Former President Obama explains how to destroy democracy and public trust in leadership
Obama explains part of the Cloward-Piven revolutionary strategy. Cloward and Piven were radical professors at Columbia University, supposedly where Obama attended some college and graduated. FRANCES FOX PIVEN: “At the heart of our argument in both books was the threat … Continue readingFormer President Obama explains how to destroy democracy and public trust in leadership
par Patrick Reymond
Pour Gail Tverberg, le moment de vérité pour les économies «avancées» est là. Elles vont s’effondrer, et les autres vont vivre des moments de pénibilités certains, parce que ces économies dites avancées plutôt qu’avancées, ont quand même un rôle, celui du ventre du monde, qu’un monde s’acharne à nourrir, en échange de gri-gri même plus réels, mais des bits sur des ordinateurs.
C’est aussi bête que Robinson Crusoë qui passait son temps à accumuler, alors qu’il était seul.
L’effet de levier, en réalité la dette pour l’appeler par son nom, a eu un effet important. En même pas l’espace d’une vie, les taux d’intérêt pour l’immobilier sont passés de 20% (et encore, en prêts bonifiés), à 1% avant de remonter au taux «démentiels» de 4%.
De fait, tel un camé, le secteur avait besoins de fix de plus en plus forts, sans réellement aller mieux.
Mais, à l’inverse de Tverberg, je pense que la guerre n’est même plus une solution. En effet, les événements d’Ukraine prouvent par l’absurde que l’empire oxxidenté n’est même plus capable de mener une guerre. Imprimer de la monnaie, c’est facile, surtout avec un ordinateur, mais ça ne crée pas de fulmicoton, de chars, d’obus, d’avions et de tout ce qu’on veut quand on n’a plus d’usine, ou quand l’adversaire est capable d’encaisser des coups qui, en plus, ne sont que des coups d’épingles. Désagréables, sans plus.
Parce que la monnaie ne crée pas la capacité de production qui n’existe plus, et ces capacités ont été tellement dévastées partout, qu’elles sont difficilement reconstituables, en plus, en privant la population d’un confort qu’elles estiment mérité et allant de soi.
Oui, en 1914 on produisait avec beaucoup moins d’énergie beaucoup plus d’armement qu’aujourd’hui, mais on n’avait pas 38 millions de voitures, des vacances au Bahamas où n’étaient allés que quelques loups de mer, et encore, pas pour visiter, mais professionnellement.
Sans doute, la seule chose qui empêche les pays «autres» qu’avancées, de renverser la table, et la crainte, pour chez eux, de l’onde de choc de l’effondrement. Et la perte d’actifs financiers dont ils espèrent au moins récupérer une partie, peut être à la chinoise, en le dépensant ailleurs en investissant et ainsi, en acquérant du réel et solide.
Sans doute, dans l’histoire, la Russie remerciera du régime de sanction qui l’ont aidé à retourner à un grand niveau d’autarcie, digne de l’URSS stalinienne.
Les problèmes actuels, est que les prix doivent augmenter, mais qu’ils ne le peuvent pas, ou du moins pas assez, et qu’ils oscillent entre baisse et hausse, au fur et à mesure des contractions de la demande, qui aboutissent à de nouveaux excédents en énergie. Bien entendu, la fabrication de torche cul à une échelle inédite, n’aide pas.
Problème américain, la guerre, censée apporter la prospérité ne l’apporte plus guère.
Problème français, la lutte des classes est une constante de notre histoire, révolution française, troubles de XVIe siècle improprement appelée «guerres de religion», en réalité conflit social de haute intensité, avec son paroxysme commençant par la saint Barthélemy, Armagnac contre Bourguignon, la partie la plus développée du royaume, tenant pour le duc de Bourgogne, et le sud du Royaume, valant plus que le nord dans la guerre, parce que plus pauvre (mais plus vaste), elle fournit de meilleurs éléments militaires, dont les gascons, avec, en souvenir de Du Guesclin, les Bretons. Mais n’oublions pas les autres…
Pour résoudre ce problème et ne pas régler la cause, on a des dépenses sociales plus importantes, normale, parce que sous le calme apparent et la bourgeoisie tranquille, le pays est structurellement, un volcan, et toutes les éruptions qu’on a eu du mal à arrêter, totalement impensables quelques mois avant seulement…
La dépense sociale ne date pas d’hier, c’est Charlemagne qui crée la dime pour calmer le jeu. Fort longtemps, elle ne fut pas contestée. Seulement, après le concordat de 1515, les bénéfices des domaines religieux étaient donnés comme dotation à des nobles, dont on sait la générosité envers la population. La générosité en paires de baffes, faut-il préciser, chose qui entraina la déflagration de 1560 et plus tard, celle de 1789.
Lors de l’affaire du collier, l’archevêque de Rohan, avait 800 000 livres de revenus, mais la seule intervention en faveur des défavorisés était envers les défavorisés de sa famille, dont il payait les banqueroutes aussi multiples que variées tout en menant grand train. Le roi dit de l’archevêque de Paris, qu’il serait bon qu’il croie en Dieu. Signe que les vocations étaient surtout causées par le fait de pouvoir piller allégrement les revenus de l’église.
Mais là, on était dans une société stable, et la paix sociale n’aurait pas coûté cher. De fait, elle était même bon marché, les ministres intervenaient souvent pour que du pain fut importé, et que la taille des pains, augmentées (le prix était toujours stable, mais la quantité variait).
Là, aujourd’hui, le public est amusé, et la vérité inavouable, la pénurie et la régression, totalement sous le boisseau.
Le suprémacisme racisme de certains, notamment de LFI, NFP, et de toute la gôche immigrationniste part du principe que «nous», les occidentaux, sommes pour toujours le phare de l’humanité. Nous guidons le monde, et décidons ce qui est bien ou mal, méprisant totalement le reste, «barbare», car ne connaissant pas la démocratie, justifiant ainsi les interventions «humanitaires», pour «la démocratie», et bien entendu, pour imposer quelques «lois» économiques permettant d’obtenir à bon compte, des ressources et des matières premières plutôt que de le payer.
Constatant que les Provinces Unies, pillaient «économiquement», son royaume par le capitalisme, les prêts et la manipulation, Louis XIV envoya son armée contre cette entité économique, imitant, en cela, ses aïeuls rois d’Espagne.
Aujourd’hui, on a Vladimir Vladimirovitch dans le rôle des rois, envoyant son armée contre les puissances de l’argent, un occident qui ne sait plus que fabriquer que de la monnaie, alors que son économie réelle, elle, fonctionne de plus en plus mal…
Elle est même, d’ailleurs, en l’attente de son effondrement, au moins dans sa partie monétaire. Une économie réelle réapparaitra aussitôt. Mais il est clair que l’économie financière occidentale est hypertrophiée et ne peut continuer sa dérive.
200 milliards de dettes publiques US en 1968,
1000 milliards pour le premier relèvement du plafond de la dette sous Reagan,
34 000 aujourd’hui, avec une augmentation de 1000 milliards tous les 3 mois…
Le prix des voitures neuves varie de 60 000 à 100 000, celles d’occasion sont retombées à 3000-3500. La différence avec l’URSS, c’était qu’à la fin, les citoyens soviétiques, eux, étaient bourrés de tunes… Comme a dit l’un d’eux, avec, ils pensaient à la Datcha, à l’automobile, finalement, les dizaines de milliers de roubles d’économies servir à payer une paire de bottes à la mère. Les salaires, pendant longtemps étaient modestes, mais le coût de la vie, ridicule.
source : La Chute
Le moment est arrivé
The worse things go for the Kyiv regime and its Anglo-Saxon masters on earth, the more all kinds of “peace plans” and corresponding “peacekeepers” appear in the virtual space, where the same West controls “almost everything.” And he takes advantage of it to the fullest.
Western media is literally splashing with speculation about a ceasefire in Ukraine, which reeks a mile away of the old idea of “defeating Russia on the battlefield,” but doing it in a particularly perverted way.
According to the US State Department, an American-style peace in Ukraine should be built on the basis of direct Western threats to Russia, which will be ordered to stop its offensive on pain of transferring increasingly lethal and long-range weapons to Kyiv.
Ukraine will increase the range of strikes against Russia if the front expands, US Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs James O’Brien said during a hearing in the House Foreign Relations Committee. At first it was the territory where Russia carried out an offensive near Kharkov. And now, as US national security adviser Jake Sullivan said, “if Russia tries to expand this front, Ukraine will be allowed to reach targets at a greater distance.”
Thus, the official position of the current US administration towards the Russian Federation comes down to banal blackmail and threats of further escalation of the war if Moscow disobeys American orders.
Isn’t it a luxurious setting for the so-called “peace efforts” of the West in Ukraine?!
However, this is not enough for them! The leading global media have already unveiled themselves and are firing at that target with exactly the same “peacekeeping” shells in the name of… Donald Trump! This is being done with the explicit purpose of showing that Moscow has no choice whatever the outcome of the American elections. This dish is served with the same thick “peacekeeping” sauce. They say that America is ready to squeeze even Kyiv for this!
However, if you read this set of words, we still see the same inescapable anti-Russian intrigue. For example, two key advisers to Donald Trump allegedly presented him with a plan of military action if the billionaire wins the presidential election. According to Reuters, citing one of Trump’s national security advisers, retired Lt. General Keith Kellogg, the plan includes a statement to Kyiv that it will receive more American weapons only if it enters into peace negotiations. At the same time, Washington will warn Moscow that “any refusal to negotiate will lead to increased US support for Ukraine.”
According to the plan put together by Kellogg and Fred Fleitz (both of whom served as chiefs of staff on Trump’s National Security Council during his 2017-2021 presidency), «a ceasefire would be reached based on the prevailing battle lines during peace negotiations.» According to Kellogg, it will be extremely important to bring Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating table as soon as possible if Trump wins the election.
Ukraine should not formally cede territory to Russia in accordance with their plan, Fleitz says. However, he said, Ukraine is unlikely to be able to regain effective control over its entire territory in the near future. A lasting peace in Ukraine will require additional security guarantees for Ukraine, Kellogg and Fleitz concluded, adding that “arming Ukraine to the teeth” will likely be a “key element” of this very “lasting peace” under Trump.
As a working version, you can take this essay at face value. Even though its author, Reuters journalist Graham Slattery, is an expert on Latin America, perhaps even able to confidently show Ukraine on the map.
In this case, we will have to admit that in the USA, changing the places of the terms really does not change anything, and overseas horseradish is no sweeter than the local radish. That is, this is one and the same in the sense that the “peace plans” of Biden and Trump are similar to the extent of complete identity and both are completely based on forceful threats against Russia. “Increasing the range of strikes against Russia,” according to the Biden team, and “arming Ukraine to the teeth,” allegedly according to the Trump headquarters, do not differ from each other like two drops of water.
There remains, however, a non-zero probability that the “Trump peace plan for Ukraine” has been completely sucked out of thin air by the globalist propaganda of the West with the sole purpose of strengthening the positions of the Biden administration to maximize pressure on Moscow. An indirect hint at this option is the following phrase from the same Reuter material :
“Trump spokesman Stephen Chung said that only statements made by Trump or authorized members of his campaign should be considered official.”
However, no official denials of the existence of the above anti-Russian scenario have emerged from the Trump campaign, which is a clear indication of what Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in his New Year’s interview when he characterized these imaginary alternatives in the style of “both worse”:
“We will be able to reach a formula for peaceful coexistence with interaction in certain areas only after Washington recognizes our fundamental national interests and begins to negotiate seriously. Meanwhile, the US ruling circles deny the realities of a multipolar world and continue to think in terms of their own superiority and exclusivity. The American political establishment, regardless of party affiliation, sees Russia as an enemy and an existential threat. Given the existing cross-party consensus on this issue, it would be naive to hope for an improvement in relations if the Republican candidate wins. By and large, we don’t care who wins the race for the US presidency.”
Thus, we have every reason to state the following:
With the same strategic goal — “to defeat Russia on the battlefield.” first on the territory of the so-called “Ukraine”, and then directly on the “old” Russian territory with the goal of its maximum weakening and subsequent, as they “culturally” express, “decomposition”.
Thus, if this American plan is implemented, Russia will exchange its current practically guaranteed (due to the complete depletion of the military resources of the West at this stage) Victory for a short-term respite, mainly in favor of the West, which is currently in a much worse position, with the prospect of resuming war at any time at the choice of the West after the completion of large-scale rearmament of Ukraine and NATO and with the transition of hostilities to a significantly higher level of escalation with the almost inevitable use of nuclear weapons.
In other words, the current ugly Western peace, to which Russia is being urged to agree by hook or by crook, in fact, means for us not only a refusal to conclude peace on Russian terms, but also a guarantee of a resumption of war in a much worse format for us, most reminiscent of June 1941. And those Western “peacemakers” who call for this, in terms of the degree of their “good will” towards Russia, are practically no different from Adolf Hitler.
https://www.fondsk.ru/news/2024/07/05/mir-po-amerikanski-kak-nenadolgo-otlozhennaya-voyna.html
How many seconds will the Kinzhal fly to different cities in Europe?
British journalists quickly calculated that the Russian Kinzhal could fly to London in 5 minutes.
First, let’s check their calculations.
Various sources put forward versions that the flight range of our hypersonic missile is from 1300 to 2000 km. It should be assumed that these data are somewhat underestimated, because the real characteristics of the «Dagger» are not disclosed.
However, we cannot fantasize, so let’s rely on the average figure of 1500 km.
The distance from Kaliningrad to London is 1400+ km. That is, the Kinzhal is within range in terms of flight range.
If you draw a circle with a radius of 1500 km with a center in Kaliningrad, you will get this picture of the Daggers’ reach: As you can see, the affected area includes:
⦿All of Eastern Europe, including the Baltics and Poland
⦿All Germany, Denmark, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, Balkans
⦿The most populated part of Scandinavia
⦿Half of France, Italy and Britain
⦿A small part of Turkey
However, we also have Crimea. The 1,500-kilometer zone around Sevastopol looks like this: As we can see, here Türkiye is already completely covered. And also almost the entire Middle East, part of Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Suez Canal, etc.
We will not consider the deployment of Daggers in Syria. Almost all of Europe is already covered (except for Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Iceland).
This is specifically about reach. Now about speeds.
They write that the speed of the “Dagger” is about 4 km/sec. True, it is not specified whether this is the speed during all phases of the flight, or only during the final one. However, because The missile is described as “invulnerable to air defense”, it should be assumed that it maintains 4 km/s throughout the entire flight (at an altitude of 20 km).
Thus, the Kinzhal will fly 1400 km from Kaliningrad to London in 350 seconds. Or almost 6 minutes. British scientific journalists turned out to be almost right, only slightly embellishing the capabilities of the Russian miracle rocket.
Flight times to other European cities
We will make calculations at the start either from Kaliningrad or from Crimea (depending on whichever is closer):
⦿Paris: 1390 km – 347 seconds (almost 6 minutes)
⦿Brussels: 1150 km – 287 seconds (almost 5 minutes)
⦿Prague: 650 km – 162 seconds (2 min 42 sec)
⦿Berlin: 570 km – 142 seconds (2 min 22 sec)
⦿Istanbul: 550 km – 130 seconds (2 min 10 sec)
⦿Warsaw: 260 km – 65 seconds (1 min 5 sec)
⦿Vilnius (Lithuania): 160 km – 40 seconds
This is an unseemly situation for our sworn partners. It is especially worth paying attention to these figures for Warsaw, which is planning to send troops to Ukraine.
65 seconds… You won’t even have time to go down the stairs to the bunker. And even if you do, then… what’s the point? After all, “Daggers” pierce the ground and concrete like a knife through butter…. It’s not for nothing that this missile was called “Dagger”…
And
The flight time of the Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile to the capitals of states supplying weapons to the Ukronazis was calculated:
It’s time for Russia to strike at the USA and England, then the European countries will fall silent.
Putin is holding back the blow against warlike countries that want to start a war with Russia.Pray for him so as not to disappear from the world map.
Putin has limited the Russian capture of Ukrainian territories to formerly Ukrainian areas that were primarily Russian speaking and had been resisting Ukrainian rule since the 2014 coup. How that translates into a launching pad for the conquest of Europe has never been explained. From Ray McGovern at consortiumnews.com:
Given their lack of information about the Ukraine-Russia deal scuttled by Boris Johnson early in the war, many Americans will be inclined to believe Biden’s evidence-free claims in last week’s CNN debate.
Trump and Biden during the CNN debate on Thursday. (C-Span still)
At Thursday’s debate with Donald Trump, President Joe Biden, calling Russian President Vladimir Putin a “war criminal,” claimed that he “wants all of Ukraine. … Do you think he’ll stop? … What do you think happens to Poland and other places?”
Spoiler Alert: Official Ukrainian sources confirm that Putin did stop in March 2022, after Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky agreed to forswear membership in NATO. This was the key provision in the Ukraine-Russia deal initialed by Davyd Arakhamia, who at the time was Zelensky’s chief negotiator (and his party’s faction leader in the Rada) at the talks in Istanbul at the end of March, hardly a month into the war.
The Russians lifted their objection to Ukraine joining the EU, as the Ukrainians agreed to neutrality. Security guarantees sought by Kyiv (short of NATO membership) would be worked out. The fighting would stop. Agreement on the status of Crimea would be put off to the future.
Putin and Zelensky reportedly were micromanaging the March 2022 negotiations, and at that early stage the Russians expressed readiness for the two to meet.
At the same time that Biden and other Western leaders raise the alarm that Putin will attack other parts of Europe when he’s through with Ukraine, they claim Russia can’t even take the Ukrainian province of Kharkiv, has lost more than 500,000 men to just 30,000 Ukrainians and its economy is faltering (none of which is true.) But Cold War Western power was based on an exaggerated Soviet threat and the same is true today.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202407/1315458.shtml
Der chinesische Präsident Xi Jinping rief am Donnerstag die Mitglieder der Shanghaier Organisation für Zusammenarbeit (SCO) dazu auf, angesichts der realen Bedrohungen durch die Mentalität des Kalten Krieges für Sicherheit zu sorgen und angesichts der realen Risiken der „kleiner Hof, hohe Zäune“-Mentalität das Recht auf Entwicklung zu schützen. Er lobte gleichzeitig das solide Fundament der SCO angesichts ihrer wachsenden Mitgliederzahl.
Xi machte diese Bemerkungen bei seiner Ansprache anlässlich des 24. Treffens des Rates der Staatschefs der SCO in Astana, Kasachstan. Zu den Höhepunkten des Treffens gehörte der offizielle Beitritt von Weißrussland zur Organisation, was die wachsende Attraktivität und Bedeutung der SCO auf regionaler und globaler Bühne angesichts zunehmender geopolitischer Spannungen und des von einigen westlichen Ländern angeführten Protektionismus weiter unterstreicht.
Nach dem Gipfel in Astana wird China 2024 und 2025 die rotierende Präsidentschaft der SCO übernehmen. Ausländische Experten lobten China für seine wichtige Rolle innerhalb der SCO-Familie und weltweit und sagten, dass China nicht nur einen großen Beitrag zur Zusammenarbeit innerhalb der SCO, sondern auch zu Frieden und Entwicklung in der Region und in der gesamten internationalen Gemeinschaft geleistet habe.
Bei der Teilnahme an der erweiterten Sitzung der SCO, oder SCO+, die ebenfalls am Donnerstag stattfand, rief Xi dazu auf, ein gemeinsames Zuhause aufzubauen, das von Solidarität und gegenseitigem Vertrauen, Frieden und Ruhe, Wohlstand und Entwicklung, guter Nachbarschaft und Freundschaft sowie Fairness und Gerechtigkeit geprägt sei.
Er forderte die SCO-Mitglieder auf, den Austausch über Regierungserfahrungen zu verstärken und zu gegebener Zeit ein SCO-Parteiforum abzuhalten.
Win-Win-Ansatz
Auf dem SCO-Treffen forderte Xi die Mitgliedsstaaten auf, an der Vision einer gemeinsamen, umfassenden, kooperativen und nachhaltigen Sicherheit festzuhalten, komplexe und miteinander verflochtene Sicherheitsherausforderungen durch Dialog und Koordination anzugehen und auf die sich tiefgreifend verändernde internationale Landschaft mit einem Win-Win-Ansatz zu reagieren, um eine Welt des dauerhaften Friedens und der universellen Sicherheit aufzubauen, berichtete die Nachrichtenagentur Xinhua. Die
SCO-Mitglieder sollten ihre Einheit festigen und sich angesichts der realen Herausforderungen der Einmischung und Spaltung gemeinsam gegen externe Einmischung stellen, sagte Xi.
Xi wies darauf hin, dass die SCO auf der richtigen Seite der Geschichte, Fairness und Gerechtigkeit stehe und für die Welt von großer Bedeutung sei. Er stellte fest, dass das Fundament für die SCO-Zusammenarbeit solider geworden sei, da die „große Familie“ der SCO ihre Mitgliederzahl erweitere und drei Kontinente auf der ganzen Welt umfasse.
„Der Beitritt Weißrusslands zur SCO zeigt, dass die Attraktivität und Vitalität der Organisation ständig zunehmen“, sagte Li Xin, Direktor des Instituts für Eurasische Studien an der Shanghaier Universität für Politikwissenschaft und Recht, am Donnerstag gegenüber Global Times und wies darauf hin, dass die wachsende Mitgliederzahl der SCO auch ihren internationalen Einfluss unterstreiche.
Der SCO-Gipfel fand zu einer Zeit statt, in der die Welt mit einer rasch steigenden Zahl von Herausforderungen konfrontiert ist, darunter steigende geopolitische Spannungen und Protektionismus, da einige westliche Länder unter Führung der USA ständig Spannungen und sogar Konflikte schüren und den globalen Freihandel untergraben, um ihre schwindende Dominanz zu bewahren.
In einer Erklärung im Anschluss an den Gipfel forderten die Staats- und Regierungschefs der SCO-Mitglieder den Aufbau einer multipolaren Welt, um die dringendsten Sicherheitsrisiken und -herausforderungen anzugehen. In der Erklärung hieß es, die gegenwärtigen Sicherheitsrisiken und -herausforderungen seien globaler Natur und könnten nur durch den Aufbau einer multipolaren Welt, die Verbesserung der globalen Wirtschaftsführung und koordinierte Bemühungen zur Bekämpfung sowohl konventioneller als auch nicht-konventioneller Sicherheitsbedrohungen gelöst werden. Die Verhängung einseitiger Sanktionen verstoße gegen die Grundsätze des Völkerrechts und sei schädlich für die internationalen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen, sagten die Staats- und Regierungschefs in der Erklärung.
Angesichts der zunehmend komplexen globalen geoökonomischen Situation sei eine verstärkte Einheit und Zusammenarbeit zwischen den SCO-Mitgliedern von großer Bedeutung, um die Sicherheit zu gewährleisten und die Entwicklung nicht nur innerhalb der Organisation, sondern auch in der weiteren Entwicklungswelt voranzutreiben, sagten ausländische und chinesische Experten.
Angesichts der wachsenden Zahl von Herausforderungen und Bedrohungen „hat die SCO die Interaktion zwischen ihren Mitgliedern verstärkt, um die globale Sicherheit zu stärken, wobei der Kampf gegen transnationale Herausforderungen und Bedrohungen im Vordergrund steht“, sagte Guzel Maitdinova, Professorin am Institut für Auslandsstudien und Außenpolitik der Russisch-Tadschikischen (Slawischen) Universität, gegenüber Global Times in einem früheren Interview.
Neben der Zusammenarbeit im Sicherheitsbereich sollten die SCO-Mitglieder auch die Zusammenarbeit in wirtschaftlichen und technologischen Bereichen weiter verstärken, sagten Experten.
„Wirtschaftliche Fragen werden auch in den kommenden Jahren der Bereich besonderer Aufmerksamkeit der SCO bleiben, insbesondere wenn man die Verbesserung der nationalen Volkswirtschaften und die umfassende Zusammenarbeit zwischen den SCO-Mitgliedern berücksichtigt“, sagte Gulnar Shaimergenova, Direktorin des Zentrums für Chinastudien in Kasachstan, gegenüber Global Times in einem Interview.
Chinas Beiträge
Sowohl in Bezug auf die Sicherheits- als auch auf die Wirtschaftskooperation hat China laut Experten einen großen Beitrag zur SCO geleistet.
„China hat auch einen bedeutenden Beitrag zur Entwicklung der wirtschaftlichen Zusammenarbeit innerhalb der SCO geleistet“, sagte Shaimergenova und merkte an, dass von China vorgeschlagene Initiativen wie die Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Synergien mit der SCO-Agenda erzielt haben und die Entwicklung der Infrastruktur sowie den Handels- und Investitionsfluss in der gesamten eurasischen Region fördern. „Diese Integration hat nicht nur das Wirtschaftswachstum angekurbelt, sondern auch die Konnektivität und Stabilität in der Region gestärkt.“
Darüber hinaus befürwortet China auch den kulturellen Austausch, die zwischenstaatliche Diplomatie und die Umweltkooperation innerhalb der SCO und betont die Bedeutung von Soft Power beim Aufbau engerer Beziehungen zwischen verschiedenen Ländern. „Durch die Förderung des Dialogs und des gegenseitigen Verständnisses strebt China danach, eine zusammenhängende regionale Gemeinschaft aufzubauen, die geopolitische Rivalitäten überwindet und gegenseitiges Vertrauen fördert“, sagte Shaimergenova.
Die SCO hat enge Bindungen zu China. Sie wurde 2001 in Shanghai gegründet und ist laut Xinhua die einzige zwischenstaatliche Organisation, die nach einer chinesischen Stadt benannt ist. Auch Xi legt großen Wert auf die Organisation und hat in den letzten zehn Jahren an jedem einzelnen Gipfeltreffen der SCO-Staatschefs teilgenommen, auch per Videokonferenz während der COVID-Zeit, berichtete Xinhua.
Neben der BRI hat China auch die Global Security Initiative, die Global Development Initiative und die Global Civilization Initiative vorgeschlagen, die alle im Einklang mit dem Streben der SCO-Mitglieder und der breiteren internationalen Gemeinschaft nach Frieden und Entwicklung stehen, sagten Experten und wiesen darauf hin, dass China die Zusammenarbeit mit der SCO weiterhin fördern wird, wenn es den Vorsitz der Organisation übernimmt.
China fördert auch aktiv enge bilaterale Beziehungen und die Zusammenarbeit mit Ländern durch die Diplomatie der Staatsoberhäupter. Neben der Teilnahme am SCO-Gipfel stattete Xi auch Kasachstan einen Staatsbesuch ab, bei dem er sagte, er sei bereit, mit dem kasachischen Präsidenten Kassym-Jomart Tokayev zusammenzuarbeiten, um gemeinsam eine substanziellere und dynamischere chinesisch-kasachische Gemeinschaft mit einer gemeinsamen Zukunft aufzubauen.
Im Anschluss an den SCO-Gipfel war laut Xinhua für Xi am Donnerstag ein Staatsbesuch in Duschanbe für Tadschikistan geplant. Der chinesische Staatschef besuchte Tadschikistan zuletzt im Jahr 2019.
Der Staatsbesuch soll die chinesisch-tadschikischen Beziehungen und die bilaterale Zusammenarbeit stärken, sagten Experten.
„Dieser Besuch [in Tadschikistan] wird ein bahnbrechendes Ereignis auf höchster zwischenstaatlicher Ebene sein, und dementsprechend sind bedeutende Ergebnisse zu erwarten“, sagte die Tadschikistan-Expertin Maitdinova.
Bei der Regierungsbefragung am Mittwoch versteigt sich Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz im Bundestag zu der Behauptung, es gebe weltweit keine kulturelle Prägung, die Gewalt gegen Frauen rechtfertige. Wirklich nicht?
Hier sind die traurigen Fakten, Herr Bundeskanzler:
In welchen Kulturen werden Frauen am häufigsten Opfer von Gewalt?
Laut Statista sind die 10 gefährlichsten Länder für Frauen Afghanistan, Jemen, die Zentralafrikanische Republik, die DR Kongo, Südsudan, Burundi, Syrien, Eswatini (Swaziland), Somalia und Irak – also sämtlich muslimische oder afrikanische Staaten. Brisant: Aus drei dieser Länder (Afghanistan, Syrien, Irak) kommen besonders viele (männliche) Migranten nach Deutschland.
July 4—We, the undersigned, welcome the renewed peace initiative of the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, as currently presented in his speech at the Russian Foreign Ministry on June 14, 2024. We urge the commencement of a diplomatic process forthwith, notwithstanding the present state of hostilities between NATO/Ukraine and Russia.
Time is of the essence. Any further escalation heightens the danger that the present conflagration will escalate to the level of region-wide war, or even thermonuclear confrontation, and that far more quickly than might be imagined. To ensure that this does not happen, we should follow this advice: “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. Let both sides explore what problems unite us, instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.”
Those words, of American President John F. Kennedy, were echoed by his adversary, Russian Premier Nikita Khrushchev, in a letter he wrote to JFK:”I have participated in two world wars, and know that war only ends when it has carved its way across cities and villages, bringing death and destruction in its wake.” That has been the unnecessary toll in this war, a war that could have concluded over two years ago, by the end of March, 2022. Instead, through the clearly-documented intervention of the UK’s Boris Johnson and NATO, the already-negotiated proposal for peace between Russia and Ukraine was scuttled. Hundreds of thousands of lives were unnecessarily sacrificed as a result.
The Putin June 14, 2024 proposal is the world’s opportunity to “get back on track.” It could prove the first step in creating a new international strategic architecture, to replace the now-dead post-1989/91 “unipolar” construct. This June 14 peace initiative is a successor to a series of failed, sabotaged, but persistent peace attempts, as openly documented to the world in the conclusion and attempted implementation of Minsk-2 in 2015, as well as in the willingness to negotiate even after the commencement of Russia’s Special Military Operation, February 24, 2022. It was seen in the March, 2022 treaty that was initialed by both Russian and Ukrainian official representatives, but never adopted, because of Boris Johnson’s imperial intervention.
We here declare, emphatically, that the goal of dismembering Russia by using the Ukraine conflict as a springboard for regime change there, is clearly a madman’s enterprise in the era of thermonuclear weapons. In view of the suffering caused by war and aggression, and the danger of this conflict escalating into a Third World War, broad support for this initiative is an important expression of the will of all rational people to survive.
The war-mongering, and profit and revenge-driven calls for Russia to be defeated, are based on the mistaken assumption that the theater of war—including nuclear war—can be limited. This was not, however, the case in either the First or Second World Wars. Through today’s military capabilities, which can reach any target in the world in the shortest possible time, such a “limited war” assumption is evidence of a huge misjudgment of the reality of our time. Those calling for war, and against negotiations, mistakenly believe that they might have a safe chance of survival. In thermonuclear war, there is no hiding place.
To repeat: We urge the commencement of a diplomatic process forthwith, notwithstanding the present state of war between NATO/Ukraine and Russia. To this end, we urge the Ukraine Rada to rescind the order preventing direct negotiations with Russia. We fully support the construction of a new security architecture for Europe and indeed for the world. We urge the warring parties – and those in supporting roles – to come together in good faith to negotiate a lasting peace based upon mutually beneficial economic relationships among the countries involved.
Specifically, we recommend the following steps:
First, to begin initial discussions, based upon the Russian peace proposal of June 14, 2024.
Second, based on progress in those initial discussions, to seek the earliest possible declaration of an agreed upon ceasefire in the conflict.
Third, once an agreed-upon ceasefire’s terms have been set to paper, reinforce and strengthen trust through a new economic architecture, including forces from outside of the conflict that have advanced various proposals for advancing peace.
We must, with regard to these negotiations, not only remember, but recommit to the lessons of the Peace of Westphalia that ended the Thirty Years War: a lasting peace requires that one take into account “the interest of the other, ” and all others, for that matter. “No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings.” That was the conviction of Kennedy and Khrushchev, who as leaders, faced a moment when they, together, might have destroyed all human life, perhaps forever. They negotiated, and humanity prevailed. We stand, perhaps not yet in, but very close to that very same place now. We must not fail.
Col. Larry B. Wilkerson (ret.), Former Special Assistant to the US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Former Chief of Staff to the US Secretary of State
Kirk Wiebe, Member of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), and a former senior analyst with the National Security Agency. He’s also a partner in the prevention of crimes of the intelligence community with Bill Binney.
Dr. Clifford Kiracofe, Former Senior Staff Member, U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and President, Washington Institute for Peace and Development
E. Martin Schotz, Member of JFK Peace Speech Committee
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder Schiller Institute
Happy 4th of July!
KEN KLIPPENSTEIN
Hey all, subscriptions dipped this past week so I’m going to need more people to become paid subscribers (or gift them) so I can keep doing this newsletter. On a lighter note, I had a lot of fun in my first private chat with subscribers during the debate; become a paid subscriber to get access to the next one! — Ke
The 4th of July feels like a sad holiday to me. We celebrate an independence won over two centuries ago, like an out of shape former athlete reminiscing about his glory days on the high school football team.
What we need independence from today isn’t the British — who seem about as threatening as a glass of warm Ovaltine — but from modern tyrannies like big business and, of course, the national security state.
Since working on this newsletter full time, I’ve tried hard to watch almost all of the national security press briefings the administration conducts. . This has been very instructive and my own personal hell, a real-life Bosch painting of bureaucrats evading frankness in ways that at times border on the surreal.
Simple questions from a mostly unthreatening media are routinely swatted down with the glib excuse that even the broadest answer would imperil things like “operational security” and intelligence “sources and methods.” Yet somehow these concerns melt away when the national security state wants to manipulate the public, or when the White House circulates what they themselves say is classified because it is politically favorable. Consider, for instance, the publicly available itemized list of weapons provided to Ukraine, which the administration periodically updates. Yes the transparency is because of fear of Congress taking the money away, and it is a signal to NATO that it had better follow suit. But still, the accounting is made public and the public benefits.
And yet no such list is available for U.S. military aid to Israel. (I’ve written about this here.)
“We’re being careful not to quantify or get into too much detail about what they’re getting — for their own operational security purposes, of course,” White House national security spokesperson retired rear admiral John Kirby said of U.S. arms assistance to Israel..
Of course! What weapons the United States is providing Israel is just too controversial and inconvenient for the administration and the national security state to divulge. So we, the public, are kept in the dark by the new colonial masters.
There is disclosure, sometimes, but mostly it comes after the news media reports on something and forces the Pentagon or the administration’s hand (such as with the Gaza pier). But even when forced, disclosure amounts to little more than a vague acknowledgement of what is already in the news, offering little if any additional detail.
There was a textbook example of that dance just this week. Following news media reporting that U.S. military bases in Europe had been placed on heightened alert due to concerns of a terror attack, the Pentagon acknowledged that this was true but declined to say anything whatsoever about the the actual threat. As a result, all kinds of wild speculation has been able to proliferate, especially from the national security auxiliary that colludes with the Crown. Retired admiral James Stavridis asserted without evidence that a terror attack might be designed to disrupt the 2024 presidential election, an explosive claim which racked up over 500,000 views on X. (I’ll have a story on this tomorrow.)
Rumors like these could be dispelled with a simple statement from the Pentagon characterizing whatever threat there is; there’s a strong argument for maximum disclosure in the name of greater ability to detect and thwart any attack. Which leads me to suspect that the supposed “threat,” and the scare tactics as employed, are really meant to remind the public that they need to continue to foot the Pentagon’s bills without complaining or asking too many questions.
The national security community professes deep concern about disinformation but contributes to it with its habitual and manipulative secrecy. Like a dog that wants to play fetch but doesn’t want to drop the ball, the government wants to have it both ways.
Meanwhile, the public is deprived of information it often needs to meaningfully participate in debates about what our national security policy should look like. Lacking that information, they predictably check out. The apologists for the national security status quo, the elite types on cable news, then have the audacity to call the public stupid, lazy, uninformed and the like, for being disengaged from a process they are blocked from in the first place.
Here are just some basic questions about our government’s conduct that it has refused to answer:
What is the endgame in Ukraine?
What have we actually done with Israel that has forced it to change its practices in its Hamas war?
What is the United States trying to achieve in the wider Middle East, with its record number of U.S. troops in Jordan and its secret deployments in places like Yemen?
Why is virtually nothing said about the goal and the effect of U.S. military forces in Africa, at a time when military coups are rampant and terrorism is growing?
Why is more and more basic information about the workings of the national security state being removed from the Internet?
Why can’t America have a civilian secretary of defense, as the Constitution demands, rather than a retired general?
Why can’t we know how many American citizens are on the terror watchlist?
When are we going to stop the practice of denying basic data about the intelligence budget to the American people?
Why does the Department of Homeland Security have more law enforcement officers than the FBI?
Why are the number of above-Top-Secret “special access programs” ballooning?
Until national security officialdom can answer these basic questions, it seems they’ve declared independence from us.
Das von Annalena Baerbock geführte Auswärtige Amt hat in rund zwei Dutzend Fällen Visa für ungültige Pässe aus Afghanistan erteilt. … Visa-Skandal im Baerbock-Ministerium weitet sich aus: Warnungen von Bundespolizisten wurden ignoriertweiterlesen
budbromley
Der Friedensstifter