Pepe Escobar: Why the SCO Summit in Kazakhstan Was a Game-Changer

By Pepe Escobar

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) member states leaders' summit in Astana, Kazakhstan - Sputnik International, 1920, 05.07.2024

It’s impossible to overstate the importance of the 2024 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) this week in Astana, Kazakhstan. It can certainly be interpreted as the antechamber to the crucial BRICS annual summit, under the Russian presidency, next October in Kazan.

Let’s start with the final declaration. As much as SCO members state “tectonic shifts are underway” in geopolitics and geoeconomics, as “the use of power methods is increasing, with norms of international law being systematically violated”, they are fully engaged to “increase the SCO’s role in the creation of a new democratic, fair, political and economic international order.”

Well, there could not be a sharper contrast with the unilaterally-imposed “rules-based international order”.

The SCO 10 – with new member Belarus – are explicitly in favor of “a fair solution to the Palestinian issue”. They “oppose unilateral sanctions”. They want to create a SCO investment fund (Iran, via acting President Mohammad Mokhber, supports the creation of a SCO common bank, just like the NDB in BRICS).

Additionally, members that “are parties to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty stand for compliance with its provisions”. And crucially, they agree that “interaction within the SCO may become the basis for building a new security architecture in Eurasia.”

The last point is actually the heart of the matter. That’s proof that Putin’s proposal last month in front of key Russian diplomats was fully debated in Astana – following Russia’s strategic deal with the DPRK de facto linking security in Asia as indivisible with security in Europe. That is something that remains – and will continue to remain – incomprehensible for the collective West.

Analysis SCO a ‘Strong Voluntary Economic Forum’ For Confidence-Building

A new Eurasia-wide security architecture is an upgrade of the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership – involving a series of bilateral and multilateral guarantees and, in Putin’s own words, open to “all Eurasian countries that wish to participate”, including NATO members.

The SCO should become one of the key drivers of this new security arrangement – in total contrast with the “rules-based order” – alongside the CSTO, the CIS and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

The road map ahead of course includes socio-economic integration and the development of international transportation corridors – from the INSTC (Russia-Iran-India) to the China-supported “Middle Corridor”.

But the two crucial points are military and financial: “To gradually phase out the military presence of external powers” in Eurasia; and to establish alternatives to “Western-controlled economic mechanisms, expanding the use of national currencies in settlements, and establishing independent payment systems.”

Translation: the meticulous process conducted by Russia to deliver a fatal blow to Pax Americana is essentially shared by all SCO members.

Welcome to SCO+

President Putin laid down the basic tenets further on down the road when he confirmed the “commitment of all member states to forming a fair world order based on the central role of the UN and commitment of sovereign states to mutually beneficial partnership.”

He added, “the long-term goals for further expansion of cooperation in politics, economy, energy, agriculture, high technologies and innovation are stated in the project of development strategy of SCO till 2035.”

That’s a quite Chinese approach to long-term strategic planning: China’s five-year plans are already mapped out all the way to 2035.

President Xi doubled down when it comes to the leading Russia-China strategic partnership: both should “strengthen comprehensive strategic coordination, oppose external interference and jointly maintain peace and stability” in Eurasia.

Once again, that’s Russia-China as leaders of Eurasia integration and the drive towards a multi-nodal world (italics mine; nodal with an “n”).

The summit in Astana showed how the SCO has really stepped up the game after incorporating India, Pakistan and Iran – and now Belarus – as new members, plus establishing key players such as Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Azerbaijan as dialogue partners, and strategic Afghanistan and Mongolia as observers.

It’s a long way from the original Shanghai Five – Russia, China, plus three Central Asian “stans” – setting up the organization back in 2001, essentially as an anti-terrorism/separatism body. The SCO has evolved into serious geoeconomic cooperation, discussing in detail, for instance, supply chain security issues.

The SCO now goes way beyond a Heartland-focused economic and security alliance, as it covers 80% of the Eurasian landmass; accounts for more than 40% of the world’s population; boasts a 25% share of global GDP – and rising; and generates global trade value of over $8 trillion in 2022, according to Chinese government numbers. Add to it SCO members hold 20% of global oil reserves and 44% of natural gas.

So it’s no wonder that a key development this year at the Palace of Independence in Astana was the first meeting of the SCO +, under the theme “Strengthening Multilateral Dialogue”.

A real who’s who of SCO partners was there, from President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and President of Turkiye Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to member of the Supreme Council of the Emirates Sheikh Saud bin Saqr Al Qasimi, Chairman of the People’s Council of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, and SCO Secretary-General Zhang Ming.

Russia’s bilaterals with many of these SCO+ actors were quite substantial.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=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%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1809095878973501519&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fsputnikglobe.com%2F20240705%2Fpepe-escobar-why-the-sco-summit-in-kazakhstan-was-a-game-changer-1119251048.html&sessionId=66db9612b0120d5759bc3ce9cdb91b7b546ee573&theme=light&widgetsVersion=2615f7e52b7e0%3A1702314776716&width=550px

India’s PM Modi did not go to Astana, sending FM Jaishankar, who maintains fabulous relations with Foreign Minister Lavrov. Modi was re-elected to his third term last month and is up to his neck working the domestic front, with his BJP now commanding a much narrower majority in Parliament. Next Monday he will be in Moscow – and will meet Putin.

Proverbial Divide and Rule hacks seized Modi’s no-show in Astana as proof of a serious India-China rift. Nonsense. Jaishankar, after a bilateral meeting with Wang Yi, stated – in a very Chinese metaphorical way – that “the three mutuals – mutual respect, mutual sensitivity and mutual interest – will guide our bilateral ties.”

That applies to their still unresolved border standoff; to the delicate balance New Delhi has to find to appease the Americans in their Indo-Pacific obsession (no one across Asia uses the term “Indo-Pacific”; it’s Asia-Pacific); and also relates to Indian aspirations when it comes to beinga leader of the Global South compared to China.

China does regard itself as part of the Global South. Wang Yiwei from Renmin University, the author of arguably the best book on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), argues that Beijing welcomes a “sense of identity” provided by the fact it represents the Global South and has been obliged to resist Washington’s hegemony and “deglobalisation” rhetoric.

The New Multi-Nodal Matrix

Astana once again revealed how the main drivers of the SCO are advancing fast on everything from energy cooperation to cross-border transportation corridors. Putin and Xi discussed progress in the construction of the massive Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline as well as Central Asia’s need to have China as a provider of funds and technology to develop their economies.

China is now Kazakhstan’s largest trading partner (two-way trade at $41 billion, and counting). Crucially, when Xi met Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, he backed Astana’s bid to join BRICS+.

Tokayev was beaming: “Deepening friendly and strategic cooperation with China is an unswerving strategic priority for Kazakhstan.” And that means more projects under BRI.

Kazakhstan – which shares a border of more than 1,700 km with Xinjiang – is absolutely central on all these fronts: BRI, SCO, EAEU, soon BRICS and last but not least, the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route.

That’s the famous Middle Corridor linking China to Europe via Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Georgia, Turkiye and the Black Sea.

Yes, this corridor skips Russia: the key reason is that Chinese and European traders are terrified of American secondary sanctions. Beijing, pragmatically, supports building this corridor as a BRI project since 2022. Xi and Tokayev actually opened what can also be called the China-Europe Trans-Caspian Express via video link; they saw the first Chinese trucks arriving on the road to a Kazakh Caspian Sea port.

Xi and Putin discussed the corridor, of course. Russia understands the Chinese constraints. And after all Russia-China trade uses its own – sanction-proof – corridors.

Russia Pepe Escobar: BRICS+ Cities Unite in Kazan, Ushering in New Era of Cooperation

Once again, Divide and Rule hacks – oblivious to the obvious, not to mention finer points of Eurasia integration – resort to their same old dusty narrative: the Global South is fractured, China and Russia don’t see eye to eye on the role of the SCO, BRI and the EAEU. Nonsense, again.

All fronts are progressing in parallel. The SCO Development Bank was initially proposed by China. The Russian Ministry of Finance – which is a mammoth organization, with 10 vice-Ministers – was not so keen, on the grounds that Chinese capital would flood Central Asia. Now that’s changed, as Iran – which has strategic partnerships with both Russia and China – is quite enthusiastic.

The strategically important China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway – a BRI project – developed slowly, but now will be on overdrive, by a mutual Putin-Xi decision. Moscow knows that Beijing – fearing the sanctions tsunami – cannot use the Trans-Siberian as the main overland trade route to Europe.

So the new Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway is the solution, reducing the journey to Europe by 900km. Putin personally told Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov there’s no Russian opposition; on the contrary, Moscow fully supports interconnected projects launched by BRICS and/or financed by the EAEU.

It’s fascinating to watch the Russia-China dynamic in play at the heart of multilateral organizations such as the SCO. Moscow sees itself as a leader of the coming multipolar order even if it does not consider itself, technically, as a member of the Global South (Lavrov insists on “Global Majority”).

As for Russia’s “pivot to the East”, it actually started in the 2010s, even before Maidan in Kiev, when Moscow started to seriously consolidate relations with, well, the Global South.

It’s no wonder that now Moscow clearly sees the new evolving multi-nodal reality – SCO and SCO+, BRICS 10 and BRICS+, EAEU, ASEAN, INSTC, new trade settlement platforms, the new Eurasian security architecture – as the beating heart in the complex, long-term strategy of meticulously shattering the domination of Pax Americana.

Source: https://sputnikglobe.com/20240705/pepe-escobar-why-the-sco-summit-in-kazakhstan-was-a-game-changer-1119251048.html

«Seine Bemühungen bieten Chancen»: Alt-Kanzler Kurz lobt Orbáns Besuch bei Putin

Der Besuch des ungarischen Premierministers Viktor Orbán bei dem russischen Präsidenten Wladimir Putin sorgte in der EU für einen großen Aufschrei. Alt-Kanzler Sebastian Kurz hingegen lobte Orbáns Bemühungen.

Redaktion5. Juli 2024

Alt-Kanzler Sebastian Kurz mit Ungarns Viktor Orbán in Prag.GETTYIMAGES/Getty Images

Der ungarische Regierungschef Viktor Orbán hat mit einem nicht abgesprochen Besuch bei Russlands Präsident Wladimir Putin Empörung von EU- und NATO-Partnern provoziert. Spitzenpolitiker kritisierten die Reise als “unverantwortlich” und schädlich für die Bemühungen um einen für die Ukraine akzeptablen Frieden – vor allem auch, weil Ungarn erst am vergangenen Montag den alle sechs Monate wechselnden Vorsitz im EU-Ministerrat übernommen hat. Kritik kam auch aus der Ukraine. Lob gab es hingegen von Österreichs Alt-Kanzler Sebastian Kurz.

Blutvergießen müsse aufhören

Gegenüber dem ungarischen Internetportal “mandiner.hu” befürwortete Kurz Orbáns Bemühungen. Er sei der Meinung, dass das Blutvergießen aufhören und es einen Verhandlungstisch geben müsse.

“Die Bemühungen von Viktor Orbán und der ungarischen Ratspräsidentschaft bieten die Chance, einen Schritt in die richtige Richtung zu machen, aber letztlich liegt es an den Kriegsparteien, eine Lösung zu finden”, fuhr der Ex-Kanzler fort.

Besuch bei Selenskyj

Erst am Dienstag hatte Orbán Kiew besucht – das erste Mal seit Kriegsbeginn. Dort forderte er den ukrainischen Präsidenten Wolodymyr Selenskyj dazu auf, eine Feuerpause in Erwägung zu ziehen, um Verhandlungen zu ermöglichen. Die Beziehungen zwischen Kiew und Budapest gelten als gespannt, weil Orbán mehrfach Hilfen für die Ukraine verzögert hat und Sanktionen gegen Russland zu verhindern suchte.

Orbán war das letzte Mal im September 2022 in Moskau, also mehrere Monate nach Beginn des russischen Angriffskriegs. Damals besuchte er jedoch lediglich die Beerdigung des früheren sowjetischen Parteichefs und Präsidenten Michail Gorbatschow. Direkten Kontakt zu Putin hatte Orbán damals nicht. Allerdings trafen sich Orbán und Putin im vergangenen Herbst beim Seidenstraßen-Gipfel in Peking.

https://exxpress.at/seine-bemuehungen-bieten-chancen-alt-kanzler-kurz-lobt-orbans-besuch-bei-putin/

This Civilization Is Deeply Unnatural

There is nothing natural about this. The way things are. The way we are living. If this was the natural and healthy way for human society to exist, it wouldn’t require mountains of propaganda spin to keep it going.

Caitlin Johnstone

Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley):

There is nothing natural about this. The way things are. The way we are living. If this was the natural and healthy way for human society to exist, it wouldn’t require mountains of propaganda spin to keep it going.

Without copious amounts of mental narratives being fed to us by people in power, it would never occur to anyone that it’s a good or normal idea to commit to wars of aggression on the other side of the planet, or to back genocides, or to militarize globally with hundreds of military outposts around the world, or to foster systems which allow a few people to have far too much while others have far too little, or to destroy the biosphere we depend on for survival for the sake of shareholder profits. It would never occur to us to accept these things if we weren’t living our lives saturated in a nonstop barrage of narratives explaining that we should accept them.

We live like this throughout our entire lives. Through mass-scale psychological manipulation our minds are twisted into freakish and unnatural shapes to ensure that we will think, speak, act, work, spend and vote in ways we would never otherwise would, all to keep the wheels of this freakish and unnatural dystopia turning. If the powerful did not control the dominant narratives of this civilization, we would be living in a very different world than the one we live in today. 

Narrative is how humans tend to get themselves into trouble. The believed thought stories in our minds are what drive us to hate, abuse, harm and kill our fellow humans. They’re what drive us into a state of anxiety even in moments when our bodies are completely safe and all our material needs are being met. They’re what have convinced humans to march out and fight wars and commit atrocities throughout the ages. Most of human suffering ultimately arises from believed thought stories. 

But believed thought stories are what shape this civilization. The only reason why power exists where it exists, why nations and their borders exist as they do, why money operates the way that it operates, why laws are written and obeyed, is because we’ve all agreed to believe a bunch of made-up narratives saying that these things are true. Tomorrow Americans could all agree that Taylor Swift is the Dictator Supreme of the United States and that copper pennies are the only form of money with any value, and if enough people believed those narratives, those narratives would become reality.

That’s the power of narrative, and that’s why powerful people pour so much energy into harnessing it. Through the power of narrative, we can be convinced to consent to things as absurd as weapons contractors using their wealth to lobby for wars and militarism, which gives them more wealth that they can then spend on more lobbying. Or working forty hours a week making our boss far more money than we get paid in a company that’s killing our ecosystem just so that we can give our paychecks to some landlord in order to live in a building on the dying planet we were born on, solely because the boss and the landlord happened to luck into owning the company and the building. Or world leaders brandishing armageddon weapons at one another.

This backwards, insane civilization only looks normal to us because it has been deliberately normalized throughout our lives via careful narrative control by the people who benefit from it. Narrative rules our lives.

Without any believed narrative in your head, there’s just peaceful being with what is, and the human animal body tending to its few human animal needs. Add in a bunch of believed narrative and then all of a sudden you’ve got a self, others, desires, agendas, enemies, social standing, goals, inadequacy, stress, a painful past and a frightening future.

It is possible for the human organism to live without believed narratives in the shift in perception commonly known as spiritual enlightenment, and it is possible for humans as a whole to drop the believed narratives that are being imposed on us by the powerful in the same way. And just as enlightenment brings with it the realization that the old way of perceiving was actually an unnatural way of operating, awakening from the dominant narratives of our day will allow us to move into a much more natural way of existing with each other and with our ecosystem on this planet.

You can call this a lofty and unattainable goal if you want, but to me I’m just talking about the one and only adaptation that has any chance of steering our species away from annihilation. Every species hits an adaptation-or-extinction juncture at some point in its existence, and we’re arriving at ours right now. We’ll either transcend our unhealthy relationship with narrative, or we’ll wipe ourselves out via nuclear war or environmental destruction.

Every sign I’m seeing right now suggests we have the ability to go either way.

Dr. ‘Bryan Ardis’ Show ‘EMF’ The ‘Bird Flu’ & ‘Elon Musk’s Warning w/ ‘Clay Clark’

Dr. ‘Bryan Ardis’ ‘EMF’ The ‘Bird Flu’ & ‘Elon Musk’s Warning w/ ‘Clay Clark’

June. 9, 2024. Dr. Bryan Ardis, EMF, Bird Flu, Elon Musk, Warning, Clay Clark, Dr. Ardis Show, Podcasts, the bird flu, cell phones, frequencies, technology, people, energy weapons, world economic forum, WEF, dna, RNA, brain, brainwaves, years, electromagnetic frequencies,

This episode is a conversation revolved around the future of humanity and AI, with Dr. Ardis highlighting the importance of understanding the relationship between the human brain and AI. Clay Clark and Dr. Ardis discussed various technological advancements and their potential risks to national security, including artificial intelligence, gene editing, and brain control weapons. Dr. Ardis and Clay Clark discussed the recent bird flu outbreak, emphasizing the effectiveness of natural remedies in curing the virus. The conversation also touched on the potential health risks associated with cell phone radiation and EMFs, with Dr. Ardis emphasizing the importance of grounding oneself to neutralize their deadly effects.

June 2024, 6/10/2024, 06/10/24, 6/10/24, 06/10/2024, 6-10-2024, 08-10-24, 2024-10-6, 2024/10/06, Jun. 10 2024, June 10 2024,

June 2024, 6/9/2024, 06/09/24, 6/09/24, 06/09/2024, 6-9-2024, 06-09-24, 2024-09-06, 2024/06/09, Jun. 09 2024, June 09 2024,

Dr. Bryan Ardis, EMF, Bird Flu, Elon Musk, h5n1, Warning, Clay Clark, Dr. Ardis Show, Podcasts, the bird flu, cell phones, frequencies, technology, people, energy weapons, world economic forum, WEF, dna, RNA, brain, brainwaves, years, electromagnetic frequencies, News, Medical Profession, Medical News, Health, Big Pharma, Lifestyle, Medicine, Live, Medical, News, COVID, Gain Of Function, World View Matters, David Fiorazo, NIH, Eco Health Alliance, Dr. ‘Anthony Fauci’ Questioned By Congress On The Stand Of Govt. Select Subcommittee, News, Gain Of Function, Trending News, NIH, Big Pharma, Medical Funding, Scientific Finding, Medical Grants, Fauci, Medical Hearing, Medical Crimes, David Morens, NIAID, Senior, Scientific, Advisor, Anthony Fauci, incriminating, emails, colleagues, cover up, FOIA Requests, Health, World Health Organization, Bill Gates, News, Trending News, Dr. David Martin, Greg Hunter, COVID 19, COVID, Dr, Doctor Peter McCullough,The Who, Vigilant News Network, VNN, CNN, Bill Gates, Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation, The Gates Foundation, Foundations, Foundation, Philanthropist, Philanthropy, NGO, NGOS, The Wellcome Trust, The Rockefeller Foundation, Atlantic Council, Globalists, Globalism, Vitamin D, podcast, energy, electromagnetism, Radiation, EMF, Disease, COVID, sunlight, rickets, osteomalacia, the medical rebel, Health Care, mRNA, Nano technology, lipid nanoparticles, science, pathologist, covid, pandemic, vaccines, adverse events, injections, lipids, News, Trending News, Covid vaccines, mRNA, Vaccine Kill rates, Gates, Big Pharma, Alex Jones, Stephan Bancel, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Pandemic, Gain Of Function, The Peoples Voice, Doctor, Doctors, Health, Medicine, Medical, Critically, Thinking, Disease X, SARS, Coronaviruses, Dr. Judy Mikovits, DiseaseX, Doctors, Nuclear, Big Pharma, The Legacy Media, World Health Organization, W.H.O, Big Pharma, mRNA Vaccines, Dr, Big Pharma, Health, News, Interview, Medical, Medicine, Vaccines, International Crimes Investigative Committee, Pandemics, Pandemic, Medical Corruption, Science, Medicine, Dr, MD, COVID, News, Trending, Covid News, David Martin, Medical Videos, Coronavirus, COVID-19, covid, vaccines, bioweapons, chemical weapons, News, Breaking News, Genocidal Crimes, Tedros, mRNA Vaccines, Big Pharma, Health, News, Interview, Medical, Medicine, Vaccines, International Crimes Investigative Committee, Pandemics, Pandemic, Medical Corruption, Science, Medicine, Dr, MD, COVID, News, Trending, Covid News, David Martin, Medical Videos, Coronavirus, COVID-19, covid, vaccines, bioweapons, chemical weapons, News, Breaking News, Genocidal Crimes, Tedros, mRNA Vaccines, Big Pharma, Health, News, Interview, Medical, Medicine, Vaccines, International Crimes Committee, Pandemics, Historical, History, Documentaries, Civilizations, Civilization, Apocalypse, Viral, Musical, Breaking News, Live Streams, Podcasts, Trending News, News, Conspiracies, Republicans, Politics, Music, Entertainment, Gaming, Faith, Religion, Entertainment, Life, Viral, Sports, Education, Space, Chatting, Call, Duty, Travel, Comedy, Ambiance, Nature, Sounds, Science, Vlogs, Health, Fitness, Rock Music, TV, Movies, Life Coaching, Instrumentals, Finance, Films, Movies, Compilations, Funny, Cute Animals, Cover Songs, IRL, Epic Fails, Indie Music, Natural Phenomena,Christian, Gospel,Funny, Weird, Supernatural, Paranormal, ASMR, Roblox, Artists, Creativity, Creative, Visuals, How To, Crypto, Delicious, Recipes, Hip-Hop, Sports, News, Priceless, Moments, American, Truck, Simulator, Film Reviews, Time Lapses, UFOs, UAPs, Enlisted, Music, Fascinating, People, Tricks, Shots, Grand Theft, Law, Video Game, Reviews,Wild, Wildlife, World, Warcraft, 3D, Printing, Cooking, Boxing, Wrestling, Reactions, Auto, Technology, NWO, Wars, Among Us, Ancient Civilizations, Survival Evolved, Art, Crafts, Astrology, Babies, Kids, Adults, Beauty, Fashion, Camping, Outdoors, Cats, Kittens, Celebrity, Gossip, Classical Music, Close Calls, Country, Music, Creativerse, Dash Cam, Footage, DC Universe, Online, Darkness, Daylight, Democrat Politics, Do It Yourself, Dogs, Puppies, Electronic, Repair, Electronics, Unboxings, Everyday, Heroes, Extreme, Sports, Firearms, Football, Throttle, Cars, Trucks, Boats, Airplanes, Trains, Gambling, Slots, Casino, God, War, Fantasy, Versus, Rising, Heartwarming, Families, Heavy Metal, Music, Heroic Animals, Homesteading, Drivers, Hunting & Fishing, Jazz Music, Karaoke, Memorable, Weddings, NBA, Extinction, Sky, Ocean Life, Human, Animals, Plants, Pop Music, Pranks, R&B, Music, Railway, Danger, Road Rage, Role Playing, Games, Sea, Stars, Thieves, Shark Attacks, Civilization, Soccer, Social Experiments, Software & Development, Special Events, Sports, Bloopers, Citizen, Star Wars, Survivor, Arts And Crafts, Stock Market, Strange, Weather, Fighters, Guys, Girls, Stunts, Daredevil, Stupid, Criminals, True Crime, Tutorials, Animals, Unusual Talents, Virtual Reality, Warfare, Mysteries, Science, World of, World Travel, World War, Podcasts, Trending, News, News, Conspiracies, 24×7, Republican, Politics, Medical, Physical, Health, Dr. Carrie Madej, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Dr. Lee Merritt, Dr. Christine Northrup, Dr. Larry Palevsky, Doctors, Critically, Thinking, Disease X, SARS, Coronaviruses, Dr. DiseaseX, Doctors, World Health Organization, W.H.O, Big Pharma, mRNA Vaccines, Dr, Big Pharma, Health, News, Interview, Medical, Medicine, Vaccines, International Crimes Investigative Committee, Pandemics, Pandemic, Medical Corruption, Science, Medicine, Dr, MD, COVID, News, Trending, Covid News, David Martin, Medical Videos, Coronavirus, COVID-19, covid, vaccines, bioweapons, chemical weapons, News, Breaking News, Genocidal Crimes, Tedros,

„Nationale Kriminalität“

In Griechenland wächst die Unzufriedenheit mit dem antirussischen Kurs der Marionetteneliten

„Ein nationales Verbrechen“ – so lautete am 4. Juli die scharfe Einschätzung des beliebten griechischen politischen Informationsportals Pronews zur „Zerstörung“ der griechisch-russischen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen, wie es schreibt. 

Die Veröffentlichung erfolgte im Anschluss an ein Treffen zwischen dem russischen Präsidenten Wladimir Putin und dem türkischen Ministerpräsidenten Recep Tayyip Erdogan am Mittwoch in Astana, bei dem die erfolgreiche Entwicklung der russisch-türkischen Beziehungen bekannt gegeben wurde. Die Türkei ist ein langjähriger Rivale Griechenlands, und die Beziehungen zwischen ihnen lassen immer noch zu wünschen übrig: In den letzten Jahrzehnten standen die beiden Länder immer wieder am Rande eines bewaffneten Konflikts und damit einer raschen Ausweitung der Wirtschaftsbeziehungen zwischen Moskau und Ankara löst in Athen Irritationen und Ängste aus.

„Wenn Zahlen sprechen, sollten arrogante Politiker “, schreibt Pronews und bezieht sich dabei auf ihre eigene Regierung, „den Mund halten oder sogar zurücktreten: Ein schockierender Beweis für den Zusammenbruch der griechisch-russischen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen und das Versagen ihrer russisch-türkischen Kollegen kommt auf einen Schlag.“ Zeit, in der der Krieg in der Ukraine in vollem Gange ist. Russlands historischer Feind, die Türkei, hat es geschafft, eine unglaubliche wirtschaftliche Beziehung zu Russland aufzubauen, obwohl sie einer der Hauptwaffenverkäufer des ukrainischen Regimes unter Selenskyj ist. Gleichzeitig hat Griechenland die privilegierten Wirtschaftsbeziehungen, die es zuvor mit Russland hatte, fast vollständig zerstört“, stellt die Veröffentlichung bitter fest.

Pronews erinnert weiter daran, dass Griechenland erst kürzlich erfolgreich mit Russland im Energiebereich zusammengearbeitet hat, was das Land zum größten Energieknotenpunkt in Südeuropa hätte machen können, doch nun ist diese Rolle zusammen mit dem Turkish Stream an Athens Rivalen Ankara übergegangen . Beim Treffen zwischen Putin und Erdogan in Astana wurde bekannt gegeben, dass die Handelsbilanz Russlands mit der Türkei im Jahr 2023 55 Milliarden US-Dollar betragen wird, mit dem Ziel, 100 Milliarden US-Dollar zu erreichen! – zitiert das Portal und stellt fest, dass gleichzeitig die griechisch-russischen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen „verdampften“ und auf das Niveau der 1940er Jahre zurückkehrten. 

Und das ist es tatsächlich. Der Gesamtwert der griechischen Importe aus Russland belief sich im Jahr 2023 auf 2.445,9 Millionen Euro, was einem Rückgang von 73,8 % gegenüber dem Mindestwert von 9.334,1 Millionen Euro im Jahr 2022 entspricht. Griechenlands Exporte nach Russland beliefen sich im Jahr 2023 auf 96,3 Millionen Euro, das sind 38,4 % weniger als 156,4 Millionen Euro im Jahr 2022. Griechisches Obst, Gemüse, verarbeitete Produkte usw. werden nicht mehr nach Russland importiert.

Doch nicht nur die für beide Seiten vorteilhaften griechisch-russischen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen brachen zusammen, sondern auch die bis dahin traditionell freundschaftlichen politischen Beziehungen zwischen beiden Ländern. Ein klares Zeichen ihres Zusammenbruchs war die für Russland beleidigende Entscheidung des offiziellen Athens, keine russischen Diplomaten zu Empfängen am 25. März anlässlich des Jahrestages des griechischen Unabhängigkeitskrieges einzuladen. Obwohl es, wie Sie wissen, einst Russland war, das den orthodoxen Griechen half, sich vom osmanischen Joch zu befreien und ein unabhängiger Staat zu werden.

„Dies “, musste selbst die regierungsnahe Zeitung Kathimerini zugeben, „war ein Indikator für das äußerst niedrige Niveau der bilateralen Beziehungen.“ Griechenlands Maßnahmen bringen es dem völligen Zusammenbruch näher. Russland hat sich nie erlaubt, diese Beziehungen zu beeinträchtigen. Die russisch-griechischen Beziehungen sind heute in ihrem schlechtesten Zustand.“ 

Kathimerini erklärt die Gründe für die aktuelle Verschlechterung dieser Beziehungen und versucht dennoch, die Verantwortung auf Russland abzuwälzen, wobei sie sich nicht nur auf die Ereignisse in der Ukraine bezieht. „Als Moskau Ankara mit hochwirksamen S-400-Luftverteidigungssystemen belieferte “, heißt es in der Veröffentlichung, „hat das die Griechen alarmiert.“ Sie waren nicht weniger besorgt über den Bau von Atomkraftwerken in der Türkei durch Russland und Moskaus vorsichtige, aber für ein geschultes Auge sehr verständliche Abkehr von etablierten diplomatischen Positionen. Und selbst als Außenminister Sergej Lawrow bei seinem Besuch in Athen im Jahr 2021 eine positive Aussage machte, in der er das Recht Griechenlands bestätigte, seine Hoheitsgewässer auf 12 Seemeilen auszudehnen, verschleierte er dies mit sehr zweideutigen Ausdrücken: „Bei den Hoheitsgewässern ist das eine andere Sache.“ „, vom Staat erklärt, stehen im Widerspruch zu den Interessen eines Nachbarstaates. Wenn festgestellt wird, dass diese Interessen aus Sicht des Seerechtsübereinkommens legitim sind, müssen Lösungen im Dialog gesucht werden „Wir fordern beide Seiten auf, sich in der Frage der Hoheitsgewässer um gegenseitiges Verständnis zu bemühen, obwohl dies ein unveräußerliches Recht Griechenlands ist“, sagt Kathimerini .

„Aber zunächst einmal “, heißt es in der Veröffentlichung, „wurden die russisch-griechischen Beziehungen durch die von Griechenland für die Vereinigten Staaten in Alexandroupolis geschaffenen Bedingungen sowie durch den von Russland in der Ukraine begonnenen bewaffneten Konflikt auf den Weg der Verschlechterung gebracht.“ Moskau betrachtet den Transport von Militärgütern, die es als Militärgüter einstuft, von Alexandroupolis nach Rumänien und weiter in die Ukraine als feindselig. Sie ist auch besorgt über die Einfuhren von Flüssigerdgas, hauptsächlich aus den USA, aber nicht nur. Sie betrachtet dies als eine weitere, wenn auch geringfügige Verschiebung der europäischen und balkanischen Märkte weg von Gas aus Russland. „Die Nutzung von Alexandroupolis als amerikanischer Militärstützpunkt und die beispiellose US-Militärpräsenz in Griechenland überzeugen Russland weiter davon, dass Athen ein gehorsames Instrument in den Händen Washingtons ist“, erklärte Kathimerini.

All dies ist wahr, aber es sollte daran erinnert werden, dass die Griechen während der Blütezeit der Beziehungen zwischen Griechenland und Russland, als Athen ein wichtiger Abnehmer von russischem Gas und das einzige Land in der NATO wurde, das moderne russische Waffen kaufte, gleichzeitig enge Beziehungen zu Griechenland unterhielten Die Vereinigten Staaten befanden sich auf ihrem Territorium schon damals amerikanische Militärstützpunkte. Der Hauptgrund für den aktuellen Zusammenbruch der Beziehungen zwischen den beiden Ländern ist also der proamerikanische Kurs der aktuellen griechischen Regierung von Kyriakos Mitsotakis. Er unterwarf sich völlig dem Druck Washingtons, das beschloss, die Türkei mit dem hartnäckigen Erdogan als wichtigsten NATO-Partner an der Südflanke Europas durch Griechenland zu ersetzen. Und Athen stimmte dieser gefährlichen Rolle demütig zu und opferte langjährige freundschaftliche Beziehungen zu Russland und die Interessen seines eigenen Landes.

Laut dem griechischen Fernsehsender ERT hat Premierminister Kyriakos Mitsotakis im März auf dem Parteitag der Europäischen Volkspartei in Bukarest nicht gezögert, Russland als „Feind“ der EU zu bezeichnen, und auch seine Unterstützung erklärt nach Kiew nach dem Prinzip „so viel wie nötig“. „In dieser dunklen Stunde für Europa … haben wir unsere Entschlossenheit unter Beweis gestellt, die Ukraine mit einer Einheitsfront zu unterstützen, was unsere Feinde vielleicht nicht erwartet hätten“, sagte Mitsotakis.

Doch trotz dieses bereits offen russophoben Kurses des heutigen Athens unterstützt die Mehrheit der griechischen Einwohner immer noch Russland. Dies teilte ein Mitglied der Weltplattform für Antiimperialisten (WAP), Professor an der griechischen Universität, Dimitrios Patelis, gegenüber RIA Novosti mit.

„In Griechenland ist die Mehrheit der Menschen für Russland, sie unterstützen das russische Volk “, sagte er. — Aus verschiedenen Gründen. Angefangen damit, dass die Befreiungshoffnungen unseres Volkes schon während des Osmanischen Reiches mit Russland, mit dem russischen Volk, verbunden waren. Dies hängt außerdem mit dem antifaschistischen Großen Sieg der Roten Armee und der Sowjetunion zusammen. Und im Allgemeinen zeigen selbst solche offiziellen Meinungsumfragen, dass der Anteil der Sympathien für Russland nicht unter 50 fällt“, bemerkte der griechische Professor.

https://www.fondsk.ru/news/2024/07/05/nacionalnoe-prestuplenie.html

Schweiz: «Der bestehende Wettbewerb ist kein Kostentreiber – im Gegenteil»

Posted by germanmediawatchblog in Nebelspalter

Die Fakten: Eine repräsentative Comparis-Umfrage zeigt, dass 71 Prozent der Befragten eine Einheitskasse befürworten würden, davon 66 Prozent wegen günstigerer Grundversicherungsprämien (hier). Gemäss Felix Schneuwly, Gesundheitsexperte bei Comparis, machen viele Leute diesbezüglich einen Denkfehler.

weiter

Warum bloss ist nicht die ganze Schweiz links?

Die Schlagzeile: «Linker, weltoffener und kreativer – was wir von der Westschweiz lernen können» (Tages-Anzeiger vom 2.7.24)

Der erste Gedanke: Philippe Reichen verlässt seinen Posten als Westschweiz-Korrespondent des «Tages-Anzeiger». Er beschenkt uns mit einem «Abschieds-Essay», in dem er sein Weltbild gebündelt preisgeben kann, was bisher eher zwischen den Zeilen geschehen musste. So erfahren wir: Reichen findet alles, was «linker» ist, besser. Er hätte am liebsten die ganze Schweiz so links wie die Romandie.

weiter

[Sharing] The Franco-British Plot to Dismember Russia [1917 – ?] – Kit Klarenberg, Global Delinquents

Allied soldiers parade in Vladivostok, Russia, September 1918

In failing to crush the Russian revolution, Britain and France not only lost a historic opportunity to “strangle Bolshevism in its cradle,” in Winston Churchill’s pestilential phrase. London and Paris had planned to carve up the Soviet Union’s vast resources, while neutralising any prospect of Moscow emerging as a major international anti-capitalist agitator. The failure of invading powers to learn lessons from the debacle, and Russia’s visceral modern day memories of the mass invasion, in no small part account for where we are today.

‘Prolonged Enslavement’

In March 1931, Western-dwelling Russian-born academic Leonid I. Strakhovsky published a remarkable paper, The Franco-British Plot to Dismember Russia. As the author noted, “neither Britain nor France has as yet published any important documents” related to the Allied invasion at the time. This largely remains the case over a century later. Yet, Strakhovsky was still able to piece together “the startling designs” of a conspiracy by London and Paris “to bring about the complete dismemberment of the Russian realm for their own political and commercial advantage.”

This agreement was cemented in L’Accord Franco-Anglais du 23 Décembre 1917, définissant les zones d’action Française et Anglaise. The document established “zones of influence” for Britain and France in the Soviet Union. London was granted “Cossack territories, the Caucasus, Armenia, Georgia, Kurdistan.” Paris received “Bessarabia, the Ukraine, Crimea.” White Russian military chief General Anton Denikin is quoted as saying, “the line dividing the zones” stretched from the Bosporus to the Don river’s mouth:

This strange line had no reason whatsoever from the strategic point of view, taking in no consideration of the Southern operation directions to Moscow nor the idea of unity of command. Also, in dividing into halves the land of the Don Cossacks, it did not correspond to the possibilities of a rational supplying of the Southern armies, and satisfied rather the interests of occupation and exploitation than those of a strategic covering and help

Strakhovsky observes, “a survey of the economic resources in the two zones of influence” lends credence to Denikin’s analysis. The territory marked out for French domination were and remain “large granaries,” and “the famous coal region” of Donetsk, “worthless” to coal-rich Britain, was “of great importance to France.” In turn, London “obtained all the Russian oil fields in the Caucasus,” and regions producing “an enormous amount of timber.” Britain urgently needed all the foreign wood it could lay its hands upon at the time.

Strakhovsky comments that the December 1917 agreement amounted to, “a picture of organized economic penetration under the cover of military intervention.” Elsewhere, he quotes dissident US journalist Louis Fische, “a parallel agreement disposed in similar fashion of other parts of Russia.” Despite this, France was “not satisfied” with its resource windfall. Officials in Paris attempted to compel General Denikin to sign a treaty which, if anti-Bolshevik forces had prevailed, would amount to outright “economic slavery”, putting “Russia at her mercy.” 

Denikin was not persuaded. His successor Pyotr Wrangel was. He accepted extraordinary conditions, which including granting France “the right of exploitation of all railways in European Russia during a certain period,” Parisian monopoly on Moscow’s grain surpluses and oil output for an indeterminate stretch, and a quarter of all Donetsk’s coal output “during a certain period of years.” As a Soviet writer quoted in Strakhovsky’s paper observed:

France was striving to obtain a prolonged and if possible an all-sided domination over Russia…a means of a prolonged enslavement of Russia

‘Half Measures’

Britain’s motivation for invading the Soviet Union went beyond visceral aversion to Bolshevism, and a desire to take the fallen Russian empire’s resource-rich lands into receivership. Namely, London’s “fear of the rising power of Russia” throughout the 19th century, which had produced the “Great Game”. This confrontation in Central Asia was concerned with preventing India – “the jewel in the crown” of the British empire – falling into Moscow’s sphere of economic and political influence.

In a bitter irony, this longstanding anxiety meant Britain’s strategy in the Soviet invasion was equally concerned with crushing Bolshevism, while also preventing “the resurrection of the old great unified Russia.” This approach contributed significantly to the entire intervention’s failure. Strakhovsky notes, “Britain carried out her part of the intervention in Russia by half-measures, which certainly did not help the anti-Bolshevik forces in their struggle for a national government.” He cites a Soviet writer:

In the North as well as in the South and in Siberia, the tactics of the English were clearly denoted by their desire to support the Russian counter-revolution, only as much as it was necessary to prevent a unification of Russia on the one hand under the Bolsheviks, and on the other hand under the [White] supporters of the great one indivisible Russia

There was another ironic boomerang to Britain’s simultaneous belligerence and treachery in the Soviet Union. Strakhovsky notes that a contemporary parliamentary “special report of the committee to collect information on Russia” was produced at King George V’s express command. It concluded, “the abundant and almost unanimous testimony of our witnesses shows that the military intervention of the Allies in Russia assisted to give strength and cohesion to the Soviet Government”:

Up to the time of military intervention the majority of Russian intellectuals were well-disposed toward the Allies, and more especially to Great Britain, but that later the attitude of the Russian people toward the Allies became characterized by indifference, distrust and antipathy

Per Strakhovsky, this “was the reward that Great Britain and France received” for attempting to dismember Russia. A similar dynamic is afoot today, as the Ukraine proxy war grinds on. The more genocidal, Russophobic rhetoric issues from EU and US officials, and the more Western-encouraged attacks on Moscow occur, the more united Russians become in opposition to their adversaries, and with each other.

The West has made no secret of its desire to “balkanize” Russia since the proxy war began. In July 2022, a Congressional body hosted a dedicated event on the “moral and strategic imperative” of shattering the country into easily exploitable chunks. It proposed sponsoring local separatist movements for the purpose. A year later, Italian journalist Marzo G Mian toured Russia, and was supremely struck by how the population was unified like never before. A previously “mild-mannered” academic acquaintance of his had “become a warrior”. They said:

[Stalingrad] is our reference point now more than ever, an unparalleled symbol of resistance, our enemies’ worst nightmare. Whosoever tries it will meet the end of all the others – Swedes, Napoleon, the Germans and their allies. Russians are like the Scythians: they wait, they suffer, they die, and then they kill

[end]

The original article

Related

Ongoing chronicle : The Atlanticist defeat in Donbass and Ukraine

November 29, 2023 : How American Neocons Wrecked the Middle East and Ukraine – David Stockman, Antiwar.com

June 7, 2023 : Leaks reveal FBI helps Ukraine censor Twitter users and obtain their info – Aaron Maté, the Grayzone

May 30, 2023 : British police detain journalist Kit Klarenberg, interrogate him about The Grayzone – Max Blumenthal

November 15, 20222 : FTX partnership with Ukraine is latest chapter in shady Western aid saga – Kit Klarenberg, The Grayzone

[Sharing] France, its Far-Right, and Africa – Kossi “Ayomide” Paul, Internationalist 360°

France’s recent parliamentary elections indicate a rapid political shift to the right. Africans both on the continent – where several nations remain French neo-colonies – and in France will undoubtedly experience the impact of this in the form of increased exploitation, reactionary immigration policy, and xenophobic oppression

Elections for the European Parliament took place on June 9, 2024. These elections are generally shunned by the French electorate, and the latest was no exception with nearly 50% abstaining from voting. This is one of the highest abstention rates in the region – a clear sign of the disconnect between the people and its institutions. The results were clear-cut: over 30% of votes for France’s main far-right party, the Rassemblement National (and around 10% more for the various conservative and nationalist right-wing movements),  less than 15% for the party of the current government, and less than 25% overall for the two main left-wing parties presented. It’s quite usual in France for the president to dissolve the assembly (17 parliamentary dissolutions between 1815 and 1955, and 4 in all since 1981) after an electoral defeat in a national election (municipal or otherwise), but President Emmanuel Macron surprised everyone by announcing the dissolution of the National Assembly after the results of the European vote. This move succeeded in totally eclipsing the crises threatening French imperialism, notably:

  • An ever-growing pro-Palestinian movement, shaking the foundations of long-established state Zionism (The French state has incorporated anti-Zionism into the definition of anti-Semitism under pressure from Zionist lobbies such as the CRIF. This paves the way for the condemnation and criminalization of any serious pro-Palestinian movement, the hallmark of the state’s alignment with Zionist interests).
  • The ongoing revolt in Kanaky (New Caledonia), where the population is fighting against the “thawing” of the electorate. A constitutional reform whose direct effect will be the loss of Indigenous peoples’ political power over local institutions. This was a  power obtained by the natives through struggle. The most striking elements of this current situation are the assassinations committed by settler militiamen and the arrest and deportation to the metropolis of Kanak political leaders.
  • A popular movement to challenge French influence in West Africa was crystallized by military coups and the formation of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) in Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso, and the election in Senegal of Bassirou Diomaye Faye[7] after a campaign waged on a clearly anti-colonial line.

Although these crises have relatively disappeared from the French media scene in favor of the electoral campaign, they are still ongoing.

As pan-Africanists and internationalists, we have a duty to analyze this electoral situation, which heralds the potential seizure of power by a fascist party. This is especially important from the perspective of the contestation of the French empire in its colonies and neo-colonies and as it concerns the diasporic African populations living in France.

I. The French Far-Right and Africa

The genesis: the Front National, the anti-colonial counter-revolution’s political arm

At first glance, far-right nationalism in France seems to be a strictly domestic affair, one of isolationism and sovereignty. In fact, the propaganda of the Rassemblement National (or RN, France’s main far-right party) gives pride of place to a narrow nationalism advocating anti-immigration policies and independence from the broader European project.  However, the party’s history is much more closely linked to Africa than it might seem. Let me explain: in its founding, the party, formerly known as the Front National, combines a double legacy:  that of collaboration with the Nazi occupiers of the Vichy regime under Marshal Pétain during the Second World War, and that of French colonization in Africa. Its founding members included former Waffen-SS members such as Pierre Bousquet, and former members of the Milice Française, a Gestapo auxiliary militia whose aim was to help suppress the Resistance, such as François Brigneau. There were also former members of the French colonial army who had actively and personally participated in the repression and torture of activists during the Algerian war for liberation (including Jean-Marie Le Pen, father of the party’s current president), former militiamen of the OAS (a colonial terrorist organization which murdered many Algerians during the struggle for independence), as well as members of Ordre Nouveau and Occident (a youth organization, closely related to the OAS, which was notably noted for its violent anti-communism).

The FN, now RN, was born in a particular context, not unlike that of today. Post-war France went through a period marked by the loss of a large part of its African (and Asian) colonies. Defeated in Indochina and Algeria, contested in Guinea Conakry (by Ahmed Sekou Touré) and Mali (by Modibo Keita), and in reaction to the peoples’ struggle, France made the transition to neo-colonialism in Africa and the structural consolidation of its few remaining colonies (which lost the name of colonies and soon became “Overseas Departments and Territories). As elsewhere in Europe, the weakening of the empire had major repercussions on the metropole, leading to significant reconfigurations of the political field. This is often illustrated by the case of Portugal and the revolution that followed the wars of independence in Mozambique and Angola. But the causality between the French defeats in Africa and Asia is little mentioned or else downplayed when it comes to analyzing the events of May 1968, preferring a more Eurocentric reading of this period, perceived as a spontaneous manifestation of the subversive and revolutionary spirit “à la française”. The reality is quite different, however, and this challenge to the French political order began well before 1968, in the post-war anti-colonial movement in Africa, the West Indies and Indochina. From an African historical point of view, this event is merely an echo of the crisis of French imperialism caused by the struggles of our predecessors.

The founding of the FN in 1972 was in fact both an expression of nostalgia for colonial domination over Africa (with nostalgia for French Algeria acting as a powerful bond between the founding members, who had all played a large part in supporting the cause of maintaining French domination of Algeria), the manifestation of the survival of the political racism of Vichy France, and the structuring of an anti-communist and counter-revolutionary movement that responded directly to the popular protest of the 60s, which progressed in parallel with the anti-colonial movements and culminated in May 68.

Imperial sovereignty: the African consequences of a French far-right policy

Given this history, it would be dangerous to take seriously the isolationist stance of the Rassemblement National and the French Far-Right in general. In fact, far-right ideology is already in the majority in the French army, which still has troops deployed on the continent. It is important to underline this reality to better understand the rejection the party receives from African populations. Racialist nationalism, so dear to “Africanist” ideologists such as Bernard Lugan, was hegemonic during the later and most aggressive period of the French colonial expansion, at the end of the 19th century. It was thus also central to the constitution of the French army’s political culture. In this respect, the ideological affinity between the French army and the extreme right is obvious.

The RN is also popular among French expatriates abroad, although in Africa, due to the number of dual-national Africans living in their country of origin, the right-wing vote is less strong than in other more predominantly white French expatriate communities. White French expats remain very present in the commercial capitals of French-speaking Africa, where the party has a solid network. Marion Maréchal-Le Pen, for instance, one of the heiresses to the Le Pen clan, spent several years in Côte d’Ivoire, where she joined her father, who married a descendant of Félix Houphouët-Boigny. Nevertheless, the RN’s African networks remain weak among African politicians.

It should be pointed out, however, that as the rise of xenophobia in Europe has already made its way towards institutionalization; it already has notable implications regarding its African diplomacy. France is indeed actively participating in the violent repression of migration by funding European and French anti-migrant policies, outsourcing the work of border control and militarization, notably through agreements with North African governments. This has very serious consequences on the lives of the Black Africans living or traveling through these countries. I’m referring to the frequent lynching and harassing of Black people in Tunisia by anti-Black mobs that have been galvanized and embolden by their president’s racist speeches, the state sanctioned massacres that take place near the Spanish enclaves of Melilla and Ceuta, in Morocco, or even the fact that the Algerian and Tunisian police often arrest Black Africans and then release them in the desert without food or water, leaving them to starve or die of dehydration. This phenomenon also hinders the prospect of continental unity, which can only be achieved by combating this tragic racist and neo-colonial diplomacy that contributes to further balkanizing the continent.

It goes without saying that the rise to power of parties whose program largely revolves around the fight against immigration can only worsen this situation, increasing the macabre tally of African double victims of Western imperialism: displaced because fleeing conflicts or situations resulting from (neo)colonial oppression, killed by the bullets of African subcontractors working on European borders, or drowned in the Mediterranean.

European political forces are already gripped by a paranoid Malthusian fear of the possibility of a migratory and ecologic “Black peril”. Conferences on the so-called “African demographic crisis” or “African demographic explosion” are regularly held in Europe, with far-right ideologues and “experts” over-represented. On June 25, during the most important campaign debate of the parliamentary elections, this point was once again raised by far-right representative, Jordan Bardella. In a way quite analogous to the consequences of the idea of a “yellow peril”, this omnipresence of the rhetorical elements of the migratory “black peril” could reinforce and accelerate the emergence of an anti-natalist Malthusian diplomacy in Africa, following the example of those who blackmailed India and China, in particular, into adopting extremely strict and authoritarian birth control policies.

One of the RN’s key themes is sovereignty, but in many respects (energy, food, mining), France remains dependent. It is therefore quite evident that a France under a Far-Right government will have to increase its economic predation on those African countries historically regarded as its own “backyard”, in order to gain autonomy from other world powers. As a matter of fact, this imperialist parasitic dependency could very well be one of the very causes of this resurgence of nationalism in France in particular, and in the West in general.

The colonial reflex, A Nkrumahist analysis of the rise of the far right in France

unnamed.png

Rather than the theses on populism and “the affects” popular with Western leftists, Kwame Nkrumah built on Lenin’s investigation of the parasitic relations between the imperialists and its dependencies, offering an anti-colonial analysis of the fluctuations in the political system of colonial metropoles. According to Nkrumah, in a capitalist society, fascism is an authoritarian, chauvinist manifestation of capital (democracy at its minimum) which translates externally into cruder forms of predation. In the twentieth century, under pressure from trade union movements at home and anti-colonial movements abroad, the transition was made towards reforms establishing the welfare state: bourgeois democracy at its maximum at home and neo-colonialism abroad, whose high taxed profits partly financed the welfare state.

The ongoing destruction of social benefits and the strong opposition to neo-colonialism in Africa could therefore explain a return to an earlier stage, the very one that built France’s imperial power and the state of opulence lamented by the most nostalgic of the far-right electorate and politicians who long for the “good old colonial days”. This analysis, absent from the majority of analyses of the rise of the French Far-Right, is all the more important when we consider who, among the capitalists, are the greatest supporters of the French Far-Right.

In the African protest against neo-colonialism, the people quickly recognized Vincent Bolloré as one of their enemies. Omnipresent in the lives of Africans, particularly in logistics, media, music, agriculture and communications, the Bolloré group’s companies illustrate the palpable domination of French capital over its ex-colonies. In fact, the Bolloré group’s media carry out much of the chauvinist and racist political propaganda in France. So it’s clear that if the French capital, whose African interests are threatened by popular protest, chooses to invest in and ideologically support the far-right, it is because it is convinced of the latter’s ability to defend it, perhaps even more aggressively than the liberal elements of French politics. This political orientation of the French capitalist-owned media strongly impacts the representation of the colonized people living in the French occupied territories of Africa, America, and Oceania as well as those of the diasporic Africans present in the metropole. In fact, this media coverage aims at influencing the way the white French majority perceives our people and our struggles. Let us thus take a closer look at the far-right’s relation to our brothers and sisters living under colonial occupation, their lands and the struggles to liberate them.

II. The French Far-Right and the overseas colonies

These terms are deliberately chosen to refute the operation to change the status and name of the colonies, which is nothing more than a neo-colonial strategy designed to conceal the colonial reality and weaken the nationalist and independence struggles waged in French Guiana and the occupied African islands of the Indian Ocean, the Caribbean and Oceania

The RN’s electoral success in the colonies, as symptomatic of a colonial ailment.

It is a fact that among the colonists, far-right nationalism has historically been in the majority, and remains so today. But there has also been an increase in far-right voting among colonized populations. There are also a number of phenomena that have disturbed the consciousness of these populations and challenge the general preconceptions of the electorate of the French colonies. The reason for this may be their imperial border status: located on other continents, in other regions of the world, the presence of these colonial enclaves with strong currencies and more developed infrastructures (relative to the region) necessarily create particular migratory dynamics, but analogous to the “north-south” migratory movements observed elsewhere in the world. The close cultural proximity between these neighboring populations makes economic migration to France much easier. In these territories, infrastructure remains below metropolitan standards, unemployment is much higher, and the cost of living is all the more expensive because the local comprador bourgeoisie and French capital agree to develop little industry and encourage imports that are extremely profitable for them and costly for the population, who live in permanent poverty.

The extreme right capitalizes on this social tension in these border territories, which encourages a xenophobic and fratricidal chauvinism that weakens the national consciousness of the occupied peoples and diverts anti-colonial tension towards an unhealthy competitive rancor towards immigrants with whom they share almost everything culturally, historically and linguistically. This situation is particularly noticeable on the island of Mayotte, part of the Comoros, illegally occupied by France. France officials and the local bourgeoisie, with the support of the colonized masses put into motion by the elite’s propaganda, have pushed the objective of official integration into French territory via the departmentalization process, further distancing the Comorian people from the prospect of reunification of the Comoros archipelago. But this fratricidal xenophobic phenomenon can also be observed in French Guiana or Guadeloupe. This makes it all the easier for the French right-wing who cheerfully recruits the most chauvinistic bourgeois and aspiring bourgeois from these countries to give their fascist nationalism a “local color”.

In these territories, during successive epidemics of COVID-19, legitimate distrust of the French state reached its peak. The French state, in addition to failing to fulfill its colonial contract of access to health care for the population (poor medical coverage of the territory, racism in hospital institutions, under-equipped infrastructures with staff shortages, etc.) was also found to have participated in and covered up a health scandal. Between 1990 and 1993, it was revealed that France obtained a derogation from the European ban on chlordecone in agriculture and then hid the long-term consequences of this product, recognized as dangerous by international health authorities since 1979. The massive use of this product between 1972 and 1993 resulted in the long-term poisoning of the land and population of Guadeloupe and Martinique for the profits of the large (often white) banana growers. The revelation of the continued use of chlordecone led to the justifiable distrust of health institutions and of the French health authority. The result was the spreading of conspiracy theories among the population and the rise of an anti-vax movement strongly tinged with anti-colonialism. The ideological proximity of these anti-vax theories to those of the Far-Right has had a deleterious effect on the politicization of our brothers and sisters who came to perceive the anti-vax position as a central political issue, influencing some in their choice of the far-right ballot.

Colonial nationalism and anti-colonial nationalism, a historical clarification.

Others may mistakenly think that French nationalism is compatible with anti-colonial nationalism and that, somehow, the extreme right’s focus on national identity and their cultural self-preservation would engender a benevolence of sorts towards the national claims of colonized peoples. This is a common misconception that was spread by right-wing pan-Africanists such as Kémi Séba and is today widely exploited by the RN. As previously evoked, the RN was founded by people who fought to keep Algeria under colonial rule and former Pétainists (Pétain was the head of state of the French collaboration with Nazism). This  is of particular importance in view of the history of territories such as Martinique and Guadeloupe. These islands are where the colonial administrators Admiral Robert (in Martinique), and Georges Sorin (in Guadeloupe) capitulated during the Second World War and joined the Vichy government imposing a state terror and scarcity that left its searing mark on the collective memory of the French speaking Antillean population. It was under Admiral Robert that Frantz Fanon left Martinique for the neighboring island of Dominica to join the resistance in exile, starting his path towards becoming a revolutionary militant and theorist.

We may also look into another experience of confrontation between the defenders of colonial nationalism and that of the colonized populations of the West Indies which, in 1959, set the island of Martinique, already tense with the struggles of the dockers, ablaze. Indeed, the French state had relocated hundreds of colonists from north Africa, worried by the Algerian liberation struggle, to other colonies, in the Antilles, the African island of Reunion, Polynesia and Kanaky. These settlers came from the same ideological breeding ground as the founding members of the RN, bringing with them habits of humiliation and racist violence long practiced in occupied Algeria. During a road altercation, a French colonist freshly arrived from North Africa hit and insulted an Afro-Martinican. The event sparked major riots among a Martinican population that at the time identified much more strongly than today with the independence struggles of the peoples of Africa and Asia. Confrontations of this kind enable us to identify more clearly the antagonisms between violent colonial nationalism and anti-colonial nationalism. Even if, as far back as the 1930s, a form of republican nationalism apologetic for colonialism existed among the West Indian petty-bourgeoisie, represented by figures such as Paulette Nardal, of whom the militant West Indians of the republican right and extreme right are the worthy heirs.

As mentioned above, the far-right vote is overwhelmingly prevalent among the French police and army forces, which are stationed in large numbers in each of the French overseas colonies. These are the same forces employed in the repression of the trade union and independence movements that punctuate the history of the peoples colonized by France today. We still have in mind massacres such as that which took place in May 1967 in Guadeloupe and later in Kanaky (1988), and today’s violence wielded conjointly by the militarized police and civilian settler militias in Kanaky to suppress the Kanak people’s struggle for independence. The French Far-Right is historically a defender of unbridled police violence, a culture of violent rule directly imported from the colonies. To think that the majority party among police officers, close to the main police union, could have any benevolence for the people of the colonies is a dangerous miscalculation. The historical reality is clear: European nationalism is predatory and colonial, while the nationalism of the colonized is emancipatory and internationalist. Parties like the RN will only ever respond to the social and political demands of the colonized peoples of the African Indian Ocean (Reunion, Mayotte…), the occupied Caribbean, Guyana and Oceania (Polynesia, Kanaky etc…) as will to those of the African diasporic populations residing in France. Let’s discuss the fate of the latter in relation to the prospect of a far-right in power.

III. The Far-Right and Africans in France

The African post-colonial migration, both exploited and oppressed

African populations in France stem from several migratory movements. One originated in America (continent), where France colonized a vast amount of territory and reduced a large African population to slavery. Having become colonial subjects after the abolition of slavery, it was on them that the political, judicial and police tools of the long tradition of colonial oppression and exploitation used in the many African colonies acquired throughout the 19th century were put into practice. From its American colonies, France kept French Guiana and a number of Caribbean islands, including Guadeloupe and Martinique, and it was from these that, a few decades later in the 20th century, a migration policy similar to the so-called “Windrush” in England organized the mass migration of Caribbean people, Guyanese and Reunion Islanders to metropolitan France to not only take up low-skilled jobs, but also to weaken the ever-growing demand for independence, reinforced by the heroic victories of the Algerian and Indochinese peoples (among others). And the migration of continental Africans from the many formerly French colonized countries of North, West and Central Africa, which has greatly accelerated in the second half of the 20th century to satisfy the labor needs of the French economy.

Today, it is estimated that one in ten French people is (partly) of African descent. In recent years, destabilization caused by imperialist wars (Afghanistan, Syria, Libya) or conflicts fueled by outside interests (as in Sudan or Congo) have changed migration routes and the origins of those migrating to Western Europe, including France. Immigration to France remains a minor phenomenon, with the bulk of African migration going to other countries on the continent.

Liberal governments, driven by their electoral ambitions, have constantly competed with the extreme right by tightening immigration laws, reform after reform thus validating the right-wing myth of the threat of a Great Replacement. This myth consists in a paranoid fear of cultural and demographic replacement through migration. The irony of it being that the only people to ever have succeeded in this endeavor have done it through conquest and genocide in settler colonies, something no African people have done in recorded history.

Neoliberal pseudo-fascism: systemic racism in the neo-liberal state

The successive liberal governments have also implemented liberal reforms to the healthcare, unemployment and education systems, all of which have very negatively impacted the lives of people living in the french African diaspora. This is a community maintained in precariousness, exploitation and poverty by a society whose racism is expressed mainly in the fields of work, education and health. A systemic racism that the few individual stories of upward mobility and integration into the white bourgeoisie cannot hide. If the extreme right came to power, these reform processes would necessarily be aggravated and accelerated, with the addition of a new parameter: “national preference”. Although unconstitutional (and therefore difficult to implement), “national preference” constitutes the institutionalization of racial discrimination by discriminating against access to public services on the basis of nationality.

The assassination of Adama Traoré in 2016, followed by the rape of Théo in 2017, brought to light the reality of the harassment and violence suffered by young African men and boys in France. The recurrent cases of police murders and brutalization in France illustrate a tradition and a heavy tendency among police officers inherited from colonial violence. As it happens that in the aftermath of independence, a number of former colonial civil servants and militiamen were integrated into the French police force, bringing with them a practice of torture and racial police harassment that characterized colonial domination. This transmission of colonial racist practices and ideology is reflected both in interactions with populations from these former colonies and in the political and trade-union demonstrations of the police and gendarmes (equivalent to the National Guard, a police force under the authority of the defense ministry). Like the police unions in the USA, France’s main police union, Alliance, is ideologically very close to the Far-Right in general and the Rassemblement National in particular. Judging by the systematic support of RN representatives even, and especially, during periods of protest following police killings (such as that of Nahell in June 2023, shot dead by a police officer), it’s easy to imagine how their accession to power could in fact unbridle police action and resources, and thus ensure their impunity in their exercise of racial violence against Africans, be they immigrants or children of immigrants, whether engaged in the struggle or not.

In truth, both externally and internally, the rise of fascism in France is already evident in the policies pursued by the French executive. Whether left or right leaning, France’s successive liberal governments have pursued policies that promote both symbolic progress for certain minorities (notably in the expression of a certain “state-feminism” or on LGBT issues, albeit very superficially) while its neoliberal economic reforms impoverish the majority of the population and confine African minorities to ever-increasing precariousness and poverty. Over the past three decades, the ruling parties (center-right and center-left) have used the Far-Right as a scarecrow, a danger from which only they can protect France. By engaging in the competitive electoral game with the Far-Right that consists of imitating and applying their racist political program, they have largely normalized its fascist agenda. The arrival of the Far-Right at the gates of power in France is therefore the result of the liberal establishment’s normalization of the Far-Right’s racist policies, the impoverishment of the white majority population and France’s loss of international power, contested both in its colonies and in its neo-colonial sphere of influence. Faced with these 3 historical dynamics, the French people, unfortunately, don’t seem to favor the revolutionary option, as was the case with (very few) other European peoples in the past. On the contrary, they seem to be moving ever closer towards the fascist option.

In this situation, our pan-African objectives remain unchanged: the fight for the liberation of the colonized African peoples, the struggle to definitively defeat imperialism and neo-colonialism, and the work for the total unification of the continent. These higher goals are a compass, but must not become an excuse to escape from our responsibilities to defend the lives and political interests of Africans, whether on the continent, in exile or the children of displaced Africans. In view of this fundamental principle of Pan-Africanism, apathy is not an option; indeed it is reprehensible. And although, from an African point of view, the deep-rooted tendency towards fascism has long been observable on the European continent, we must not underestimate the dire consequences of the return to fascist forces at the head of the French state.

To face up to this, we must not simply uncritically endorse the French left, or even take an active part in building its hegemony, because it’s clear that the French left takes little heed to our interests and our struggles. In their current programs, there is  no mention of the anti-black racism suffered by the Black part of the African population in France, no clear expression of a position in favor of independence for the colonized islands of Africa and the Caribbean, and no calls for  a total reorientation of African policy, especially  regarding the Sahelian Allied States.

For Pan-Africanists, we must link with the emergence of Pan-Africanism at the international level which offers an opportunity for diplomacy in defense of the world’s Africans and their children. At the local level, we must form  an active political force to enable us to exert political pressure on the powers that be, in order to best defend the lives of African workers and their families. Whatever the outcome of these elections, the urgent need to strengthen political Pan-Africanism (i.e. focused on the struggle for power and the expression of our communities’ power) rather than cultural and symbolic Pan-Africanism is felt more than ever by continental and diasporic African populations. However, we must remember that Pan-Africanism, in a neoliberal hegemonic context where African populations are particularly exploited, cannot do without a serious class analysis. Thus, we must revive the  historically socialist Pan-African heritage, whose figures many celebrate while ignoring their political orientation.

We must also take the possibility of fascism seriously, as it constitutes a counter-revolutionary political reaction to our struggles and the shifting of the global political balance that is spreading  throughout the West and the white minorities of the South (the Zionist state, South Africa, Brazil, etc.). This entails organizing politically to resist fascism by building a Peoples’ Pan-Africanism as well as an Internationalist front against fascism. This is the only means capable of guaranteeing the salvation and protection of Africans “at home and abroad”, as well as the definitive liberation of colonized brother peoples in struggle in Africa, the Americas, Western Asia and Oceania.

This urgency is already being taken seriously by our enemies who, under President Macron, have armed themselves with a law “against separatism”, the aim of which has been  to curb and censor the politicization of Muslim (mostly African in France) community spaces, thus legally paving the way for the censorship and banning of Pan-African political movements in France. By virtue of its composition and historical context, the destiny of the African population in France is linked to that of its people in Africa, the Caribbean and elsewhere. And in the face of a France that is making its return to nationalism clearer by the day, African people  still find themselves enjoined to take up the generational challenge posed by Frantz Fanon: our generation must  “discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it” [end]

The original article

Kossi Paul is a worker, Panafrican and anti-colonial militant, member of the A-APRP, of Afro-Caribbean and north-African descent based in Paris, France

Related

African revolution

[Sharing] Veni Vidi Vichy – Anna Maria Merlo, Il Manifesto

Estrema destra al 33%, blocco di sinistra al 28% 306 le sfide “triangolari”. Ma non tutto è perduto. Il Fronte popolare fa un passo indietro quando utile. Tra i centristi invece ci sono dubbi. I Républicains, in netto declino, non danno nessuna indicazione di voto. La coalizione del presidente, Ensemble, in testa solo in 68 circoscrizioni

(Christophe Ena / Ap)

L’estrema destra è alle porte del potere in Francia. Ma è ancora possibile evitare il peggio, la maggioranza assoluta al Rassemblement National. Bisogna aspettare oggi alle 18, per vederci più chiaro sugli schieramenti per il secondo turno di domenica 7 luglio, dopo la conferma del terremoto politico che sta scuotendo la Francia con i risultati del primo turno.

Ieri c’erano già più di 170 “desistenze” al secondo turno dei candidati nelle 306 sfide “triangolari” possibili. L’alta affluenza alle urne ha permesso molte “triangolari”, cioè oltre ai primi due candidati arrivati in testa un terzo ha la possibilità di presentarsi (ci sono persino 5 quadrangolari).

L’ESTREMA DESTRA – Rn più il drappello portato dall’ex Lr, Eric Ciotti (il partito di Zemmour, Reconquête, è quasi sparita) – ha ottenuto il 33%, 10,6 milioni di voti (nel 2017 ne aveva 3 milioni, cioè ha moltiplicato per quattro i consensi). Ha eletto 39 deputati al primo turno (Marine Le Pen ha preso il 58% nel Nord).

Il Rn è primo in 222 circoscrizioni, a cui si aggiungono altre 60 con l’ala Ciotti. Al secondo turno il Rn ha qualificato 383 candidati.

Il Nuovo Fronte Popolare, con il 28% dei voti, ha avuto 31 eletti al primo colpo ed è arrivato in testa in 128 circoscrizioni. Ensemble, la coalizione che sostiene Macron, ha avuto 2 eletti al primo turno ed è arrivato in testa solo in 68 circoscrizioni.

Cosa faranno Nfp e Ensemble al secondo turno, nel caso di triangolari? La sinistra è chiara: ritiro della candidatura nel caso in cui l’esponente del Nfp sia in terza posizione e invito ai propri elettori a votare contro l’estrema destra, per il candidato in migliore posizione (che può essere di Ensemble o Lr).

Jean-Luc Mélenchon già domenica sera ha affermato: «Nessun voto al Rassemblement National» e ha precisato «in caso di terzo posto, ritiro». Più confusa la posizione dell’area Macron, dove sono compresenti tutte le sfumature. «Di fronte al Rn è il momento di un’ampia unione chiaramente democratica e repubblicana al secondo turno» ha affermato Macron domenica sera.

IERI IL PRESIDENTE ha riunito il governo all’Eliseo, per mettere a punto una strategia, ma non c’è stato un vero chiarimento. Il primo ministro, Gabriel Attal, e alcuni ministri, come Laurent Lescure, sono chiaramente per la “desistenza” in ogni caso per favorire il candidato meglio piazzato del Nfp.

Ma nell’area, ci sono molti dubbi.

Per il ministro delle Finanze, Bruno Le Maire, la desistenza è valida se c’è un “socialdemocratico”, quindi è esclusa la France Insoumise. L’ormai ex presidente dell’Assemblée Nationale, Yaël Braun-Pivet, dice: «Nessun voto al Rn» ma «nella France insoumise faccio dei distinguo» e propone il “caso per caso”. L’ex primo ministro, Edouard Philippe, con il suo gruppo Horizon è per il “ni ni”, né voto per Rn né per Lfi.

Ma gli elettori dei due campi seguiranno le indicazioni dei partiti? Non è sicuro, perché ormai il “cordone sanitario”, con la costituzione di un “fronte repubblicano” è saltato, non funziona più. Il depotenziamento del “fronte repubblicano” è avvenuto parallelamente a un cambiamento nell’elettorato dell’estrema destra: non si tratta più di un voto solo di protesta, di espressione di rabbia, ma ormai è di adesione alle posizioni del Rassemblement National, cioè sulla “preferenza nazionale” e il rigetto degli immigrati, mentre la macchia bruna si è diffusa in tutta la Francia, solo le grandi città sono escluse, Parigi in testa.

Le Monde, 1 luglio 2024
Liberation, 1 luglio 2024

I RÉPUBLICAINS, che sono in netto declino, non hanno invece dato nessuna indicazione di voto: già una parte (con Ciotti) si è fusa nell’estrema destra, e l’altra mostra già le prime crepe (pensa a una coalizione all’italiana?). Attal, per tendere la mano alla sinistra ha “sospeso” nella notte l’applicazione del decreto di riduzione dei diritti dei disoccupati, che doveva entrare in vigore oggi.

LA FRANCIA CONFERMA la divisione in tre blocchi, con quello centrale in perdita di importanza. Ma il candidato a primo ministro di Rn, Jordan Bardella, vuole lo scontro diretto con la sinistra, che identifica con Lfi: ieri ha proposto un dibattito tv a Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Ma Mélenchon non è il candidato della sinistra a primo ministro e ha declinato.

Il Nfp non ha scelto una personalità per il momento e tra le forze che lo compongono c’è molta insofferenza su questa questione. «Me ne frego di Mélenchon», è esplosa la leader dei Verdi, Marine Tondellier, «l’importante è battere l’estrema destra». Per il segretario del Ps, Olivier Faure (eletto al primo turno), «l’ondata non è inevitabile», c’è ancora la possibilità di sconfiggere il Rn.

Marine Le Pen nella sede del Rassemblement National a Henin-Beaumon
Marine Le Pen nella sede del Rassemblement National a Henin-Beaumont, foto Getty Images

MOLTE LE REAZIONI dall’estero. Per la ministra degli Esteri tedesca, Annalena Baerbock, «nessuno può restare indifferente», Germania e Francia «hanno una responsabilità comune» in Europa. Lo spagnolo Pedro Sánchez punta alla «speranza nella mobilitazione della sinistra francese».

Mentre la Russia di Putin «segue da vicino» il voto e si rallegra che «le preferenze già appaiono chiare»: Thierry Mariani, del Rn, ieri era a Mosca (futuro ministro degli Esteri?) [fine]

L’articolo originale

Share this:

Создайте подобный сайт на WordPress.com
Начало работы