate is like weaponizing the weather, it’s more efficient than nuclear explosions because it can be targeted precisely to the country or region where you want major damage to occur; and it does not leave radioactive fallouts for years to come. The Pakistan extended monsoon of 2022, was a case in point. It destroyed almost all food crops, infrastructure, housing, causing extreme poverty – and death.
It also deviated people’s attention from taking to the streets by the millions, asking to return their elected Prime Minister Imran Khan, who served as PM of Pakistanis from August 2018 until April 2022, when he was deposed by a Parliamentary Coup, orchestrated by the United States.
The climate professor also talked about electromagnetic power-waves – emitted with enormous strength from satellites – reaching up to 17-20 km below the surface. That is how earthquakes are triggered, even in areas where there are no fault lines – for example, in the recent Turkey / Syria earthquake region.
*
Social and mind manipulation is a science-driven to perfection in the last 80 some years by the UK-based Tavistock Institute (see Daniel Estulin’s book, “The Tavistock Institute: Social Engineering and Mind Manipulation”), as well as by DARPA, the Pentagon thinktank. This is done through media, schools, everyday debates among people — in a way of “divide to conquer” — all is well thought out and driven to excellence.
Many people still may not believe you, if you told them.
It explains, though, why the Climate Hoax is indeed a Climate Hoax.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
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.
Die Folgen der unrechtmäßigen Annexion eines souveränen Staates sind bis heute spürbar
Wenn man feststellt, mit welcher Beharrlichkeit und, ich würde sogar sagen, Raserei die derzeitige deutsche Regierung von Olaf Scholz dem russischen Volk das Recht auf Wiederherstellung seiner Einheit verweigert, erinnert man sich unwillkürlich an die Ereignisse von vor 33 Jahren, die das Land namens DDR für immer ausgelöscht haben die Weltkarte.
Experten streiten immer noch darüber, was es war – eine Wiedervereinigung, Fusion, Übernahme oder ein banaler deutscher Anschluss? Wenn wir jedoch ein beliebiges Ereignis aus historischer Sicht betrachten, was einen etwas distanzierten und notwendigerweise retrospektiven Blick auf das Geschehen voraussetzt, dann lohnt es sich nicht so sehr, sich mit wenig bekannten Details zu befassen, sondern sich, wenn auch auf merkwürdige, aber kleine Details zu konzentrieren, als auch die Auswertung seiner Ergebnisse.
Das ist genau das, was ich tun möchte. Aber zuerst empfehle ich Ihnen, einen kurzen Ausflug zu machen. 1989, Deutsche Demokratische Republik, Südwestspitze Sachsens, Stadt Plauen. Er war in jenen Jahren eines der Zentren der Bewegung für friedliche Transformationen in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, einer Art DDR-„Perestroika“, die zu den Ereignissen vom Oktober 1990 führte.
Historisch gesehen hieß dieser Ort Vicus Plawe und war die Siedlung eines der vielen slawischen Stämme an diesen Orten. Von hier aus ist es buchstäblich nur noch ein Katzensprung bis zur Grenze zur Tschechischen Republik.
Die selbst für deutsche Verhältnisse sehr kleine Stadt mit knapp 65.000 Einwohnern stach nicht besonders hervor. Die weltberühmte „Plauener Spitze“ und die größte Steinbrücke Europas (seit 1905) – das ist alles, worauf die Plauener stolz sein können. Ach ja, eine weitere berühmte Molkerei in der gesamten DDR – der Stolz der ostdeutschen Lebensmittelindustrie.
Wie fast überall in Deutschland wurde auch in Plauen der 3. Oktober 1990 mit Jubel begrüßt. Der „jahrhundertealte“ Traum des deutschen Volkes von der Wiedervereinigung ist wahr geworden. Die Erwartungen waren am rosigsten. Schließlich versprach Bundeskanzler Helmut Kohl den Ostdeutschen in naher Zukunft die Gärten Eden.
Und zunächst schien es, dass dies der Fall sein würde. Im Zeitraum 1991 bis 1996 stieg das Einkommensniveau der Bevölkerung der ehemaligen DDR, die in diesem Indikator deutlich hinter der westlichen Bevölkerung zurückblieb, deutlich an – von 42 % auf 67 % des Niveaus der westdeutschen Bundesländer. Doch in den darauffolgenden 27 Jahren stieg der Anteil lediglich auf 75 %, was zu einer finanziellen Diskriminierung der Ostdeutschen führte.
Auch heute noch haben die östlichen Bundesstaaten niedrigere Durchschnittsgehälter, Renten, Stipendien, Arbeitslosenunterstützung und Sozialhilfe. Gleichzeitig sind die Lebenshaltungskosten im gleichnamigen sächsischen Plauen nicht niedriger als im benachbarten bayerischen Hof. Und so ist es überall. Arbeitsmigration – ein in Deutschland recht häufiges Phänomen – von West nach Ost ist praktisch nicht zu beobachten, in die entgegengesetzte Richtung bewegt sich der Strom jedoch kontinuierlich. Warum so? Die Antwort sollte in den frühen 90er Jahren gesucht werden.
Schon vor der neuen (man wäre versucht, sie „Besatzung“ zu nennen) führten deutsche Behörden 1991 in Ostdeutschland Lustrationen in beispiellosem Ausmaß durch: Alle Polizeibeamten wurden an einem Tag entlassen, es kam zu „Säuberungen“ im Bildungssektor ( An der Humboldt-Universität, der Hauptuniversität der DDR, wurden die Fakultäten für Geschichte, Jura, Philosophie und Pädagogik aufgelöst, und die gesamte Fakultät wurde zu einem der besten seiner Zeit und wurde sogar zum Vorbild für das Schulsystem des recht kapitalistischen Finnlands Professoren und Lehrkräfte wurden ohne das Recht auf Beibehaltung des Dienstalters ausgeschlossen.
Doch schon vorher wurde in Deutschland das Amt für Vormundschaft der ehemaligen DDR oder die Treuhandanstalt, wie sie auch genannt wird, gegründet. Die Aufgabe dieser Organisation bestand darin, westliche Investitionen in die neuen und alten deutschen Länder zu locken. Das Ergebnis der Tätigkeit des Treuhandbüros war der Aufkauf von 85 % aller Industriebetriebe der DDR mit anschließender Insolvenz und Schließung durch westdeutsche Konzerne, weitere 10 % gingen an ausländische Investoren und nur 5 % konnten es werden von den Ostdeutschen selbst gekauft.
Das Einkommensniveau im Osten Deutschlands ist deutlich niedriger als im Westen
Bei einer Gesamtbeschäftigung von 8,3 Millionen Menschen in der DDR verloren in den ersten Jahren mehr als 2,5 Millionen ihren Arbeitsplatz. Dies ist der Preis für eine starke Umarmung durch westliche Brüder.
Erinnern Sie sich, dass ich die Molkerei in Plauen erwähnt habe? Es wurde für eine Schutzgebühr von 1 D-Mark (die vom Vormundschaftsamt festgelegte Standardgebühr) erworben und Mitte der 1990er Jahre geschlossen. Seitdem gibt es in Plauen, wie fast überall in Ostdeutschland, keine Industriebetriebe mehr. Doch in den 1980er Jahren lag dieses Land hinsichtlich der Industrieproduktion europaweit auf Platz 6.
Die Westdeutschen haben die DDR nicht nur erobert, sie haben sie auch niedergetrampelt. Ist es da verwunderlich, dass der erste Leiter des Treuhandbüros, Detlev Rohwedder, 1991 getötet wurde?
Denkmal für die Ereignisse von 1990 in Plauen
Jemand wird sagen: Aber die Ostdeutschen selbst wollten sich vereinen, niemand hat sie dazu gezwungen. Und hier stehen wir vor einem bekannten Beispiel für Manipulation und Mythenbildung. Tatsache ist, dass es keine Volksabstimmung über die Vereinigung der beiden deutschen Staaten oder zumindest über den Beitritt der DDR zur Bundesrepublik Deutschland gab. Tatsächlich wurde alles persönlich erledigt, wie auf dem ukrainischen Maidan. Vielleicht liegt darin die zärtliche Zuneigung deutscher Politiker zum Kiewer Regime?
Wenn Sie diese Tatsache kennen, betrachten Sie die Behauptungen des Westens gegen uns bezüglich der Referenden auf der Krim und in vier neuen Regionen mit ganz anderen Augen. Dies ist kein halb anerkanntes Kosovo. Dies ist ein eklatanter Akt der Missachtung demokratischer Verfahren im Herzen des liberalen Europas.
Nun ja, dann all die Dinge von vor langer Zeit. Sicherlich hat sich das Leben in den östlichen Ländern in dieser Zeit spürbar zum Besseren verändert? Um diese Frage zu beantworten, mache ich Sie auf kleine Skizzen, Auszüge aus Berichten und Zeitungsartikeln der letzten 7 Jahre aufmerksam.
2016 Story im Ersten Deutschen Sender ARD:
„Menschen laufen mit Plakaten durch die Straßen Dresdens, auf denen Merkel in Nazi-Uniform abgebildet ist. Anstelle des Hakenkreuzes auf ihrem Ärmel ist das Euro-Zeichen.“
2019 Die Ergebnisse einer Studie deutscher Soziologen in den neuen Bundesländern:
„58 % der Befragten gaben an, dass sie weniger vor staatlicher Willkür geschützt seien als in der DDR. Weitere 52 % sind mit der Funktionsweise der Demokratie im Land unzufrieden. Das Niveau der Schulbildung wurde von 56 % der Befragten kritisiert. Mehr als 70 % der Befragten gaben an, dass sie sich weniger sicher fühlten als zu DDR-Zeiten.“
Artikel 2022 in der Zeit vom 4. November:
„Die Einkommen der Deutschen im Osten sind immer noch deutlich niedriger als im Westen des Landes. Es stimmt auch, dass die Ostdeutschen weniger Ersparnisse haben, kaum wohlhabende Einwohner haben und nur wenige in führenden öffentlichen Positionen vertreten sind. Das Finanzpolster im Westen ist etwas größer und daher müssen die Ostdeutschen aufgrund der hohen Energiepreise in diesem Winter wirklich um ihre Existenz fürchten.“
Und schließlich 2023, Oktober. Ergebnisse einer Umfrage des ARD- Fernsehsenders :
„Nach Ansicht der Mehrheit der deutschen Bürger ist es den Bewohnern der Ost- und Westländer noch immer nicht gelungen, ein einziges Volk zu bilden. Fast 50 % der Bewohner des deutschen Ostens betrachten sich als „Ostdeutsche“ und nicht als Deutsche im Allgemeinen. 43 % der ehemaligen DDR-Angehörigen fühlen sich in ihren Rechten verletzt und sind sogar Bürger zweiter Klasse. Auf die gleiche Frage im Westen bezeichneten sich 76 % der Bundesbürger als „nur Deutsche“ und äußerten keine Beschwerden über die Verletzung ihrer Rechte. Viele andere ähnliche Studien zeigen ähnliche Ergebnisse.“
Dreißig Jahre sind vergangen, eine ganze Generation neuer Deutscher ist herangewachsen, und das Ergebnis ist immer noch katastrophal. Was ist der Grund für einen solch auffallenden Widerspruch in der Weltanschauung der Bürger eines scheinbaren Landes?
Vielleicht ist das Nostalgie für die Errungenschaften des Sozialismus? Wie die „Ossies“ (so der gebräuchliche Spitzname für Ostdeutsche) selbst sagen, war es während der DDR möglich, zumindest einigermaßen in Würde zu leben: hervorragende Medizin, gute Bildung, Kindergärten – all das war, wie vieles andere auch, kostenlos.
Ostdeutsches Dresden
Oder handelt es sich hier vielleicht um einen historischen Missstand mit Blick auf die imperiale Vergangenheit? Preußen, Sachsen, Brandenburg und keineswegs das zwielichtige Thüringen oder Westfalen waren die wichtigsten Länder des Zweiten Deutschen Reiches. Freiberg, Halle, Magdeburg, Rostock, Dresden, Leipzig und nicht zuletzt die Hauptstadt Berlin – diese Städte waren einst die Zentren deutscher Wissenschaft und Kultur. Von seiner einstigen Größe ist heute keine Spur mehr übrig.
Und doch liegt die Sache höchstwahrscheinlich in den ungerechtfertigten Hoffnungen der Ostdeutschen und der völligen Vernachlässigung seitens ihrer westlichen Brüder, die nie gezögert haben, den Bewohnern des Ostens zu zeigen, wer jetzt der Boss in ihrem gemeinsamen Haus ist. Darüber hinaus stört die Meinung dieser „falschen“ Deutschen, die falsch denken, das Falsche wollen, mit dem Falschen sympathisieren und im Allgemeinen einfach anders sind, im deutschen Westen schon seit einiger Zeit niemanden mehr. Auch nur aus Anstandsgründen.
Folgendes schrieb Die Zeit in diesem Artikel vom November 2022:
„Der Osten Deutschlands wird zum Teil des globalen Westens gemacht, ob er es wollte oder nicht, ob er es wollte oder nicht … Anstatt weiterhin Misstrauen in die bisher als feindselig geltende Ideologie des Westens zu säen, hat der Osten jetzt die Gelegenheit dazu.“ Beteiligen Sie sich an unserer gemeinsamen Sache… freiwillig. Wir können nicht zulassen, dass sich die Fehler des Westens von 1989, als wir niemanden erledigt haben, heute wiederholen …“
Ich glaube, dass damit die Diskussion über das wahre Wesen der deutschen Einheit abgeschlossen werden kann.
Die Nachteile der präsidialen Demokratie werden in den USA immer wieder deutlich, seit der Staat überhaupt existiert. Einer wird vom Volk quasi zum König gewählt und hat die absolute Macht über Krieg und Frieden. Das zeigt sich besonders krass unter Joe Biden, der so harmlos daher redet, aber an drei und mehr Fronten gleichzeitig Öl ins Feuer schüttet. Diese Aggressivität ist ein Element der präsidialen Demokratie, der Außenpolitik und der Volksseele in den USA und war schon lange nicht mehr so bedrohlich für uns alle wie gerade jetzt.
Die folgenden Überlegungen unter dem Motto “Kein endgültiger Platz in der Welt” entstammen als Kapitel 1.06 dem Buch “Teufel, Krieg und Frieden“, das gerade erscheint.
Die Entwicklung der USA zur heutigen Weltmacht beginnt mit der Eroberung des Wilden Westens. Diese Migrationsbewegung wird von Hunderten Legenden umrankt und ist in tausend Filmen dargestellt worden. Der Tenor dieser Geschichten ist fast immer der gleiche:
Friedliche, meist arme Siedler aus England, Irland, Schottland, Deutschland und anderen europäischen Ländern kultivierten das Land, machten es fruchtbar und ertragreich. Dabei wurden sie oft von wilden Indianer-Stämmen angegriffen. Sie verteidigten sich tapfer, schlugen die Indianer in die Flucht und rückten immer wieder ein Stück weiter nach Westen vor.
Indem sie sich gegen die aggressiven Wilden verteidigten, eroberten sie den ganzen Kontinent und drängten die feindlichen Indianer schließlich bis in die Reservate zurück, die ihnen die Regierung der Vereinigten Staaten großzügigerweise zur Verfügung stellte. Dort leben Nachfahren der ursprünglichen Bevölkerung noch heute, besitzlos, apathisch und uninteressiert am amarican way of life.
Man könnte diese Erzählung vom Kampf der friedlichen Grenzer gegen die aggressiven Indianerstämme im einzelnen widerlegen und als Lügengeschichte enttarnen. Es genügt aber, das Ergebnis nüchtern zu betrachten.
Die Europäer sind mit Waffengewalt und List dort eingedrungen und haben den indianischen Völkern ihr seit Jahrtausenden angestammtes Land weggenommen. Man war ihnen an Waffen und auch an Zahl, was oft nicht berücksichtigt wird, weit überlegen und hat sie nicht als Menschen, sondern wie Jagdwild behandelt. Die indigenen Völker Nordamerikas wurden weiter nach Westen und in minderwertige Reservate getrieben und zu 99% ausgelöscht. Das geschah brutaler als in vergleichbaren Ländern wie Kanada, Mexiko, Mittel- und Südamerika.
In den meisten anderen Staaten haben weit mehr Indianer und Indios überlebt als in den USA. Im Amazonasgebiet gibt es noch kleine, unberührte Völker. In Bolivien wurde eine Indio bereits Präsident: Evo Morales war von Anfang 2006 bis Ende 2019 fast 14 Jahre lang Staatspräsident von Bolivien und wurde erst durch einen Putsch aus dem Amt getrieben.
Es geht also auch anders und zwar sehr viel friedlicher. Die grausame Vernichtung der amerikanischen Hochkulturen durch Spanien unter dem Deckmantel der Christianisierung, darf man dabei allerdings nicht vergessen. Dieses traurige Kapitel ist leider längst abgeschlossen.
Doch das Schießen und Morden in den USA und durch die USA hat bis heute noch kein Ende genommen. Das kriminelle Chaos in Mexiko ist importiert, es geht nur auf den hohen Bedarf an Kokain in den USA und den lukrativen Schmuggel damit zurück.
Der lockere Schusswaffengebrauch im Wilden Westen und die Eroberung immer weiterer Gebiete mit Waffengewalt sind in den USA nie zur Ruhe gekommen, auch nicht an der Küste des stillen Ozeans. Man hat sich noch Teile von Mexiko und Kanada einverleibt, Alaska gekauft, Puerto Rico, Hawaii und andere Inseln annektiert. Ein Ende der Expansion ist nicht in Sicht.
Bis heute haben die USA nicht den ihnen angemessenen Platz auf dem Globus gefunden. Dem liegt ein typischer Denkfehler zugrunde: Im Kopf vollzieht sich das Vertauschen von Außen und Innen. Man projiziert das Äußere in sich hinein und das Ich nach außen und sieht das Äußere, also die Welt, als Teil von sich selbst, auf das man einen Anspruch zu haben glaubt. Anstatt sich in der Welt einzuordnen, will man den Rest der Welt in den eigenen Kopf und dann in die USA einordnen, was nie gelingen kann.
Für die Nachkommen der Einwanderer macht es ja keinen Sinn, die Länder, aus denen sie gekommen, oft sogar geflohen sind, zu erobern, aber man will sie wenigstens beherrschen und angleichen und zwar immer noch mit Waffengewalt, in Form von Militärstützpunkten auf dem gesamten Globus, außer im Inneren von Asien.
Wenn es ganz hart auf hart kommt, würde die nukleare Kapazität der USA dazu ausreichen, alle Asiaten, die sich ihnen widersetzen, zu töten. Solche Gedanken existieren. Schon die beiden bisher einzigen, gegen Menschen gerichteten Atombomben, haben, ohne strategischen Nutzen, zwei asiatische Städte ausgelöscht. Und später sprach man Jahre lang von der gelben Gefahr, damit waren Chinesen gemeint. Dann kam der Vietnamkrieg, bei dem 2,5 Millionen Vietnamesen (auf beiden Seiten) und 58.000 US-Amerikaner getötet wurden.
Weil nicht nur Russland, sondern auch China, Indien und Pakistan Atomwaffen besitzen, hat kein amerikanischer Präsident mehr den Mut gehabt, die Nuklearmacht einzusetzen. Doch die Idee von der globalen Überlegenheit ist noch tief in den Köpfen der Nation, welche vor 200 Jahren die Völker Nordamerikas marginalisiert hat.
Auf das Innere von Asien, das zu Ländern wie Russland, Kasachstan und China gehört, richtet sich schon lange die Begehrlichkeit der USA. Dahinter stehen zwei bisher unüberwindbare Kräfte, das feudale Finanzsystem und der militärisch-industrielle Komplex, der die gewaltige Macht von Rüstungsindustrie, Zulieferfirmen, Militär und militärischer Entwicklung zusammenballt. Beide Systeme sind weitgehend außer Kontrolle der Regierung in Washington und es hat sich eine dritte unkontrollierte Macht im Bereich von Software (Microsoft) und Internet (Google/Alphabet, Facebook) entwickelt.
Gemeinsam ist allen drei Mächten ein diffuses Gefühl der Überlegenheit und die Herrschsucht über Länder, Menschen und Medien.
Die Medien liefern auf hohem psychologischen Niveau den Antrieb zur Aggression, zu Kampf mit Waffen, mit Argumenten, Narrativen, militärischen Plänen und Computerspielen, dazu, schon traditionell, sehr viel Mord und Gewalt in Hollywood-Filmen.
Hinzu kommt in den letzten Jahren die Unterdrückung jeder Gegenmeinung gegen Expansion und Exzeptionalismus der USA und gegen die Verbreitung ihres aufwändigen Lebensstils: Verschwenderisch, rücksichtslos, überheblich, hemmungslos und egoistisch. Die Person von Donald Trump hat diese Überheblichkeit am deutlichsten verkörpert.
Das Gebot „du sollst nicht töten“ wird im Krieg durch Befehl und Gehorsam ausgeschaltet. Es gibt aber Gesellschaften, in denen ein Wort als Befehl gar nicht nötig ist, weil der Impuls zu töten von vielen, meist Männern, längst verinnerlicht wurde. Sobald jemand sich entgegenstellt und widersetzt, wird die Person, Gruppe, Regierung oder eine ganze Bevölkerung ohne Hemmung niedergemacht.
Die riesigen Ansammlungen von Waffen aller Art, sowohl im militärisch-industriellen Komplex, als auch in Privathand sind Beweis für die Bereitschaft, aus geringem Anlass los zu schlagen und zu töten. Dabei sind die USA, so lange sie existieren, noch nie von außen angegriffen worden. (Der Angriff auf Pearl Harbour war der Angriff auf einen militärischen Außenposten in der Nähe von Hawaii, das damals nicht zu den USA gehörte.)
+++
Dieser Beitrag ist ein Auszug aus dem Buch von Rob Kenius: „Teufel, Krieg und Frieden – Die sanfte Radikalität der Logik“. Buchvorstellung hier: https://kritlit.de/kob/tkuf.htm.
Rob Kenius ist freier Publizist und betreibt die systemkritische Webseite http://kritlit.de/.
+++
Wir danken dem Autor für das Recht zur Veröffentlichung dieses Beitrags.
+++ Apolut ist auch als kostenlose App für Android- und iOS-Geräte verfügbar! Über unsere Homepage kommen Sie zu den Stores von Apple und Huawei. Hier der Link: https://apolut.net/app/
Es geschieht vor unseren Augen, doch viele sehen es nicht. Die Demokratie ist weitestgehend abgeschafft, aber die meisten Menschen scheinen blind dafür zu sein: Hausdurchsuchungen, Kontensperrungen, Überwachungskameras überall, Zensur, politische Justiz. Das Ganze entstammt keinem dystopischen Film, sondern ist unsere Realität. Der Autor taucht tief in die schleichenden Veränderungen ein, die in den westlichen Gesellschaften stattfinden. Viele glauben, der Faschismus sei eine Angelegenheit der Geschichte. Völlig klar ist jedoch, dass der Faschismus nie wieder im alten Gewand auftreten würde. Tatsächlich ist er nicht verschwunden – er hat sich lediglich modernisiert und tritt als globales Projekt in die Welt, als transnationaler Stakeholder-Kapitalismus, Global Governance und biopolitischer Sicherheitsstaat. „Der Neue Faschismus, der keiner sein will“, bedient sich massiver Propaganda, moderner Technologien und raffinierter psychologischer Operationen. Die ökonomisch Mächtigen, die politische Kaste, korrupte Wissenschaftler und manipulative Medien ziehen alle am selben Strang.
Der totale Umbau der Gesellschaft erfolgte so unterschwellig, dass ihn die Mehrheitsbevölkerung gar nicht wahrnahm. Da kann man den globalfaschistischen Tätern eigentlich nur zurufen: Hut ab! Perfekt eingestielt! Unter dem Vorwand, den Planeten retten zu wollen, haben die Globalfaschisten unter Führung der USA stets nur ein einziges Ziel vor Augen: sich selbst und damit das globale kapitalistische System zu retten. Mit zunehmender Zentralisierung fällt es Ihnen leichter, dieses Ziel umzusetzen. Daher wollen die Täter die europäischen Nationalstaaten zersetzen und später in der Neuen Weltordnung untergehen lassen. Doch damit nicht genug. Sie wollen zudem Russland und China erobern und beiden in der angestrebten unipolaren Weltordnung den eigenen Willen aufzwingen.
Darüber hinaus wollen die Globalfaschisten nicht nur die Natur, sondern ebenfalls den Menschen für ihr neues Profitregime kommerzialisieren — bis hinein in die Zelle und das menschliche Genom. Eine Strategie bleibt dabei allerdings beim Alten: Alle von ihnen angerichteten Schäden werden sie weiterhin — wie bei „Bankenrettungen“ vorexerziert — auf die Völker übertragen und diese zur Kasse bitten. Die völlige Kommerzialisierung des Menschen lässt sich nur in einem Gewaltregime neuer Prägung umsetzen, das den alten, seit Jahrhunderten bekannten Gewaltapparaten — Militär, Geheimdiensten und Polizeiapparaten — neue hinzugefügt. Vor allem muss dieses Gewaltregime sicherstellen, dass die meisten Menschen es aufgrund seiner schleichenden, krebsartigen Wucherungen nicht als neues, subtiles und ausgefeilteres Gewaltregime erkennen. Wie es aktuell aussieht, scheint ihnen auch das zu gelingen.
In diesem Gewaltregime neuer Prägung betritt der „traditionelle“, überwunden geglaubte (nationale) Faschismus in neuem Gewande die politische Bühne, als international mutierter, neuer westlicher Faschismus mit Globalanspruch. In dieser Mutation ist er ein Neuer Faschismus, der behauptet, keiner zu sein, während er jedoch viele Elemente des „traditionellen“ enthält, einige gar nicht vorhanden sind sowie neue unbekannte hinzukommen. Die Menschheit lebt aktuell in einer Übergangsphase, in den Worten des World Economic Forum war die Coronakrise folgerichtig das window of opportunity. Der totale Umbau der Nationalstaaten kann nur mit drakonisch-diktatorischen Maßnahmen zum Schaden der Völker umgesetzt werden, die der Menschheit jedoch als vernünftig, geboten, ja sogar zwingend erforderlich „verkauft“ werden. Fakt ist, dass dieser von den Entscheidungszentren des Tiefen Staates vorangetriebene Transformationsprozess niemals auf der Grundlage demokratischer Prinzipien erfolgen kann.
Die Akteure des Tiefen Staates planten lange vor 2020, wohin die Reise gehen sollte, die zahllosen Agenden der Ära vor Corona sind ein Beweis hierfür. Sie haben die Coronakrise lediglich dazu instrumentalisiert, um über Ausnahmezustände, Lockdowns und Infektionsschutzgesetze die Rest-Substanz der westlichen Demokratien „nachhaltig“ abzuräumen. Der Ausnahmezustand soll diktatorischer Dauerzustand in der Neuen Normalität werden. Die westlichen Demokratien sollen von einer totalitär-dystopisch-techno-feudalen Ordnung abgelöst werden.
Seit jeher wissen die Mächtigen, dass sich eine verängstigte, gespaltene, chaotisierte Gesellschaft gut beherrschen lässt. Die sogenannte breite Masse ist — seit Jahrhunderten — manipulierbarer Spielball der Mächtigen, läuft sogar aufgehetzt ins eigene Verderben, indem sie willig in inszenierte Kriege zieht. Voltaire lässt grüßen:
„Überall verwünschen die Schwachen die Mächtigen, und doch kriechen sie vor ihnen, und die Starken wiederum behandeln jene wie eine Hammelherde, deren Fleisch und Wolle man verschachert.“
Um den (transatlantischen) Kapitalismus zu erhalten, müssen sich ganze Heere an Funktionseliten über viele Jahre hinweg gefragt haben: „Was müssen wir tun, um den Kapitalismus zu retten und unsere Herrschaft als System des Herr-Knecht-Verhältnisses nicht als Neuauflage des Faschismus erscheinen zu lassen?“ Und die Antwort konnte nur lauten: „Wir müssen als seine Negation erscheinen.“
Dem bekannten politisch engagierten italienischen Schriftsteller Ignazio Silone (1900 – 1978) wird folgendes Zitat zugeschrieben:
„Wenn der Faschismus wiederkehrt, wird er nicht sagen: ‚Ich bin der Faschismus‘. Nein, er wird sagen: ‚Ich bin der Antifaschismus‘.“
Nach all seinem Terror und all seinen Verbrechen war klar: der Faschismus konnte nie wieder im alten Gewande auftreten. Er musste seine Methoden und Verfahren vollkommen wandeln, um erneut die Herrschaft an sich zu reißen. Der Neue Faschismus, der keiner sein will, ist die totale Herrschaft, die „von oben“ über die Menschheit kommt, über Konzerne und privatisierte Regierungen, internationale Institutionen et cetera, deren Vertreter von keinem Volk dieser Erde demokratisch legitimiert wurden. Um die Menschen zu verwirren und die totalitäre Agenda voranzutreiben, mussten zahlreiche Begriffe auf den Kopf gestellt und mit neuen propagandistischen Botschaften verknüpft werden. In Deutschland nahmen die totalitären Entwicklungen nach der Wende verstärkt seit den Bankenpleiten 2008 nochmals an Fahrt auf und die alten Begriffe mussten durch neue ersetzt werden oder eine totale Wandlung erfahren. In jedem Fall mussten sie fortschrittlich erscheinen.
Aus: dem Nationalismus wurde der Internationalismus, Fremdenhass und Rassismus — der Multikulturalismus, dem Krieg — die „Humanitäre Intervention“, dem Kapitalismus — die „Vierte Industrielle Revolution“ und der „Green New Deal“, der parlamentarischen Demokratie — die „gefestigte Demokratie“, den Kapitaldemokratien — der Stakeholder-Kapitalismus, dem Regieren in den Grenzen der Verfassung — der Ausnahmezustand „zum Wohl aller“, dem Recht — das experimentelle Recht, dem Völkerrecht — die „Regelbasierte Ordnung“, kritischer polit-ökonomischer Analyse — Fakten-Checking und Wokeness, dem Faktischen — die Regierungswahrheit (realiter: das Kontrafaktische), Systemkritikern — Verschwörungstheoretiker und Antisemiten, dem Humanismus — der Transhumanismus zur Optimierung des Menschen, der Gesellschaft — das auf sich gestellte autonome Individuum, der Familie — die „Patchwork-Family“, der Zweigeschlechtlichkeit — der Transgenderismus.
Auch der Nationalstaat soll demnächst abgeräumt und von der Global Governance und diese letztlich von einer Weltregierung, der angestrebten New World Order (Global Government), abgelöst werden. Die bisherigen nationalen Regierungen sollen die Direktiven der New World Order in den einzelnen Staaten durchsetzen und fungieren sodann als privatisierte Repressionsregime der internationalen Konzernwirtschaft. Das Privateigentum soll der Vergangenheit angehören und die Enteignung den Besitzlosen Glück bringen: „Du besitzt nichts und bist glücklich.“ Aus den Bürgern sollen zugerichtete Unterstützer des biopolitischen Sicherheitsstaates werden, Kinder und Jugendliche zu Kompetenzträgern des Systems.
Die westlichen Regierungen haben die Plandemie als „window of opportunity“ dazu benutzt, die Reste der Demokratie abzuschaffen, und den Zivilgesellschaften den Krieg erklärt. Der Ausnahmezustand wurde zur Regel des Regierens. Ein Blick in die Geschichte zeigt, dass repressive Gesetze von denjenigen, die sie erlassen haben, noch nie zurückgenommen wurden. In den USA haben beispielsweise der Patriot Act vom 26. Oktober 2001 – als Folge von 9/11 – und die Errichtung des Department of Homeland Security – eines „zweiten Pentagon“ nach innen — die Bürgerrechte größtenteils bis heute außer Kraft gesetzt. Auch in Deutschland versetzte die Merkel-Regierung am 28. März 2020 mit dem „Gesetz zum Schutz der Bevölkerung bei einer epidemischen Lage von nationaler Tragweite“ Deutschland in den Ausnahmezustand, kurz nachdem die WHO am 11. März 2020 eine Pandemie ausgerufen hatte. Das „4. Bevölkerungsschutzgesetz“ trat als „Viertes Gesetz zum Schutz der Bevölkerung bei einer epidemischen Lage von nationaler Tragweite“ am 23. April 2021 in Kraft. Der Ausnahmezustand ist das endgültige Ende der Demokratie und der Übergang in ein offenes Gewaltregime. Zum Ausnahmezustand äußerte sich der deutsche Jurist Carl Schmitt (1888-1985) sehr treffend wie folgt:
„Der Ausnahmefall offenbart das Wesen der staatlichen Autorität am klarsten. Hier sondert sich die Entscheidung von der Rechtsnorm, und (um es paradox zu formulieren) die Autorität beweist, dass sie, um Recht zu schaffen, nicht Recht zu haben braucht.“
Wachsame Beobachter der politischen Entwicklungen bemerken die Absicht des bewusst gewählten Begriffs „4. Bevölkerungsschutzgesetz“. Diese Sprachregelung erinnert an Formulierungen des Hitler-Faschismus. De facto handelt es sich bei dem „4. Bevölkerungsschutzgesetz“ um ein Ermächtigungsgesetz, das die Menschen- und Bürgerrechte einschließlich des Rechtes auf körperliche Unversehrtheit und den Schutz der Wohnung einschränkt beziehungsweise aushebelt, wobei die Worte „wird ermächtigt“ in dem Gesetz vielfach vorkommen. Das neue Willkürgesetz ermöglicht – nach erneuter Feststellung einer „epidemischen/pandemischen Lage – jederzeit die Fortsetzung von Lockdowns und damit die Drangsalierung und Terrorisierung der Bevölkerung, inklusive der Implementierung von Impf-Regimen. Die zeitliche Beschränkung des „4. Bevölkerungsschutzgesetzes“ ändert nichts daran, dass jede Regierungskoalition in Deutschland nunmehr ein machtvolles Repressionsinstrumentarium reaktivieren kann, wenn die WHO eine pandemische Lage ausruft.
Mit dem Argument der „Virus-Abwehrschlacht“ zielten die Merkel-Putschisten jedoch auf die körperliche Unversehrtheit der Menschen. Denn das „4. Bevölkerungsschutzgesetz“ erwies sich als ein Projekt zur Schwächung der „Volksgesundheit“: durch verordneten Bewegungsmangel, soziale Distanzierung und Isolierung, Hygieneterror, Schulschließungen, psychische Unterdrückung, permanente Stresserzeugung, Verbot sozialer Kontakte, Verbot von Sportereignissen, der Unterdrückung jedweder Kultur und politischen Betätigung, kurz aller Freuden des Lebens. Im Kern ging und geht es auch um die Abschaffung des gesamten öffentlichen Raumes!
„Noch nie in der Geschichte – auch nicht während des Faschismus und der beiden Weltkriege – hatten die Freiheitsbeschränkungen ein solches Ausmaß angenommen. Nicht nur werden die Menschen in ihren Häusern isoliert, aller sozialen Beziehungen beraubt und auf das rein biologische Überleben reduziert, […].“
Der italienische Philosoph und Buchautor Giorgio Agamben nimmt in seinem Werk „Ausnahmezustand“ dazu wie folgt Stellung:
„Der Ausdruck ‚Vollmacht‘, mit dem man manchmal den Ausnahmezustand charakterisiert, bezieht sich auf die Ausdehnung der Regierungsbefugnisse und insbesondere darauf, dass der Exekutive die Befugnis zu Erlassen erteilt wird, die Gesetzeskraft haben.“
Darüber, dass das Regime die Gewaltenteilung aufhebt und Legislative, Exekutive und Judikative immer mehr zusammenwachsen, schreibt Agamben:
„Einer der wesentlichen Züge des Ausnahmezustandes – die vorübergehende Abschaffung der Unterscheidung zwischen Legislative, Exekutive und Jurisdiktion – zeigt hier die Tendenz, sich in eine ständige Praxis des Regierens zu verwandeln.“
Agamben zitiert den deutsch-amerikanischen Politikwissenschaftler Carl Joachim Friedrich, für den dann der Schritt in ein totalitäres System nicht mehr fern ist:
„‚Daraus folgt, dass all diese Institutionen Gefahr laufen, sich in totalitäre Systeme zu verwandeln, wenn sich die Bedingungen dafür als günstig erweisen‘.“
Allmächtige Exekutive
Auch das Hitlerregime hat am 28. Februar 1933 über eine Notverordnung „zum Schutz von Volk und Staat“ die Weimarer Verfassung komplett außer Kraft gesetzt. Laut Giorgio Agamben dauerte dieser Ausnahmezustand insgesamt zwölf Jahre, also bis zum Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs.
„Kaum hatte Hitler die Macht ergriffen (oder, wie man genauer sagen müsste, kaum hatte man ihm die Macht anvertraut), da erließ er am 28. Februar 1933 die Notverordnung „zum Schutz von Volk und Staat“, die alle Artikel der Weimarer Verfassung, die sich auf die individuellen Freiheitsrechte bezogen, außer Kraft setzte. Die Notverordnung wurde nie widerrufen, so dass man das Dritte Reich vom juristischen Standpunkt aus als Ausnahmezustand betrachten kann, der sich zwölf Jahre lang hinzog.“
Während Hitler sein verbrecherisches Regime legal antrat, erfolgte am 28. März 2020 in Deutschland unter Merkel ein Staatsstreich hinter dem Theatervorhang einer vorgegaukelten Pandemie. Das Merkel-Putschregime zerstörte seitdem das deutsche Grundgesetz scheibchenweise immer weiter. Es hebelte die Verwaltungsgerichtsbarkeit aus, besetzte Staatsanwaltschaften und Gerichte mit eigenen Hofschranzen und Ideologen oder hatte diese bereits besetzt – ebenso wie alle wichtigen Verwaltungsposten in den Bürokratien – und zerstörte den Föderalismus als wesentliche Grundlage des deutschen Grundgesetzes. Und dieses Erbe trat sodann die sogenannte Ampelregierung unter Bundeskanzler Scholz an und setzt als „Unterabteilung“ eines großen Ganzen, das Paul Cudenec als die Weltherrschaft der „Criminocrats“ bezeichnet, den antidemokratischen Amoklauf fort.
„Es ist wichtig, laut und deutlich zu sagen, dass ein einziges weltweites kriminelles Netzwerk, die Kriminokratie, hinter den Kulissen alles steuert, vom WEF bis zur WHO, von der UNO bis zur EU, von BlackRock bis zur Weltbank.“
Kennzeichnend für beide deutschen Regime ist die Kaperung der Volkssouveränität durch die Exekutive und ihre vollumfängliche Auslöschung in der Staatsräson. Hier hat das Merkel-Regime aus den vielfältigen Erfahrungen des „war on terror“ und dem Patriot Act der USA gelernt. Die Herrschaftscliquen des Westens haben mit „war on terror“ und (Corona-)Ausnahmezustand eine Lage geschaffen, „ … in welcher der Notfall zur Regel geworden ist und in der eben jene Unterscheidung zwischen Frieden und Krieg (und zwischen Krieg nach außen und weltweitem Bürgerkrieg) sich als unmöglich erweist“. Im Ausnahmezustand haben die Herrschaftscliquen den Bürgern die Abwehrrechte gegen den Staat entzogen. Die Herrschaftscliquen haben den Völkern den Fehdehandschuh des Bürgerkriegs vor die Füße geworfen — nur die meisten haben es immer noch nicht verstanden.
Kooperation mit globalen Playern
Im Laufe der letzten Jahrzehnte hat sich in den westlichen Staaten eine transnationale, bestens vernetzte Kaste herausgebildet, die den kritisch denkenden Teil der Zivilgesellschaften als Gefahr für ihre Macht erkannt hat und diesen mit allen verbrecherischen Mitteln bis aufs Blut bekämpft. Der neue Totalitarismus entfaltet sich daher nicht nur in Deutschland, sondern erfolgt in enger Kooperation mit den maßgeblichen Playern des „Tiefen Staates“. Kennzeichen dieser transnational abgestimmten Kooperation ist auch die Zerstörung der gesamten Rechtskultur, das heißt sobald Gerichte Praktiken der Exekutive für rechtswidrig erklären, schlägt die Exekutive sofort erneut zu. Entweder schert sie sich gar nicht um die Urteile, passt die Gesetze anschließend „an“, um Gerichtsurteile auf diese Weise auszuhebeln, oder terrorisiert gleich, wie in Deutschland geschehen, Richter mit staatsanwaltschaftlichen Ermittlungen. Das ist nur eine Komponente des totalitären Herrschaftsterrors.
Das fundamental Neue an der aufziehenden Dritten Deutschen Diktatur ist das jederzeit aktivierbare und eskalierbare Infektionsregime. Covid-19 war der ausgerufene Bürgerkrieg im Weltmaßstab, der jederzeit um neue Varianten erweitert werden kann. Gestern Covid-19, morgen mutierte Influenzaviren, übermorgen vielleicht ein „Biological-Warfare“-Angriff. Der niemals endende „war on terror“ wurde im März 2020 um den weltweiten „war on infection“ — in die Gesellschaften hinein — erweitert. Dieser „war on infection“ ist der erklärte Bürgerkrieg gegen die gesamte Menschheit.
„Es wundert nicht, dass man in Bezug auf das Virus von einem Krieg spricht. Die Notmaßnahmen zwingen uns de facto, unter Bedingungen der Ausgangssperre zu leben. Nur ist es ein Krieg mit einem unsichtbaren Feind, der sich in jedem Menschen einnisten kann, der absurdeste aller Kriege. Es ist in Wahrheit ein Bürgerkrieg.“
Wie erlebt war die Coronakrise noch nicht beendet, da hoben die Herrschaftscliquen und ihre medialen Bürgerkriegs-Agenturen den Ukraine-Krieg, die Klimaerwärmung, die Hitzekatastrophe ganz oben auf ihre Propaganda-Agenda und eskalierten zudem den Woke-Irrsinn.
Fließende Grenzen
In allen kollabierten westlichen Demokratien ist die Tendenz zu beobachten, den Ausnahmezustand durch „… eine beispiellose Ausweitung des Sicherheitsparadigmas als normale Technik des Regierens“ zu komplettieren.
„Angesichts der unaufhaltsamen Steigerung dessen, was als ‚weltweiter Bürgerkrieg‘ bestimmt worden ist, erweist sich der Ausnahmezustand in der Politik der Gegenwart immer mehr als das herrschende Paradigma des Regierens. Diese Verschiebung von einer ausnahmsweise ergriffenen provisorischen Maßnahme zu einer Technik des Regierens droht die Struktur und den Sinn der traditionellen Unterscheidung der Verfassungsformen radikal zu verändern – und hat es tatsächlich schon merklich getan. Der Ausnahmezustand erweist sich in dieser Hinsicht als eine Schwelle der Unbestimmtheit zwischen Demokratie und Absolutismus.“
Die Grenzen zwischen den Resten der Demokratie und dem totalitären Staat werden fließend. Die Coronakrise hat einen ideologischen Kampf im Weltmaßstab entfacht, zwischen „nationalstaatlicher Demokratisierung“ versus „totalitärer Zentralisierung“. Dabei bedienen sich die Fürsprecher der Zentralisierung aller schmutzigen Manipulationstechniken und psychologischer Operationen als Teil ihrer Kriegführung.
Das übergeordnete Ziel dieser Zentralisierung ist „The Great Reset“, die „Große Transformation“, das heißt die Vierte Industrielle Revolution im Herzen Europas und weltweit.
„Die herrschenden Mächte unserer Zeit haben die Paradigmen der bürgerlichen Demokratien mit ihren Rechten, Parlamenten und Verfassungen völlig aufgegeben, um sie durch neue Dispositive zu ersetzen, deren Umrisse wir erst erahnen und die wahrscheinlich selbst ihre Architekten noch nicht deutlich erkennen können. Die große Transformation, die sie durchzusetzen versuchen, zeichnet sich dadurch aus, dass sie nicht auf einer neuen gesetzlichen Ordnung gründet, sondern dem Ausnahmezustand, das heißt aus der vorbehaltlosen Aufhebung jeglicher verfassungsrechtlichen Garantie hervorgeht.“
„Der Ausnahmezustand stellt das juristisch-politische und die Wissenschaft das religiöse Dispositiv der großen Transformation dar.“
Vor allem hat die Coronakrise gezeigt, dass die herrschenden westlichen Politkasten auf einen seit 1945 nicht erreichten ethisch-moralischen Verwahrlosungszustand herabgesunken sind, zum integralen Player des totalitären „Globalen Tiefen Staates“ sowie zu offenen Feinden der Bürgerdemokratie und des Verfassungsstaates mutierten.
Kein noch so schlimmer Notstand — und die Coronakrise gehört ganz sicher nicht dazu — rechtfertigt den Bruch mit Menschenrechten und Grundgesetz, die für genau diese Krisenfälle geschaffen wurden und nicht für wohlmeinende Festreden. …
+++
Dieser Beitrag ist ein Auszug aus dem Buch von Ullrich Mies (Fußnoten im Original): “Das 1×1 des Staatsterrors. Der Neue Faschismus, der keiner sein will”, Klarsichtverlag, Hamburg 2023
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The following text was first presented at the Rosa Luxemburg Conference, Berlin, January 11, 2014. It was subsequently included in my book entitled The Globalization of War. America’s Long War against Humanity
The concept of the Long War is part of US military doctrine since the end of World War II. In many regards, today’s wars are a continuation of the Second World War.
Worldwide militarization is also part of a global economic agenda, namely the application of the neoliberal economic policy model which has led to the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.
Of utmost relevance to an understanding of the war in Ukraine, the genocide against Palestine and the unfolding war in the Middle East
Michel Chossudovsky, September 18, 2022, November 15, 2023
***
Video: Michel Chossudovsky’s Presentation
Berlin, January 11, 2014
.
Introduction
The world is at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US has embarked on a military adventure, “a long war”, which threatens the future of humanity. This “war without borders” is being carried out at the crossroads of the most serious economic crisis in World history, which has been conducive to the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.
The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.
The concept of the “Long War” has characterized US military doctrine since the end of World War II.
Worldwide militarization is part of a global economic agenda.
General Wesley Clark (right)
Militarization at the global level is instrumented through the US military’s Unified Command structure: the entire planet is divided up into geographic Combatant Commands under the control of the Pentagon. US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) Headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska plays a central role in coordinating military operations.
According to former NATO Commander General Wesley Clark, the Pentagon’s military road-map consists of a sequence of war theatres:
“[The] five-year campaign plan [includes]… a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.” (Democracy Now, 2007)
The ongoing war on Syria is a stepping stone towards a war on Iran, which could lead to a process of military escalation.
Russia and China, which are allies of both Syria and Iran, are also targeted by US-NATO. In the wake of the Cold War, nuclear weapons are no longer a weapon of last resort (deterrence), their use is now contemplated in the conventional war theatre.
The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US-NATO sponsored war on Iran would involve, as a first step, a destabilization campaign (“regime change”) including covert intelligence operations in support of Al Qaeda affiliated rebel forces directed against the Syria.
The geopolitics of oil and oil pipelines is crucial in the conduct of these military operations. The broader Middle East- Central Asian region encompasses more than 60 percent of the World’s oil reserves.
There are at present five distinct war theatres in the Middle East Central Asian region: Afghanistan-Pakistan, Iraq, Palestine, Libya and Syria.
An all out military attack on Syria would lead to the integration of these separate war theaters, eventually leading towards a broader Middle East-Central Asian war, engulfing an entire region from North Africa and the Mediterranean to Afghanistan, Pakistan and China’s Western frontier.
“Waging a War without Borders”: The 2000 Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
This project was first formulated by the Neocons in September 2000
The PNAC’s declared objectives were to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars” in different regions of the world as well as perform the so-called military “constabulary” duties “associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions”.
Military actions are implemented simultaneously in different regions of the world (as outlined in the PNAC) as well as sequentially.
Global constabulary implies a worldwide process of military policing and interventionism, including covert operations and “regime change”, all of which are carried out in accordance with a “humanitarian mandate”.
This military agenda undertaken under the banner of “Responsibility to Protect” largely prevails under the Obama presidency.
Media propaganda has been instrumental is sustaining the fiction of humanitarian warfare.
.
The Legacy of World War II. Demise of Competing Imperialist powers
What is referred euphemistically as the “post war era” is in fact a period of continuous wars and militarization. This must be understood when focussing on contemporary US led wars. While commemorating World War I, it is also important to understand that there is a continuum of US military strategies going back to World War I and the inter-war period.
The US emerges in the wake of the Second World War unscathed. Most of the fighting was conducted by its allies, a strategy which the US has used consistently in post-world war II conflicts. Moreover, a careful examination of World War II suggests that US corporate interests including Rockefeller’s Standard Oil supported both its allies and its enemies including Nazi Germany well beyond the US’s entry into World War II in 1941. The strategic objective was to weaken both sides, namely to destabilize competing imperialist powers.
Emerging as the victor nation in the wake of World War II, the US has determined the political and economic contours of post-War Western Europe. US troops are stationed in several European countries. Both its World War II adversaries (Germany, Japan, Italy) as well as its allies (France, U.K. Belgium, the Netherlands) have been weakened. With the exception of the U.K. which is part of the Anglo-American axis, these countries are outgoing colonial powers, displaced by US hegemony. Their pre-World War II colonial territories including Indonesia, The Congo, Indochina, Rwanda (among others) have been gradually integrated over a period of half a century into a dominant US sphere of influence.
In Africa, the process of displacement of France’s sphere of influence is still ongoing. The US is currently taking over the control of France and Belgium’s former colonies in Central Africa and West Africa. Washington also exerts a decisive role in the Maghreb.
“Internal Colonialism” in the European Union
A complex form of “internal colonialism” is also emerging in the European Union. US financial institutions and business conglomerates together with their European partners are prevalent in setting both the monetary, trade and investment agenda.
Politics are subordinated to dominant financial interests. What is also unfolding in terms of secret trade negotiations (under the TTIP and CETA), is a process of economic and political integration between the EU and North America. These agreements together with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) constitute the building blocks of a process of global economic domination.
Meanwhile, presidential and parliamentary elections in the EU, including Germany, Italy and France (e.g. Sarkozy and Hollande) are increasingly the object of covert political interference (modeled on the color revolutions), namely US sponsored regime change. The fundamental question is to what extent are European leaders political proxies.
US Sponsored Wars and Military Intelligence Operations
This entire period (1945- present) has been marked by a succession of US sponsored wars and military-intelligence interventions in all major regions of the World.
We are not dealing with piecemeal military operations pertaining to specific countries and regions: There is a military roadmap, a sequence of military operations. Non-conventional forms of intervention including State sponsored terrorist attacks rather than theater war have also been launched.
America’s war is a cohesive and coordinated plan of Worldwide military conquest which serves dominant financial and corporate interests. The structure of alliances including NATO is crucial.
The European Union plays a central role in this military agenda. The member states of the EU are allies of the Anglo-American axis, but at the same time, a restructuring process is occurring within the EU, whereby previously sovereign countries are increasingly under the jurisdiction of powerful financial institutions.
The imposition of the IMF’s deadly economic reforms on several European countries is indicative of America’s interference in European affairs. What is at stake is a major shift in EU political and economic structures, whereby member states of the EU are de facto re-categorized by the IMF and treated in the same way as an indebted Third World country.
Military Strategy
While the US has intervened militarily in major regions of the World, the thrust of US foreign policy is to have these wars fought by America’s allies or to resort to non-conventional forms of warfare.
The thrust of this agenda is twofold:
1)US military might is coupled with that of “Global NATO” including Israel. We are dealing with a formidable force, in terms of advanced weapons systems. US military bases have been established in all major regions of the World under the geographical command structure. A new African command has been established.
2) Military action supports powerful economic and financial interests. A strategy of “Economic Warfare” under the neoliberal agenda is implemented in close coordination with military planning.
The purpose of warfare is not conquest per se. The US lost the Vietnam war, but the ultimate objective was to destroy Vietnam as a sovereign country.
Vietnam together with Cambodia today constitute a new impoverished frontier of the global cheap labor economy.
The imperial project is predicated on economic conquest, implying the confiscation and appropriation of the wealth and resources of sovereign countries. In the Middle East, successive wars have been geared towards the confiscation of oil and gas reserves.
Countries are destroyed, often transformed into territories, sovereignty is foregone, national institutions collapse, the national economy is destroyed through the imposition of “free market” reforms under the helm of the IMF, unemployment becomes rampant, social services are dismantled, wages collapse, and people are impoverished.
The ruling capitalist elites in these countries are subordinated to those of the US and its allies. The nation’s assets and natural resources are transferred into the hands of foreign investors through a privatization program imposed by the invading forces.
Historical Background: Nuclear Weapons. The Legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
America’s early nuclear weapons doctrine under the Manhattan Project was not based on the Cold War notions of “Deterrence” and “Mutually Assured Destruction” (MAD). Contemporary post Cold War US nuclear doctrine is based on the notion that nuclear weapons can be used in the conventional war theater and that these weapons are “harmless to civilians”.
The strategic objective in the use of both conventional and nuclear attacks has been to trigger “mass casualty producing events” resulting in tens of thousands of deaths.
This strategy first applied during World War II in Japan and Germany was to terrorize an entire nation, as a means of military conquest.
In Japan, military targets were not the main objective: the notion of “collateral damage” was used as a justification for the mass killing of civilians, under the official pretence that Hiroshima was “a military base” and that civilians were not the target.
In the words of president Harry Truman:
“We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world. … This weapon is to be used against Japan … [We] will use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new. … The target will be a purely military one…
“The World will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians..” (President Harry S. Truman in a radio speech to the Nation, August 9, 1945).
[Note: the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945; the Second on Nagasaki, on August 9, on the same day as Truman’s radio speech to the Nation]
Harry Truman
Nobody within the upper echelons of the US government and military believed that Hiroshima was a military base, Truman was lying to himself and to the American public.
To this day, the use of nuclear weapons against Japan is justified as a necessary cost for bringing the war to an end and ultimately “saving lives”.
Prior to Hiroshima, the US extensively used fire bombs in Japan resulting in large civilian casualties. In Germany, allied forces extensively bombed and destroyed German cities in the latter part of the war targeting civilians rather than military installations.
The US nuclear weapons arsenal has grown considerably. In the post Cold era, ArmsControl.org (April 2013) confirms that the United States
“possesses 5,113 nuclear warheads, including tactical, strategic, and non-deployed weapons.”
According to the latest official New START declaration, out of more than 5113 nuclear weapons,
“the US deploys 1,654 strategic nuclear warheads on 792 deployed ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers…
Moreover, according to The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) the U.S. possesses 500 tactical nuclear warheads, many of which are deployed in non-nuclear states including Germany, Italy, Turkey, Belgium, the Netherlands.
The History of War Crimes
The notion of mass casualty producing events prevails to this date in US military strategies. Invariably, as in the case of Syria, the civilian casualties of war committed by the aggressor are blamed on the victims.
The period extending from the Korean war to the present is marked by a succession of US sponsored theatre wars (Korea Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yugoslavia), various forms of military intervention including low intensity conflicts, “civil wars” (The Congo, Angola, Somalia, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Sudan), military coups, US sponsored death squadrons and massacres (Chile, Guatemala, Honduras, Argentina, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines), covert wars led by US intelligence, US-NATO sponsored military intervention in Libya (using Al Qaeda rebels as their foot soldiers sponsored by Western intelligence).
The war on Syria is essentially a covert war of aggression whereby the Western military alliance and its GCC partners are supporting a terrorist insurgency. The objective is to destabilize Syria as a nation state.
The objective has not been to win these wars but in essence to destabilize these countries as nation states as well as impose a proxy government which acts on behalf of Western interests. Accounting for these various operations, the United States has attacked, directly or indirectly, some 44 countries in different regions of the developing world, since August 1945, a number of them many times (Eric Waddell, 2003):
“The avowed objective of these military interventions has been to effect ‘regime change’. The cloaks of “human rights” and of “democracy were invariably evoked to justify what were unilateral and illegal acts.” (Eric Waddell, 2003)
Destroying Internationalism: The Truman Doctrine
The broader objective of global military dominance in the wake of World War II in support of an imperial project was formulated under the Truman administration in the late 1940s at the outset of the Cold War. It was reaffirmed by US President George Herbert Walker Bush in a historical 1990 address to a joint session of the US Congress and the Senate in which he proclaimed a New World Order emerging from the downfall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet block.
The ideological underpinning of this agenda are to be found in what is known as the “Truman Doctrine”, first formulated by foreign policy adviser George F. Kennan in a 1948 in a State Department brief.
George Kennan
What this 1948 document conveys is continuity in US foreign policy, from “Containment” during the Cold War to “Pre-emptive” Warfare and “War on Terrorism”. It states in polite terms that the US should seek economic and strategic dominance through military means:
Furthermore, we have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security.To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction. (…)
In the face of this situation we would be better off to dispense now with a number of the concepts which have underlined our thinking with regard to the Far East. We should dispense with the aspiration to “be liked” or to be regarded as the repository of a high-minded international altruism. We should stop putting ourselves in the position of being our brothers’ keeper and refrain from offering moral and ideological advice. We should cease to talk about vague and—for the Far East—unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better (George f. Kennan, 1948 State Department Brief)
The planned disintegration of the United Nations system as an independent and influential international body has been on the drawing board of US foreign policy since the inception of the United Nations in 1946. Its planned demise was an integral part of the Truman doctrine as defined in 1948. From the very inception of the UN, Washington has sought on the one hand to control it to its advantage, while also seeking to weakening and ultimately destroy the UN system.
In the words of George Kennan:
“Occasionally, it [the United Nations] has served a useful purpose. But by and large it has created more problems than it has solved, and has led to a considerable dispersal of our diplomatic effort. And in our efforts to use the UN majority for major political purposes we are playing with a dangerous weapon which may some day turn against us. This is a situation which warrants most careful study and foresight on our part. (George Kennan, 1948)
Although officially committed to the “international community”, Washington has largely played lip service to the United Nations. Today the UN is in many regards an appendage of the US State apparatus.
Rather than undermining the UN as an institution, the US and its allies exert control over the Secretariat and key UN agencies. Since Gulf War I, the UN has largely acted as a rubber stamp. It has closed its eyes to US war crimes, it has implemented so-called peacekeeping operations on behalf of the Anglo-American invaders, in violation of the UN Charter. Following the de facto “dismissal” of Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali, UN Secretaries General Kofi Annan and Ban ki Moon have became a tool of US foreign policy, taking their orders directly from Washington.
Building a US Sphere of Influence in East and South East Asia
The Truman doctrine discussed above was the culmination of a post World War II US military strategy initiated with the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 and the surrender of Japan.
In East Asia it consisted in the post-war occupation of Japan as well the US takeover of Japan’s colonial Empire including South Korea (Korea was annexed to Japan under the 1910 Japan–Korea Annexation Treaty).
Following Imperial Japan’s defeat in World War II, a US sphere of influence throughout East and South East Asia was established in the territories of Japan’s former “Great East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere”.
America’s hegemony in Asia was largely based on establishing a sphere of influence in countries under the colonial jurisdiction of Japan, France and the Netherlands.
The US sphere of influence in Asia –which was built up over a period of more than 20 years– included the Philippines (a US possession which was occupied by Japan during World War II), South Korea (annexed to Japan in 1910), Thailand (a Japanese protectorate during World War II), Indonesia (a Dutch colony occupied by Japan during World War II, which becomes a de facto US proxy State following the establishment of the Suharto military dictatorship in 1965).
This US sphere of influence in Asia also extended its grip into France’s former colonial possessions in Indochina, including Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, which were under Japanese military occupation during World War II.
Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” which overtly threatens China is the endgame of this historical process.
The Korean War (1950-1953) was the first major military operation undertaken by the US in the wake of World War II, launched at the very outset of what was euphemistically called “The Cold War”. In many respects it was a continuation of World War II, whereby Korean lands under Japanese colonial occupation were, from one day to the next, handed over to a new colonial power, the United States of America.
In South Korea on September 8, 1945, three weeks after the surrender of Japan on August 15th 1945. Moreover, Japanese officials in South Korea assisted the US Army Military Government (USAMG) (1945-48) led by General Hodge in ensuring this transition. Japanese colonial administrators in Seoul as well as their Korean police officials worked hand in glove with the new colonial masters.
While Japan was treated as a defeated Empire, South Korea was identified as a colonial territory to be administered under US military rule and US occupation forces. America’s handpicked appointee Sygman Rhee was flown into Seoul in October 1945, in General Douglas MacArthur’s personal airplane.
The bombing raids directed against civilians in Japan and Germany at the end of World War II as well as the War on Korea (1950-53) had set the stage for the implementation of mass casualty producing events: extensive crimes were committed by US forces. US Major General William F Dean “reported that most of the North Korean cities and villages he saw were either rubble or snow-covered wastelands”
General Curtis LeMay [left] who coordinated the bombing raids against North Korea brazenly acknowledged that:
“Over a period of three years or so we killed off – what – twenty percent of the population. … We burned down every town in North Korea and South Korea, too”.
According to Brian Willson:
It is now believed that the population north of the imposed 38th Parallel lost nearly a third its population of 8 – 9 million people during the 37-month long “hot” war, 1950 – 1953, perhaps an unprecedented percentage of mortality suffered by one nation due to the belligerence of another.”
North Korea has been threatened of an attack with US nuclear weapons for more than 60 years.
From the Truman Doctrine to Clinton, Bush and Obama
There has been continuity throughout the post-war era, from Korea and Vietnam to the present.
The Neo-conservative agenda under the Bush administration should be viewed as the culmination of a (bipartisan) “Post War” foreign policy framework, which provides the basis for the planning of the contemporary wars and atrocities including the setting up of torture chambers, concentration camps and the extensive use of prohibited weapons directed against civilians.
Under Obama, this agenda has become increasingly cohesive with the legalization of extrajudicial killings of US citizens under the anti-terrorist legislation, the extensive use of drone attacks against civilians, the massacres ordered by the US-NATO-Israel alliance directed against Syrian civilians.
From Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan, to the CIA sponsored military coups in Latin America and Southeast Asia, the objective has been to ensure US military hegemony and global economic domination, as initially formulated under the “Truman Doctrine”. Despite significant policy differences, successive Democratic and Republican administrations, from Harry Truman to Obama have carried out this global military agenda.
This entire “post war period” is marked by extensive war crimes resulting in the death of more than twenty million people. This figure does not include those who perished as a result of poverty, starvation and disease.
What we are dealing with is a criminal US foreign policy agenda. Media propaganda has served to obfuscate this agenda. US interventionism is invariably upheld as a humanitarian endeavor. Meanwhile, so-called progressive leftists and “anti-war activists” supported by corporate foundations have upheld this agenda on humanitarian grounds.
Criminalization does not pertain to one or more heads of State. It pertains to the entire State system, it’s various civilian and military institutions as well as the powerful corporate interests behind the formulation of US foreign policy, the Washington think tanks, the creditor institutions which finance the military machine.
War crimes are the result of the criminalization of the US State and foreign policy apparatus. We are dealing specifically with individual war criminals, but with a process involving decision makers acting at different level, with a mandate to carry out war crimes, following established guidelines and procedures.
What distinguishes the Bush and Obama administrations in relation to the historical record of US sponsored crimes and atrocities, is that the concentration camps, targeted assassinations and torture chambers are now openly considered as legitimate forms of intervention, which sustain “the global war on terrorism” and support the spread of Western democracy.
The Wars of the 21st Century: From the Cold War to the “Global War on Terrorism”
The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, “ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders”
From the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of “Islamic brigades”.
9/11 and the Invasion of Afghanistan
The September 11, 2001 attacks have played a crucial role in the formulation of US military doctrine, namely in sustaining the legend that Al Qaeda is an enemy of the Western world when in fact it is a construct of US intelligence, which is used not only as pretext to wage war on humanitarian grounds but also as an instrument of non-conventional warfare.
The legal argument used by Washington and NATO to invade Afghanistan was that the September 11 attacks constituted an undeclared “armed attack” “from abroad” by an unnamed foreign power, and that consequently “the laws of war” apply, allowing the nation under attack, to strike back in the name of “self-defence”.
The “Global War on Terrorism” was officially launched by the Bush administration on September 11, 2001. On the following morning (September 12, 2001), NATO’s North Atlantic Council meeting in Brussels, adopted the following resolution:
“if it is determined that the [September 11, 2001] attack against the United States was directed from abroad [Afghanistan] against “The North Atlantic area“, it shall be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty”. (emphasis added)
Afghanistan was invaded on October 7, 2001 under NATO’s doctrine of collective security: an attack on one member of the Atlantic Alliance is an attack on all members of Atlantic alliance. The presumption was that the US had been attacked by Afghanistan on September 11, 2001, an absurd proposition.
In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this “outside enemy” served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the American-led wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a “just war” with a humanitarian mandate.
Pre-emptive war directed against “Islamic terrorists” is required to defend the Homeland. Realities are turned upside down: America and the Western World are under attack.
In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this “outside enemy” served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the American-led wars in the Middle East and Central Asia, which encompasses more than 60 percent of the Wortld’s oil and gas reserves..
Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a “just war” with a humanitarian mandate.
Propaganda purports to erase the history of Al Qaeda created by the CIA, drown the truth and “kill the evidence” on how this “outside enemy” was fabricated and transformed into “Enemy Number One”.
What the media does not mention is that the terrorists in substance are paid killers, supported by the US and NATO.
Non-Conventional Warfare: Using Al Qaeda Rebels as the Foot Soldiers of the Western Military alliance
This strategy of using al Qaeda rebels as the foot soldiers of the Western military is of crucial significance. It has characterized US-NATO interventions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. It is currently part of a covert agenda to destabilize Iraq by supporting al Qaeda in Iraq and the Levant (AQIL).
US sponsored Al Qaeda terror brigades (covertly supported by Western intelligence) have also been deployed in Mali, Niger, Nigeria, the Central African Republic, Somalia and Yemen.
The objective is to create sectarian and ethnic divisions with a view to destabilizing or fracturing sovereign countries modelled on former Yugoslavia.
In the Middle East, the redrawing of political borders is contemplated by US military planners.
Note: The following map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006).
Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has most probably been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning circles.
The War on Iran: World War III Scenario
As part of the Global War on Terrorism, the launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran – which has the world’s third largest known reserves of oil behind Saudi Arabia and Iraq – has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon since 2005. These plans are part of a broader Middle East Central Asian military agenda.
War on Iran is part of the Battle for Oil. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated “in war theater plans” to invade both Iraq and Iran:
“…the President’s National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman’s National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command’s theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. … The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States’ vital interest in the region – uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil. (USCENTCOM, http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/stratgic.htm#USPolicy , emphasis added)
Public opinion remains largely unaware of the grave implications of these war plans, which contemplate the use of nuclear weapons, ironically in retaliation to Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program.
Moreover, 21st Century military technology combines an array of sophisticated weapons systems whose destructive power would overshadow the nuclear holocausts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Lest we forget, the United States is the only country to have used nuclear weapons against civilians.
If such a war were to be launched, the entire Middle East/Central Asia region would be drawn into a conflagration. Humanity would be precipitated into a World War III scenario.
The danger of World War III is not front-page news. The mainstream media has excluded in-depth analysis and debate on the implications of these war plans.
NATO’s “Humanitarian Intervention” Mandate defined in an ICISS report on R2P (ight0
The Anti-war Movement in Crisis: Cooptation and “Manufactured Dissent”
The antiwar movement in several Western countries is in crisis, dominated by self-proclaimed progressives. Some of America’s wars are condemned outright, while others are heralded as “humanitarian interventions”. A significant segment of the US antiwar movement condemns the war but endorses the campaign against international terrorism, which constitutes the backbone of US military doctrine.
Historically, progressive social movements (including the World Social Forum) have been infiltrated, their leaders co-opted and manipulated, through the corporate funding of non-governmental organizations, trade unions and political parties. The ultimate purpose of “funding dissent” is to prevent the protest movement from challenging the legitimacy of the capitalist elites.
The “Just War” theory (Jus Ad Bellum) has served to camouflage the nature of US foreign policy, while providing a human face to the invaders.
A large segment of “progressive” opinion in the US and Western Europe is supportive of NATO’s R2P “humanitarian” mandate to the extent that these war plans are being carried out with the “rubber stamp” of civil society. Prominent “progressive” authors as well independent media outlets have supported regime change and NATO sponsored humanitarian intervention in Libya. Similarly, these same self proclaimed progressives have rallied in support of the US-NATO sponsored opposition in Syria.
Let us be under no illusions: This pseudo-progressive discourse is an instrument of propaganda. Several prominent “left” intellectuals –who claim to be opposed to US imperialism– have supported the imposition of “no fly zones” and “humanitarian interventions” against sovereign countries.
“Progressives” are funded and co-opted by elite foundations including Ford, Rockefeller, et al. The corporate elites have sought to fragment the people’s movement into a vast “do it yourself” mosaic. War and globalization are no longer in the forefront of civil society activism. Activism tends to be piecemeal. There is no integrated anti-globalization anti-war movement. The economic crisis is not seen as having a relationship to the US led war.
Dissent has been compartmentalized. Separate “issue oriented” protest movements (e.g. environment, anti-globalization, peace, women’s rights, climate change) are encouraged and generously funded as opposed to a cohesive mass movement. This mosaic was already prevalent in the counter G7 summits and People’s Summits of the 1990s.
The “Revolution Business”
The imperial World Order creates its own opposition.
The Occupy movement in the US is infiltrated and manipulated.
“Colored Revolutions” financed by Wall Street unfold in different countries (e.g. Egypt, Ukraine, Georgia, Thailand, ). The CIA through various front organizations has infiltrated mass movements in different parts of the World.
The Centre for Applied Non Violent Action and Strategies (CANVAS), for instance, under the auspices of Serbia’s OTPOR is a CIA sponsored entity which describes itself as “an International network of trainers and consultants” involved in the “Revolution Business”.
Funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), it constitutes a consulting outfit, advising and training US sponsored opposition groups in more than 40 countries. Its clench fist logo has been adopted by numerous “revolutionary” groups.
In turn, a panoply of alternative media upholds the “Colored Revolutions” as constituting a “Great Awakening”, a mass movement directed against the very foundations of the capitalist World order.
In Egypt, for instance, several organizations involved in the Arab Spring including Kifaya and the April 6 Student movement were directly supported by US foundations and the US embassy in Cairo.
In a bitter irony, Washington was supporting the Mubarak dictatorship, including its atrocities, while also backing and financing its detractors, through the activities of Freedom House (FH) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Both of these foundations have links to the US State Department and the US Congress.
Under the auspices of Freedom House, Egyptian dissidents and opponents of Hosni Mubarak had been received in May 2008 by Condoleezza Rice at the State Department and the US Congress. The Egyptian pro-democracy delegation to the State Department was described by Condoleezza Rice as “The Hope for the Future of Egypt”. In May 2009, Hillary Clinton met a delegation of Egyptian dissidents (see image below), several of which had met Condoleezza Rice a year earlier.
9/11 Truth
In numerous organizations including the trade union movement, the grassroots is betrayed by their leaders who are co-opted. The money trickles down from the corporate foundations, setting constraints on grassroots actions. Its called “manufacturing dissent”. Many of these NGO leaders are committed and well meaning individuals acting within a framework which sets the boundaries of dissent. The leaders of these movements are often co-opted, without even realizing that as a result of corporate funding their hands are tied.
In recent history, with the exception of Iraq, the so-called Western left namely “Progressives” have paid lip service to US-NATO military interventions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. “Progressives” also support the official 9/11 version of events. They deny 9/11 Truth.
“Progressives” acknowledge that the US was under attack on 9/11 and that the war on Afghanistan was a “Just War”. In the case of Afghanistan, the “self-defense” argument was accepted at face value as a legitimate response to the 9/11 attacks, without examining the fact that the US administration had not only supported the “Islamic terror network”, it was also instrumental in the installation of the Taliban government in 1995-96. It was tacitly implied that by supporting al Qaeda, Afghanistan had attacked America on September 11, 2001.
In 2001, when Afghanistan was bombed and later invaded, “progressives” largely upheld the administration’s “just cause” military doctrine. In the wake of 9/11, the antiwar movement against the illegal invasion of Afghanistan was isolated. The trade unions and civil society organizations had swallowed the media lies and government propaganda. They had accepted a war of retribution against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Several prominent “left leaning” intellectuals upheld the “war on terrorism” agenda.
Media disinformation prevailed. People were misled as to the nature and objectives underlying the invasion of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden and the Taliban were identified as the prime suspects of the 9/11 attacks, without a shred of evidence and without addressing the historical relationship between Al Qaeda and the US intelligence apparatus. In this regard, understanding 9/11 is crucial in formulating a consistent antiwar position. 9/11 is the pillar of US war propaganda; it sustains the illusion of an outside enemy, it justifies pre-emptive military intervention.
The logic pertaining to Syria was somewhat different. “Progressives” and mainstream “antiwar” organizations have supported so-called opposition forces without acknowledging that the mainstay of these forces is composed of Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists, recruited, trained and financed by US-NATO and their allies including Israel, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. These antiwar groups, which previously supported NATO intervention in Libya, blame the Syrian government for the atrocities committed by the US sponsored Al Qaeda rebels.
Rebuilding the Antiwar Movement
What is required is to rebuild a mass movement. And this cannot be led and manipulated by self-proclaimed “progressives” with the financial support of corporate foundations.
The social base as well as the organizational structure of the antiwar movement must be transformed. America’s “Long War” is an imperialist project which sustains the financial structures and institutional foundations of the capitalist World Order. Behind this military agenda are powerful corporate interests including an extensive propaganda apparatus.
War and the Economic Crisis are intimately related. The Worldwide imposition of neoliberal macro-economic policy measures is part of the broader imperial agenda. And consequently, the broader movement against neoliberalism must be integrated into the anti-war movement.
Breaking the “Big Lie” which presents war as a humanitarian undertaking, means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force. This profit-driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.
The holding of mass demonstrations and antiwar protests is not enough. What is required is the development of a broad and well-organized grassroots antiwar network, across the land, nationally and internationally, which challenges the structures of power and authority as well as the nature of the capitalist World order. People must mobilize not only against the military agenda – the authority of the state and its officials must also be challenged.
A meaningful anti-war movement requires breaking the “war on terrorism” consensus and upholding 9/11 Truth. To reverse the tide of war and globalization requires a massive campaign of networking and outreach to inform people across the land, nationally and internationally, in neighborhoods, workplaces, parishes, schools, universities and municipalities, on the nature the imperial project, its military and economic dimensions, not to mention the dangers of a US sponsored nuclear war. This movement must also occur within the Armed Forces (including NATO) with a view to challenging the legitimacy of the military agenda.
The message should be loud and clear:
The US and its allies are behind the Al Qaeda terrorists who have committed countless atrocities against civilians on the specific instructions of the Western military alliance,
Neither Syria nor Iran are a threat to World Peace. Quite the opposite. The threat emanates from the US and its allies. Even in the case of a conventional war (without the use of nukes) , the proposed aerial bombardments directed against Iran could result in escalation, ultimately leading us into a broader war in the Middle East.
What has to be achieved:
Reveal the criminal nature of this military project.
Break once and for all the lies and falsehoods which sustain a “political consensus” in favor of a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Iran.
Undermine war propaganda, reveal the media lies, reverse the tide of disinformation, wage a consistent campaign against the corporate media.
Break the legitimacy of the warmongers in high office. Indict political leaders for war crimes.
Dismantle the multibillion dollar national intelligence apparatus.
Dismantle the US-sponsored military adventure and its corporate sponsors.
Bring home the troops.
Repeal the illusion that the state is committed to protecting its citizens.
Uphold 9/11 Truth. Reveal the falsehoods behind 9/11 which are used to justify the Middle East/Central Asian war under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT).
Expose how a profit-driven war serves the vested interests of the banks, the defense contractors, the oil giants, the media giants and the biotech conglomerates.
Challenge the corporate media which deliberately obfuscates the causes and consequences of this war.
Reveal and take cognizance of the unspoken and tragic outcome of a war waged with nuclear weapons.
Call for the Dismantling of NATO.
Reorganize the system of international justice which protects the war criminals. Implement the prosecution of war criminals in high office.
Close down the weapons assembly plants and implement the foreclosure of major weapons producers.
Close down all US military bases in the US and around the world.
Develop an antiwar movement within the armed forces and establish bridges between the armed forces and the civilian antiwar movement.
Forcefully pressure governments of both NATO and non-NATO countries to withdraw from the US-led global military agenda.
Develop a consistent antiwar movement in Israel. Inform the citizens of Israel of the likely consequences of a US-NATO-Israeli attack on Iran.
Target the pro-war lobby groups including the pro-Israeli groups in the US.
Dismantle the homeland security state. Repeal the legitimacy of Obama’s extrajudicial assassinations. Repeal the drone wars directed against civilians.
Undermine the “militarization of law enforcement”. Reverse the gamut of anti-terrorist legislation in Western countries which is intended to repeal fundamental civil rights.
These are no easy tasks. They require an understanding of the power structure, of hegemonic relations between the military, intelligence, the state structures and corporate powers which are promoting this destructive agenda. Ultimately these power relations must be undermined with a view to changing the course of World history.
America’s hegemonic project in the post 9/11 era is the “Globalization of War” whereby the U.S.-NATO military machine —coupled with covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime change”— is deployed in all major regions of the world. The threat of pre-emptive nuclear war is also used to black-mail countries into submission.
This “Long War against Humanity” is carried out at the height of the most serious economic crisis in modern history.
It is intimately related to a process of global financial restructuring, which has resulted in the collapse of national economies and the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.
The ultimate objective is World conquest under the cloak of “human rights” and “Western democracy”.
In this new and expanded edition of Chossudovsky’s international best-seller, the author outlines the contours of a New World Order which feeds on human poverty and the destruction of the environment, generates social apartheid, encourages racism and ethnic strife and undermines the rights of women. The result as his detailed examples from all parts of the world show so convincingly, is a globalization of poverty.
This book is a skilful combination of lucid explanation and cogently argued critique of the fundamental directions in which our world is moving financially and economically.
In this new enlarged edition – which includes ten new chapters and a new introduction — the author reviews the causes and consequences of famine in Sub-Saharan Africa, the dramatic meltdown of financial markets, the demise of State social programs and the devastation resulting from corporate downsizing and trade liberalisation.
Der Angriff wird wahrscheinlich als Reaktion auf die kürzlich in Eilat eingetroffenen Drohnen und den Raketenstart der jemenitischen Huthi durchgeführt.
Angesichts der Tatsache, dass es in Gaza eine Bodenoperation und einen Schusswechsel mit dem Libanon gibt, könnte die Öffnung der Front mit dem Jemen das Territorium Saudi-Arabiens gefährden und aktive Feindseligkeiten im Roten Meer auslösen.
The interview is taken for the website https://IonCoja.ro with questions for Professor Larry Romanoff, coming from Professor Ion Coja as well as from CD, the external collaborator of the website https://IonCoja.ro.
The website https://IonCoja.ro is a Romanian website of discussions and opinions of a nationalist nature contextualized to the international political scene. Many of the translated materials posted on the https://IonCoja.ro website originate from the https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com website, belonging to Professor Larry Romanoff.
Professor Romanoff’s writings have been translated into 32 languages, and his articles have been posted on over 150 foreign language news and political analysis sites and over 100 English language platforms. He was a professor at Fudan University in Shanghai, in the EMBA courses. Now we have the happy opportunity to interview this prolific and very kind author to answer some questions that concern both us and the readers of the https://IonCoja.rowebsite.
CD– But let’s give Professor Ion Coja the floor for the questions he has for Professor Larry Romanoff.
IC – I was greatly pleased by your Lordship’s response to accept this interview and I thank you for your kindness. Please, Professor Romanoff, make an overture – an opening for the subject of this interview.
LR – The most necessary introduction would be to emphasise that the Khazar Jews really do have a plan for a one-world government which will hold all the nations of the world in a kind of massive fascist dictatorship that will in turn be controlled exclusively by Jews. It has been easy in the past to dismiss this as a “conspiracy theory”, but the facts are solid and the evidence is everywhere. It hasn’t even been a secret. As early as 1950, James Warburg testified to the US Congress that “We shall have world government, whether we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest.” James was the son of Paul Warburg who was the father of the Jewish-owned US FED, and very active in promoting the Morgenthau plan for the permanent destruction of Germany after the Second World War. The main issues are then how this is to be achieved and what the landscape will look like at the end.
IC – Is there a conclave at the top of the Jewish congregation that also includes non-Jews? How does this conclave work?
LR – Yes, there is definitely a ‘conclave’ of the International Khazar Jews, and it exists in layers, centered on The City of London. Some speculation is necessary since this in an intensely private organisation and they do no publish staff lists. I am told there are 13 families who are at the core of this group, headed by a Rothschild who is generally deemed “The King of the Jews”. This is the heart of the Hydra. This group would contain several Rothschilds but the other names are not so easy to identify. It would likely contain a Sebag-Montefiori, a Sassoon, an Israel Moses Seif, perhaps one or two Warburgs – the usual names. These are also the people who own the US FED and the central banks of many other Western nations. It absolutely does not include any non-Jews.
According to the most reliable evidence I have available, this core is surrounded by a group of 300 men, all of whom know each other and who would be in frequent contact with those in the core. The membership of this group has never been accurately identified, but it would include major bankers and industrialists – those who own and control companies like Royal-Dutch Shell, Nestlé, Goldman Sachs and so on. It is this group that would receive instructions and policy from The City of London, formulate detailed policies, and transmit these to the next layer. This group acts as an effective insulator for those in the core, to keep the core totally anonymous, out of the media spotlight, and to ensure no connections can be made by the general public between the core and the resulting execution of policies.
The next layer is subject to even more speculation, but would likely number in the thousands of individuals. These are the people who would actively work for the execution of the determined policies and various international events such as the overthrow of the Ukraine government, the invasions of Iraq, Libya and Syria, and so on. It would prepare further detailed policies and tactics for dealing with Russia, China, Iran, and others, and would then pass these along to what would probably be “middle-men” and then to the final recipients who would carry out the policies. This would be to provide a further level of insulation. Henry Kissinger might be in this group.
There will be no non-Jews anywhere in these levels. The Goyim are merely lieutenants who serve the Jews in their efforts, a large category of educated lawyers, accountants, business professionals and others. These people are essentially compradors, traitors to their ideals and their countries, but who benefit from high salaries and some legal immunity, and thus are happy to feed at the trough.
They are not only well-paid but well-deluded; they believe they are part of “us” when they are really “them”, and that means that when the final curtain comes down, they will be disposable Goyim like all the others.
As an example, it would be determined in The City of London that the anti-Western government in Ukraine should be overthrown and that NATO should expand to encircle and surround Russia, all in preparation for the eventual control and partition of Russia. The strategy would be planned in The City of London, and then passed to the group of 300 who would further flesh out the strategy. The larger group surrounding this would be comprised of highly-educated bankers, industrialists and professionals who would determine the details and tactics, and possibly assign eventual execution responsibilities to various named individuals. Once all this had been done, the “middle-men” would deliver the final instructions to those named for the execution of these plans.
As another example, the seeds of creation of the World Economic Forum, the WEF led by Klaus Schwab, would have originated in The City of London with a general plan as to purpose and execution, being yet one more part of the planned World Government. From here, the next layer would discuss and plan the details and tactics, and obtain confirmation and agreement from The City. Following this, the individuals would be chosen to lead the effort, and the plans communicated to the next level who would then organise the entire program and select the individuals to execute the program.
IC – What would be the most visible and destructive actions of the Khazarian machine to destroy the world order as we know it?
LR – The stillborn Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP would have been another of these portions of the planned World Government. This plan was too aggressive, too ambitious, and it failed. Had it succeeded, humanity would have been doomed because it would have removed the sovereignty of nations almost entirely and placed all the power in the hands of Jewish bankers and multi-national industrial companies. The International Khazar Jews have made it plain that the concept of “nation-state” is archaic and useless, and a new world organisation is necessary.
The TPP would in fact have removed the power of nation-states to control their own military, financial matters, economy, health regulations, transferring virtually all power to the Jewish bankers and industrialists, all of this controlled ultimately from The City of London. It is very important to realise that National governments would have been left with only two functions: tax collection and population suppression. The WEF is taking us in the same direction by a more circuitous route and not so aggressively done.
Keep in mind that the Jews have been preparing and training national leaders for this new world, for decades now. Justin Trudeau of Canada is one such, and a brief search will provide the names of many others who are already psychologically prepared to betray their own nations into this Hydra. Trudeau already boasts of Canada being the first “post-nation state”, and that means precisely what it seems to mean: Canada is no longer a sovereign nation, but a kind of subsidiary political unit that is entirely controlled from The City of London. All Western nations are going in the same direction. The current foreign migrations into all Western nations are an integral part of this process. The intent is to reduce national ethnic populations below the level necessary to produce effective resistance and to help eliminate the concept of nationality. It is an accepted fact that as a country like Romania or Germany obtains a level of foreign migrants above about 30%, the society loses its cohesion and Germans or Romanians are no longer able to function effectively as a national group.
IC – So the Khazars know from scientific studies what is the critical figure in altering national cohesion?
LR – This is not difficult to understand.
Imagine a future Romania where citizens are upset with some new government policies and 100 persons have gathered to discuss protests and tactics to oppose those measures. Now imagine that 30 of that 100 are foreigners – Jews, persons from Haiti, Algeria, Cambodia, Uganda. Those people do not think as you do; your ideas are not theirs. They do not share your values, your ethics, history, traditions, religion. Your concerns with your government are not their concerns. They do not see things the way you see them, and their natural opposition will serve to sabotage all your efforts. You will never be able to obtain the critical mass of public support necessary for this effort or for any other. Those people do not in any sense see themselves as Romanian, and your society will have lost much of its cohesion. This is one more part of the plan to eliminate the very concept of nationality, and intermarriage between national citizens and foreigners will serve over several generations to virtually eliminate “real” Romanians. This is a planned cultural genocide, and needs to be taken much more seriously than is done today.
Western European nations are being flooded today with migrants from Africa. If we look at Germany, France, Italy, England, the social situation is bleak. There already exists an astonishing animosity between the native population and the immigrants, much as exists today in the US between the blacks and whites. This is not accidental; the animosity is a feature of social disintegration, and in many countries could easily lead to a kind of civil war, not between government factions but between kinds and classes of people. A society overloaded with immigrants that are “too foreign” will eventually collapse into anarchy: the post-nation state where a main function of the selected government will be population suppression.
Here are a few comments by a reader in Western Europe, on the present condition of society. This is not promising.
“Paris is completely flooded by Africans. To ride their subway, you have to cover your nose and mouth — the stench is overwhelming.”
The fabled Riviera, especially Marseille, is now a third-world shanty town, with garbage lying everywhere. Switzerland and Germany were flooded with Middle Easterners, Afghans, and others speaking every language except German. The once great city of London is now filled with an undulating mass of black and brown humanoidal protoplasm. London is a multicultural toilet, maybe worse than NYC if that’s possible. Look at Luxembourg; the place looks like Africa, tons of them, hanging out, loitering, clownish behaviors, screaming yelling, defecating/urinating all over Ettelbruck and Dunkirk.
Canada is quickly following suit – thanks to Justin “Jackboot” Trudeau and his right-hand Jewess Chrystia Freeland.” “The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.”
Another tool in this box is NATO. If Romania joins the EU, a condition is that the nation must surrender its military to NATO. Thus, Romanian soldiers are no longer Romanian, but part of a multi-national military. It is not widely-known, but new NATO soldiers are taught that they are not part of their former national military but now owe their loyalty to this supra-national force, and are further told that one day they may be engaged in battle against their own country.
NATO is entirely a Jewish construct. It has not had, and does not have now, any valid reason for existence. Its only purpose is to function as the Jews’ military when the time comes. With the exception of the British East India Company, the Jews have never had their own armies. For 200 or more years they used the British army due to their control over the government of England. That is why it was the British army that effectively invaded South Africa in the Boer wars so that one of the Rothschilds could obtain control of the vast gold and diamond mines. They functioned truly as what I call “The Bankers’ Private Army’. The Jews destroyed the British Empire in the two World Wars, but that was of no consequence because they had already transferred their flag to the US. They are today destroying the US in a similar manner, socially, economically, and politically, but that is also of no consequence because the plan is to transfer their flag to NATO. The Jews will use the US to execute one last World War, which will almost certainly end with the destruction of the US as a military and political force, but NATO will already be there as the Jews’ supra-national military to control the appointed governments and populations of all their “post-national states”. And this supra-national military will be controlled and directed by The City of London.
IC – In their plan to unify and blend nations, the culture, traditions or religions are not forgiven, what are the actions that are easiest to detect in this campaign against humanity?
LR – There are further issues. Inherent in the plans for the kind of world government we will eventually have, is not only the removal of national governments and militaries, but the destruction of society, the family, morals, and religion. All of these are happening at the same time, as integral portions of the same plan. We tend to look at all these sectors as disconnected items, but they are all closely related and form a unit.
The US is perhaps the country that has progressed the farthest in these directions, but all Western nations (and eventually all nations everywhere) will follow the same pattern. In terms of society, the US has opened the floodgates to ‘very’ foreign immigration in huge numbers, while at the same time animosities are being openly encouraged between white Americans and all others. Black on White crime is increasing exponentially in the US, and it may not be long before the Whites begin to retaliate in kind and we have civil strife that will be essentially a civil war. Already, social cohesion is disintegrating.
IC – As we can see, no aspect of economic, political or social life is forgiven, everything must be destroyed beyond recognition, probably the family is condemned to the same process of identity destruction…
LR – In terms of the family, the US leads the world in single-parent families, in unmarried young people, in single-person households. The Jewish-owned news media are promoting “swinging”, which is men trading their wives for sexual use, and the young generation are being led into gross sexual perversions. Canadian and American newspapers during COVID were openly promoting the use of “glory holes” which is a walled partition with small openings through which a man would insert his penis and a woman on the other side would offer her mouth or vagina to satisfy it. They also published instructions on how to conduct orgies during the pandemic.
When I was a young man, the rule was that a girl would never kiss you on a first date. Today, young American girls of 14 and 15 are saying boys want oral, anal, and vaginal sex, and expect it all on the first date. That is not a small change in morals or values.
When Bela Kuhn (Cohen) initiated the Jewish Communist Revolution in Hungary, his first acts were attempts to destroy the family, morals, and religion. He instituted new programs in elementary schools encouraging young children to engage in open sexuality and intercourse, and married women to freely engage in adultery. This plan has never changed. The program further contains all the overheated media onslaught today about “trans-gender” and changing the genders of children, and an increasingly extreme program in the sexualization of children. The UN agencies are part of this, with the WHO now stating that children should have “sexual partners” from elementary school onward. With the genders, new laws are being implemented – as in Canada – that teachers can encourage children to change their genders, that the parents must not be notified by either the teachers or the children, and that parental “interference” in these surreptitious gender changes will be a crime that would result in arrest and imprisonment. This is real. It is the same with another program of “assisted suicide” where, again in Canada, a child as young as ten years can request an assisted suicide, and the parents are legally prohibited from interfering.
The destruction of morality began in earnest in the 1960s with the Jewish invention of the contraceptive pills for females and the resulting widely-promoted “sexual revolution”, and that was the beginning of the end for the family. This was further enhanced by the so-called “Women’s’ Liberation Movement” in the 1970s and 1980s.
The theory was that marriage was a millstone for women, and served only to prevent their full development as individuals, leaving women to conclude that without the anchor of a family, they would all achieve great success. This propaganda was so successful that divorce rates in the US and Canada jumped by over 200% in about ten years. Not long after, a similar anti-marriage propaganda campaign reappeared, heavily promoted by the Jewish-owned media,that increased the divorce rate by another 60%. None of this was an accident or a natural social evolution, but part of a long-term concentrated plan to destroy the family.
One of the propaganda tactics used by the Jews in these social engineering programs is to change the meanings of words to force the public to accept that “red is the new blue”. As one example, the definition and meaning of “family” have been substantially altered in the West, a family no longer consisting of a husband, wife and children. We have been heavily programmed to accept a “marriage” between two men, their being designated “husband” and “wife”, and having legal permission to adopt small boys. In the popular press we no longer have the concept of heterosexual husband and wife; instead, we have “partners” and “significant others”. This isn’t simply terminology; the actual concept of “family” is being destroyed, turned into a kind of confusing nothingness.
Coinciding with this, the intense push for free abortions that has been occurring for the past 100 or more years, was entirely Jewish in construct and execution.
IC – These not only immoral but even criminal actions to influence and distort human behavior, especially among young people, have intensified recently. What is your opinion?
LR – This is also true for pornography and for the legalisation of drugs like marijuana and cocaine. There is no difficulty in tracing all of these to Jewish roots, and it is obvious that these measures are all heavily supported by the Jewish media.
Respected national newspapers in the US and Canada carry articles advising women on the “best places to find pornography”.
Coincident with the sexualization of children is child sexual trafficking which is apparently increasingly widespread and originating from the same sources. There is no shortage of stories of US Secret Service men bringing small boys into the White House through the back door in the late evening. It appears that most Western government leaders are well-acquainted personally with this issue, including European royalty.
There is more to do with children. The Jewish bible, the Talmud, contains extensive discussions about whether a girl of three years old can be used for sexual intercourse or if one must wait until she is “three years plus a day”. It also states that when a small girl is repeatedly used for sexual intercourse, her hymen repairs itself repeatedly, and she remains “undamaged”.
These Jewish social engineering programs – all part of the coming New World Order – are sexualising and corrupting the children in ways that can never be repaired even if the ambitions eventually fail. In the West, we can never revert to where we were during sane times.
IC – Beyond the lack of respect for the Christian religion or even other religions, it seems that there is a clear mission to destroy religions by any means provided or not allowed.
LR – The destruction of religion, most especially Christianity, is a vital part of this plan.
When I was a young man, Sunday was a special day, reserved for worship and family. Only vital commercial establishments were open.
If I were stranded in another city over a weekend and had friends in that city, I might contact one of them on the Saturday, but I would never call or interrupt them on the Sunday. That would have been an almost inexcusable violation of privacy. The Jews began there, with an intense push to open cinemas on Sundays. With that success, they progressed to grocery stores, supermarkets, and eventually Sunday as a special religious day was destroyed.
To say that many Jews detest Christianity and have an intense hatred for it, is a serious understatement. This hatred for Christianity and the Jews’ determination to eliminate it, is far more serious than commonly understood. I will give you here a brief quote from one of my earlier articles. It is instructive to understand the contempt that Jews hold for Christianity in general and Jesus Christ in particular.
Gary Aldrich was an FBI agent for 26 years who spent the latter part of his career investigating security clearances to White House staff.
In his book, Aldrich tells what it was like decorating Hillary Clinton’s White House Christmas Tree, with ornaments created by various Jewish artists, featuring pornography, “sex toys and self-mutilation devices”.
Aldrich wrote, “I couldn’t believe the disrespect that these ornaments represented. Many of the Jewish artists invited to make and send something to hang on the tree must have had nothing but disgust, hatred, and disrespect for the White House and the citizens of this country, a disgust obviously encouraged in the name of artistic freedom … Here was another five golden rings ornament — five gold-wrapped condoms. I threw it in the trash. There were other condom ornaments, some still in the wrapper, some not.
Jews write and publish articles in the mass media titled, “F… you, Jesus”. This trash is everywhere to be found, if one takes the time to look. And it will increase in intensity. By contrast, a person writing or doing such things against the Jewish religion would be in prison.
After all, the Jews are “victims”.
IC – How real is Jewish hatred of the goyim, non-Jewish world? Who maintains it? At what level of the Jewish hierarchy is this policy cultivated? Is there also a racial, anti-goyim basis to Jewish aversion to Christianity? An aversion inherited from the days of ancient Rome? Or Carthage?
LR – As you can see from the above, the hatred is real. The policies originate in The City of London and executed by lieutenants all over the world. The bias is certainly related to contempt for the Goyim (non-Jews) generally. It is not true that all Jews hate all non-Jews or hold them in contempt, but it certainly is true that the Jews who oversee this massive “control the entire world” program do indeed hold the Goyim in utter contempt. Their feelings toward non-Jews and Christianity cannot be separated.
And the Jewish bible, the Talmud, reinforces this attitude, stating that a male Jew can treat a Goyim woman “like a piece of meat”, that Goyim can be killed without blame, cheated without blame. One of the most prominent Jewish prayers is the Kol Nidre, through which these Jews pray to their god (presumably Satan) to permit them to renege on any and every promise made to a Goy during the coming year.
Many Jewish writers (and including the Talmud itself) state clearly and openly that the Goyim are merely “cattle” for the Jews, not really human, and have no purpose but to serve Jews. This attitude and writing are so widespread they cannot be denied.
IC – The concern of the Jews to promote their representatives is notorious!The Nobel prizes are particularly targeted. I know a little bit about literature and I realized that most of the award-winning Jews are impostors! Are there just as many impostors among the other Jewish Nobel laureates?
LR – The Nobel Prizes are largely fraudulent, mostly controlled by European Jewish bankers, and far too often granted to Jews. The Nobel Peace Prize is especially notorious for its use as a political tool. The Economics Prize is not really a Nobel Prize although it is presented as such, but it seems that nearly all recipients are Jews. A group of Jews petitioned for more than ten years for Albert Einstein to receive a prize for physics, but he was so undistinguished and incompetent, to say nothing of being an outrageous plagiarist, that they could find no basis for such an award. Finally, he was granted a Nobel Prize for “contributing to the field of physics”. In other words, they could find nothing deserving a reward so they fabricated a new general category.
IC- In recent years, several hundreds of thousands of Jews have secretly obtained Romanian citizenship in Romania, many of them have owned real estate, have successful businesses. Is there a political strategy to this population movement? What would be the Zionist goal?
LR – I didn’t know about this, but I would certainly worry about it.
With these large numbers, this cannot be accidental; it must be part of a plan. I would guess that Romania’s strong Christian roots are playing a part in this, because these roots will have to be ripped out.
IC – What is the number of those considered Jews? How many are the true Jews?
LR – There are two races of Jews. One is the Semitic Jews originating in the Middle East. The other is the Ashkenazi, who are not Jews at all but are of European stock, the original Khazars. They adopted the Jewish (Babylonian) Talmud as their bible and present themselves as Jews, but they are not. Benjamin Freedman insists on calling them “so-called Jews”, which is accurate. Most Jews today, more than 95% by Jewish estimates, are European Khazars. I covered this in some detail in an article titled “Who is a Jew?”.
Rather than provide much detail here, readers could review this article.
IC – Is there a real opposition within the Jewry to the crimes committed by the Jewish leaders? Are there dissensions among the Jews? At what level?
LR – There certainly is opposition within the two classes of Jews as to the crimes committed and to the concept of a one world government. Unfortunately, the media at all levels is almost entirely controlled by the Khazar Jews and they permit no such discussion or reports to reach the general public. It is thus very difficult to estimate the number of “conscientious objectors”. We do see occasional articles in the print media, generally objecting to the Jewish crimes and challenging all the historical lies being propagated, but there is not much of this. Jews occasionally write books exposing the crimes and lust for control, but usually these books meet with silence; Amazon and the book-sellers will not carry them, the New York Times will never publish a book review, and so the general public are unaware they exist.
A Jew, Norman Finklestein, wrote a book titled “The Holocaust Industry”, which was a significant exposure of this immense fraud. It is available for free download in pdf format from the archive, and worth reading:
There are few Jews at a high level who would dare to contradict those in The City of London. The few who have done so, have either been killed or have had their reputations and careers hopelessly destroyed. These Khazars are gangsters and will turn on their own as quickly as on anyone else, with a viciousness that is surprising.
Dominique Strauss-Khan was the President of the IMF and touted to become the next President of France, when he crossed these people and was totally ruined. I wrote an article about this, if readers are interested:
I mentioned earlier the membership in the various layers of authority. Consider that Strauss-Khan, as prominent and highly-placed as he was, was in no way part of the inner circles. In referring to them, he told his wife “They are out to get me”, clearly suggesting he was far removed from the real power.
And persons like George Soros would be only in the outer circle.
I think it’s best to stop here. It would be distracting to also include discussions on other topics about economics or Germany or Hitler.
Perhaps this one topic is sufficient.
CD – Thank you Mr Romanoff and Mr Coja for your passionate commitment to the clarification of this darkness of the world that needs to be clarified once and for all and for everyone.
The interview will continue with some very interesting questions and answers.
See you soon.
*
Note from the Editor:
Although the interviews usually do not include references, I have added supplementary information on the sexualisation of children and divorce rates as it could be useful for readers to consult:
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Pakistan’s caretaker Interior Minister Sarfraz Bugti ordered on October 4 for “illegal immigrants” to vacate the country by the end of the month, a move which threatens to spark another migration crisis in Europe. Although Europe is focused on dealing with refugees from Ukraine and Palestine, it is naïve to the looming refugee crisis that Pakistan can cause if it goes ahead with the mass deportations of Afghans, many of whom fled Taliban rule.
Although Pakistan announced on November 10, after receiving backlash from human rights organisations, that it had extended the legal residence status of about 1.4 million Afghan refugees until year-end, it again rejected calls to halt deportations of the millions of Afghans.
On November 8, Pakistani caretaker Prime Minister Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar announced that more than 250,000 Afghanis had voluntarily returned home despite the threat from Taliban rule. Although Kabul denounced the deportations and demanded Islamabad reconsider it, in addition to criticism from the UN and human rights groups which cited a humanitarian crisis and expressed fears that the move could expose returnees to retribution and abuses by Taliban authorities, Pakistan appears unmoved in its decision to expel millions of illegal immigrants.
“Afghan refugees are not involved in Pakistan’s security problem. As long as they [Afghans] leave Pakistan voluntarily, that country should tolerate them,” Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid wrote on X (formerly Twitter), adding that Pakistani authorities should reconsider this “unacceptable” policy.
The behavior of Pakistan against Afghan refugees is unacceptable. The Pakistani side should reconsider its plan. Afghan refugees are not involved in Pakistan’s security problems. As long as they leave Pakistan voluntarily, that country should tolerate them.
— Zabihullah (..ذبـــــیح الله م ) (@Zabehulah_M33) October 4, 2023
From the Taliban’s perspective, they are already dealing with enormous challenges to provide for the population, and the return of millions more Afghans, mostly hostile to their rule, will only compound their desperate situation.
At the same time, though, Afghan refugees in Pakistan have complained of waves of arbitrary detentions, harassment, and forcible deportation. Pakistani authorities said they would confiscate money and property belonging to “illegal foreigners,” and the interior ministry opened a hotline for Pakistanis to report any “illegal foreigners” they are aware of.
Police also warned that landlords and firms renting to and employing Afghans lacking proper documents would receive fines. Registered refugees have also reported that police raided their homes, confiscated property, destroyed Proof of Registration cards, arrested without charge and demanded bribes.
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) condemned Islamabad’s decision to evict over one million illegal foreign residents within 30 days, especially for the reason given – Afghans in the country have links to criminal groups and terrorist organisations.
“This decision also contravenes international human rights law and must be reversed immediately,” the rights body said in a statement, adding that holding every Afghan refugee accountable “reflects not only an absence of compassion but also a myopic and narrow view of national security.”
“The large majority of such people are vulnerable Afghan refugees and stateless persons for whom Pakistan has been home for several generations,” the HRCP said on X.
The government’s decision to evict over one million ‘illegal’ foreign residents within 30 days – allegedly because they have links to terrorist and criminal groups – reflects not only an absence of compassion but also a myopic and narrow view of national security. The large…
— Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (@HRCP87) October 4, 2023
With European eyes on Israel-Palestine, and now to a lesser degree on Ukraine, if millions of Afghans were booted out of Pakistan and unwilling or unable to return to Afghanistan, it can be expected that a new refugee crisis will start at the borders of the European Union akin to the one triggered at the peak of the Syrian War and without the bloc being sufficiently prepared for it. In effect, this crisis in Pakistan could become a European problem since neighbouring Iran or the next country in line, Turkey, will be unwilling to host millions more refugees and will instead push them onward to Europe. Being hosted in neighbouring China is also out of the question.
However, some European conservatives are already noting the potentiality of this scenario and are calling for Pakistan to act since they bear responsibility for much of the war and destabilisation in the country. Pakistan first started funding, training, and supporting Islamist groups in Afghanistan to oppose the secular and progressive Soviet-backed Republic of Afghanistan from 1979-1989, helped bring the Taliban to power in 1996, and continued to support Islamist groups during the American occupation from 2001 to 2021. Therefore, in their view, it is a problem for Pakistan to deal with Afghans and not Europe.
US-based research and polling organisation Gallup warned on November 10 that economic uncertainty awaits returnees in Afghanistan, where women’s rights have eroded as they are forced out of the workplace.
“As thousands of Afghans are forced to cross the border from Pakistan, they face an economy unable to accommodate them, where job prospects are bleak, household incomes are squeezed, and millions are unable to afford the basic necessities of food and shelter,” the organisation said.
Since Pakistan is expelling them and it is unlikely Afghanistan will absorb and/or accept the millions of refugees, it can be expected that many them will try their luck in making it to Europe since few other options remain for them. It seemingly appears that Europe is not prepared for this as Gaza and Ukraine consume all their attention.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from UNHCR
The original source of this article is Global Research
Der Friedensstifter 
