Dispatches from
STEPHEN LENDMAN

Instead of declaring their independence, most European nations let Washington pressure, bully and bribe them to go along with its imperial agenda, harming their own national security. 

Dispatch #1

Most European Nations Act More Like US Colonies Than Sovereign States

[dropcap]E[/dropcap]conomic powerhouse Germany remains occupied since WW II ended, permitting numerous US bases on its territory, some jointly operated, harming its security, not protecting it.

The Obama-Merkel not so-odd couple. Their ruling circles are crazy enough to entertain visions of global hegemony at almost any cost. Meanwhile, Merkel, a certifiable Russophobe, remains America’s shill in the heart of Europe.

Instead of normalizing relations with Russia, a reliable ally, Die Welt newspaper said a new Defense Ministry White Paper near completion lists it as one of Germany’s 10 major threats, despite no credible evidence suggesting it – plenty proving otherwise.

Other threats include international terrorism – without explaining it’s US created and Berlin supported. Terrorist groups can’t exist without state sponsors.

According to sources quoting what the report says, Russia is Germany’s key rival, using “hybrid instruments to blur the boundaries between war and peace…undermin(ing) other states.”

 Dispatch #2

Jerusalem Day 2016

[dropcap]O[/dropcap]n June 5, Israelis celebrate what Palestinians mourn – the conquest and occupation of East Jerusalem, following Israel’s June 1967 preemptive Six Day War of choice, naked aggression by any standard.

Photo by Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign

Palestinians were and remain deprived of their historic capital. Israel transformed Jerusalem from a multi-cultural, multi-religious metropolis into a predominantly Jewish one. On July 30, 1980, the Knesset introduced the Jerusalem Law. It annexed the city as Israel’s unified capital.

On March 1, 1980, Security Council Resolution 465 declared “all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel’s policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant (Fourth Geneva) violation…and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”

On July 9, 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territory, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and an obstacle to peace and to economic and social development (and) have been established in breach of international law.”

Israel systematically breaches international law and UN resolutions unfavorable to its interests. It lawlessly claims  Jerusalem as its exclusive capital, wanting the entire city Judaized.

Palestinians are being forced out, their fundamental rights denied. Jerusalem Day is a national holiday, ignored by most Israelis, celebrated by “religious chauvinists…a bullying, screeching minority,” Gideon Levy explained.

Palestinians were and remain deprived of their historic capital. Israel transformed Jerusalem from a multi-cultural, multi-religious metropolis into a predominantly Jewish one. 

They infest the city, terrorizing Palestinian neighborhoods, dispossessing longstanding residents – with full regime support, including from its racist courts.

“Today we are supposed to celebrate this day by law,” said Levy. “No person of conscience can do this.” One day the occasion will be “mourn(ed).” Occupation is no cause for joy.

Palestinian rights are mocked. Israel’s High Court rejected a petition submitted by human rights attorney Itay Mack to bar the annual march from passing provocatively through the Old City’s Muslim quarter.

Participating Zionist zealots notoriously insult Palestinian residents. Unaccountable vandalism occurs. Justices ordering police to assure “minimal friction with the Muslim residents (and show) zero tolerance to verbal and physical violence” was meaningless.

Palestinian rights are systematically denied – on Jerusalem Day and all others. Ramadan begins Monday, June 6.

Joint (Arab) List MK Yousef Jabareen called the High Court’s ruling, permitting Zionist zealots free access to the Old City’s Muslim quarter on Ramadan’s eve “provocative (and) racist” – its “sole purpose…to terrorize” Palestinian merchants and other residents.

“On the evening in which Palestinians celebrate Ramadan, a month of tolerance and brotherhood, the police chose, and the High Court approved, to (let) marchers provoke Palestinians, hurt them and sow hatred and fear,” he explained.

“Can anyone imagine” Israeli authorities letting Palestinians march through Jewish neighborhoods “on the eve of Passover” or any other Jewish holiday?

“East Jerusalem is part of” illegally Occupied Palestine. No High Court or political authority can change reality on the ground.

About the author

STEPHEN LENDMAN lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."  ( http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html ) Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

by Dr. Milena RampoldiFollow @promosaik_
MINTPRESS NEWS

Israeli soldiers and relatives of new Jewish immigrants from the U.S. and Canada, wave Israeli flags to welcome them as they arrive at Ben Gurion airport near Tel Aviv, Israel, Tuesday, July 23, 2013. (AP)

Jennifer Loewenstein

About her work, she wrote me:

This year I’ve been working on Iraq and Syria more than anything else. I’ve never stopped following the crises in Gaza and the West Bank, however. There are some ties between the two — not obvious or ‘conspiracy’ oriented.

As you may know, I’ve lived in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Beirut. I’ve traveled in Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel. I’ve also worked a lot on refugee issues. (I lived in the refugee camp of Bourj al-Barajneh in Lebanon for 3 summers, though that was a while back now — 1999-2002 — but return almost every year to visit friends.)

I haven’t been able to get into Gaza since 2010, but I follow events there closely and keep up with my contacts there. I think an important issue is how the media focus has been taken off Palestine as the Syrian Civil War continues. Both deserve a lot of attention, however. U.S. foreign policy in the region continues to trouble me, to say the least. It deserves a lot of attention and clarification.

Jennifer Loewenstein was Associate Director of the Middle East Studies Program at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Last August she mooved to Penn State University. She is politically active, and writes as a freelance journalist. Her work has been featured in scholarly publications such as The Journal of Palestine Studies, and she is a regular contributor to CounterPunch.

Loewenstein is a member of the USA board of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and founder of the Madison-Rafah Sister City Project.

Jennifer Loewenstein: The ProMosaik interview

Dr. Milena Rampoldi, ProMosaik: You have been a lot in the Middle East. Which is the main peace obstacle there?

Jennifer Loewenstein, journalist: Unrestrained U.S. military involvement in the Middle East and the U.S.’ simultaneous refusal to put pressure on its client states to seek non-military resolutions to their conflicts poses, in my view, the greatest obstacle to regional stability to say nothing of real peace. It is impossible to single out one of the many wars and conflicts raging across the Middle East today as being the ‘worst’ situation in the region (now or in the past). Each is related to the Middle East order created by the colonial powers, Britain and France, at the end of the First World War and, subsequently, exploited by them.

After the end of the Second World War, as the British and French empires receded, the United States filled the void left by these powers with its own imperial influence, economic interests and political objectives, strengthened, I should point out, by the Soviet Union’s equally genuine competition for regional influence.

Cold War politics should not be uncritically deferred to as the guiding framework for superpower competition, however. The fear and propaganda generated domestically in the U.S. against “communism” and an “evil” Soviet empire proved a powerful tool for recruiting people to fight in U.S. wars in the Middle East and elsewhere around the globe. Much of what we were taught about the designs and power of the Soviet Union, however, was overstated or simply false. Much was omitted with regard to our own alleged allies. It is crucial to understand this in the context of Vietnam and U.S. military involvement in southeast Asia as well.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu waves to members of the audience before speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Policy Conference in Washington, Monday, March 2, 2015. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

The Middle East was of particular importance, and has been ever since, because of its strategic location, its oil and natural gas reserves, and because of regional instability deliberately cultivated by those powers that had sought to control parts of it in the past. Until 1967, when the U.S.’ “special relationship” with Israel began seriously to be cultivated, no single Middle Eastern nation was allowed to dominate the region — least of all one with close ties to Moscow.

MR: How to deal with Zionism? What does Zionism mean to you?

JL: Modern Zionism may end up dealing with itself if it continues along what has become an increasingly self-destructive and globally alienating path. It is widely understood by most people (outside the U.S.) that the only thing keeping Israel from becoming a global pariah state is the unconditional support it receives from the United States and, to a lesser extent, the EU. This is one reason why mobilizing world public opinion is so important where Israel and Zionism are concerned.

The boycott, divestment, and sanctions’ (BDS) movement has had an effect on how Israel is perceived in the West, but it has a long way to go and must navigate some dangerous political waters carefully. Most Americans still view Israel in a more positive light than the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors, thanks in part to the continual demonization of Arabs, Muslims, and Islam in U.S. domestic civil society: schools, universities, civic organizations, churches, synagogues, conservative and liberal “think tanks,” state, local and national governing institutions, the entertainment industry, and, of course, the news media (including social media and the speed with which information can be processed, spun, and disseminated) all play a very large role in manipulating fear, xenophobia, and ignorance.

Political lobbies, primarily AIPAC, have often been blamed for determining America’s “pro-Israel” stance and they do, indeed, play a forceful role. This role is significantly diminished, however, when juxtaposed to the giant oil and natural gas cartels, highly profitable corporate enterprises designed for the benefit of ourselves and our allies, and the overwhelming role of the US armaments industry in selling advanced weaponry and spreading, stoking and assuring war.

Zionism has become one of the most unfortunate manifestations of modern nationalism (in this case Jewish nationalism). Over the years it has become chauvinistic, dangerous, and sadistic — especially toward non-Jews living in Israel or in territories illegally occupied and annexed to Israel over the years. What makes Zionism a particularly pernicious form of nationalism is that it is a form of settler colonialism. In order to create a Jewish state, Zionism (as it has developed) required more and more land, resources, external financial and military subsidization, and Jewish people in order to flourish.

What we are seeing today is a logical conclusion of this project: the need to remove, chase out, terrorize, isolate into densely populated but unconnected islands of territory — including squalid urban settings, torture, or kill off, those people who stand in the way of this project. Were the eyes of a good part of the world not already focused on Israel, it would be frightening to see how its future would unfold. This underscores the need for people to educate and mobilize public opinion around what is happening in Israel and its illegally held territories. Even with broad based activism against Israel’s self-declared “manifest destiny” its political and military leadership continue to act with impunity and to be held unaccountable for repeated acts of aggression, mass murder and destruction against the people and land of Palestine.

A boy and his sisters watch graffiti artists spray on a wall, commemorating the victims who were killed in Saudi-led coalition airstrikes in Sanaa, Yemen, Monday, May 18, 2015. Saudi-led airstrikes targeting Yemen’s Shiite rebels resumed early on Monday in the southern port city of Aden after a five-day truce expired amid talks on the war-torn country’s future that were boycotted by the rebels. (AP Photo/Hani Mohammed)

Personally I have no stake in Zionism whatsoever. I come from a long line of anti-Zionists (reaching back into the 19th century) and am increasingly appalled by what I’ve seen and experienced in Palestine and in places such as the Palestinian refugee camps of South Beirut as the direct consequences of Israeli state policy. No state — ethnic, religious, or otherwise — can truly be secure until people within and outside its borders learn to accept each other as humans first and as beings whose collective future depends upon extensive cooperation, universal human rights, the need to share the earth’s land and resources, and respect for the earth itself. This may sound idealistic. It is increasingly clear, however, that it is becoming a necessity if human life is to continue.

MR: How are all the conflicts in the Middle East connected one with another?

JL: To do this question justice, I would have to write a book. Many of the conflicts (such as in Syria and Iraq) are directly connected to each other. They are also influenced to a large degree by an apparent need for regional hegemony by the strongest military powers. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are heavily involved in the Syrian and Iraqi Civil Wars, as are Turkey and Iran. Other states, such as Yemen, have become the unwitting victims of the treacherous game of chess being played out across the region.

There is no question, however, that the wars and conflicts that have raged and are raging in the Middle East are another direct result of U.S. intervention since, above all, the end of the Second World War. Soviet and Russian power, along with European great power intervention have exacerbated the conflicts within the Middle East but none have done so on the scale of the United States.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be seen as an extension of US meddling in the region, which has done so much to destabilize it already. Israel is an arm of U.S. power and, as such, acts with the knowledge and complicity of its master. That these two countries have differences has not challenged the status quo since the special relationship between Israel and the United States began in the aftermath of the 1967 June War. Right now, that status quo is not in jeopardy, and this should give us all pause to think about ways this can change.

MR: What does it mean to you to be a journalist looking for truth?

A boy carries a wreath with posters with a photo of slain Palestinian boy Baha Samir Bader, 13, ahead of his funeral procession at the village of Beit Lykia near the West Bank city of Ramallah, Friday, Oct. 17, 2014. Palestinian police said that the boy has been shot dead by Israeli soldiers during a clash in the village. Tensions between Israelis and Palestinians have spiked in recent days amid Palestinian charges that Israel is limiting access to Palestinian worshippers at a sensitive Jerusalem holy site. The poster reads the slain boy’s name in Arabic and “a sacrifice for Palestine and the al-Aqsa mosque.” (AP Photo/Nasser Nasser)

JL: It means celebrating when other journalists and people work together with you to seek it, write about it, and to educate people to think for themselves. It also means bracing yourself for the worst possibilities when individuals, institutions, or states begin to find your work threatening.

MR: How can we as writers, journalists, and bloggers help to promote peace in the Middle East?

JL: We have an obligation to inform and educate people without imposing our personal views on them. This can take place in schools, universities, in the arts, in political forums and neighborhood organizations; in churches, mosques, synagogues, in grocery store conversations; at the dinner table; in local or national demonstrations; in letter writing campaigns; in call-ins and sit-ins; in non-violent direct action; in reading world newspapers; in taking the initiative to speak to people in our cities and towns who come from other parts of the world; in initiating activities that we’re all waiting for someone else to do.

We have another obligation to be patient and not to expect to see change overnight. Some of  us may never see the kinds of things we have worked so hard to attain. We have got to learn how to organize effectively without falling victim to petty, divisive infighting among the people working with us. We have to get it across to people that problems do not resolve themselves. On the contrary, left untouched, such major problems will only worsen.

MR: Tell us about your experience in Gaza.

JL: This would take an entire memoir, which I hope to write someday. Suffice to say, it has been the resilience of the people of Gaza, above all, that has kept me going even at my darkest moments. 

Originally published by ProMosaik.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

 Dr. Milena Rampoldi was born in Bolzano, Italy in 1973 to a bicultural and bilingual family. Since her childhood she has understood the importance of multilingualism, multiculturalism, music, art, cultural exchange and dialogue. In her books, Dr. Rampoldi focuses on dialogue with the Islamic world and on human rights. She is convinced that without human rights and intercultural and interreligious empathy there cannot be lasting peace and justice.

More articles by Dr. Milena Rampoldi

Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

Nauseated by the
vile corporate media?
Had enough of their lies, escapism,
omissions and relentless manipulation?

Dispatches from Eric Zuesse

The Obama regime will (or should) go down in history as one of the most criminal, hypocritical, and disgraceful American administrations in many generations, only comparable in its sheer heinousness to that of the Bush-Cheney regime. 

When U.S. President Barack Obama perpetrated his coup d’etat in Ukraine in February 2014, and even had his agent Victoria Nuland select the person who was to rule Ukraine after the coup, it was with the expectation that the new government would renegotiate, and soon end, the Russian lease of the naval base at Sebastopol in Crimea, which wasn’t due to expire until 2042. (Up until 1954, that base had been in Russian territory because Crimea was part of Russia; but, after Khrushchev in 1954 arbitrarily transferred Crimea to Ukraine, and then the Soviet Union itself broke up in 1991, Russia was keeping its navy there by paying a lease on it from Ukraine.) 

However, instead of the U.S. winning control of Crimea as had been planned, the racist-fascist anti-Russian “Right Sector” forces, which Obama’s people had hired to carry out the coup in Kiev under the cover of ‘democratic’ demonstrations in Kiev against the democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych (who had received over 75% of Crimeans’ votes in the Presidential election, prior to his being overthrown), terrorized Crimeans during the coup, and this terrorizing of them, simply added insult to their injury. On February 20th, Right Sector forces massacred Crimeans who were escaping from Ukraine’s capital, fleeing the rabid sentiments in Kiev against supporters of Yanukovych, such as they, who populate Crimea and the many other parts of the former Ukraine that had elected Yanukovych (very unpopular in the Kiev region) into office. Right Sector caught up with them at the town of Korsun, burned some of their buses, and murdered some of the escaping Crimeans, though most survived — some of them severely injured.

Also, early in March of 2014, shortly prior to Crimea’s referendum on whether to remain within Ukraine, a Crimean who had served in Kiev as a prosecutor in the democratically elected Ukrainian national government that had just been overthrown, and who had likewise escaped from Kiev, was now safely back home in Crimea, and did a Crimean TV interview. This former prosecutor, Natalya Poklonskaya, took questions from the live TV audience. The interview was posted to youtube on 12 April 2014, and, as I described it, linking to the youtube, she proceeded there to:

inform her fellow Crimeans what she had seen happen during the overthrow, and why she couldn’t, in good conscience, remain as a Ukrainian official in Kiev, and swear loyalty to the new Ukrainian Government. She had heard the chants of the Maidan protesters and smelled their piles of burning tires, and seen their marches in Kiev with nazi symbols and salutes, and she didn’t want to become any part of that. So, she quit and was now unemployed back home in Crimea at the time of this interview.

The Obama Administration, in planning for the coup, had had polling done prior to the coup, throughout Ukraine, and supplemented the sample in Crimea because, naturally, taking control of the Sebastopol naval base was of particular concern to Obama. 

USAID and the International Republican Institute of the Republican Party (not the National Democratic Institute, because funding from them might have suggested the White House’s backing) polled 500 Crimeans, during 16-30 May 2013. As I have reported elsewhere, the first stage of preparation for the upcoming coup was already active inside the U.S. Embassy in Kiev on 1 March 2013; and so, this was a very coordinated Obama Administration operation. (Most Washington-based accounts of the overthrow allege that it was ‘democratic’ and started after Yanukovych rejected the EU’s offer on 21 November 2013.) On 27 December 2014, I compared the results of that Crimean poll versus the results of a poll covering all areas of the former Ukraine, which was taken, also, for the U.S. government, but, to Obama’s inevitable disappointment, neither poll found a U.S.-friendly, Ukraine-friendly, Russia-hostile, Crimea.

Gallup polled 500 Crimeans during May 16-30 in 2013, and found that only 15% considered themselves “Ukrainian.” 24% considered themselves “Crimean.” But 40% considered themselves “Russian.” Even before Obama’s February 2014 coup which overthrew the Ukrainian President whom [nearly] 80% of Crimeans had voted for, the Crimean people overwhelmingly wanted to secede from Ukraine — and, especially now they did, right after the President for whom they had overwhelmingly voted, Viktor Yanukovych, had been overthrown in this extremely bloody coup. Furthermore, in April 2014, Gallup again polled Crimea, and they found that 71.3% of Crimeans viewed as “Mostly positive” the role of Russia there, and 4.0% viewed it as “Mostly negative”; by contrast, only 2.8% viewed the role of the United States there as “Mostly positive,” and a whopping 76.2% viewed it as “Mostly negative.” During the intervening year, Crimeans’ favorability toward America had plunged down to 2.8%, from its year-earlier 6%. Clearly, what Obama had done in Ukraine (his violent coup in Kiev) had antagonized the Crimeans. And, as if that weren’t enough, the 2014 poll provided yet more evidence: “The 500 people that were sampled in Crimea were asked [and this is crucial] ‘Please tell me if you agree or disagree: The results of the referendum on Crimea’s status [whether to rejoin Russia] reflect the views of most people here.’ 82.8% said ‘Agree.’ 6.7% said ‘Disagree.’” In the hearts of the local residents, Crimea was still Russian territory, after an involuntary hiatus of 60 years; and so the Russian Government accepted them back again, into Russia — this was not as Corey Flintoff droned, “Russia’s seizure of Crimea.” It was Russia’s protection of them from the invasion of Ukraine by the United States in a bloody coup.

[dropcap]O[/dropcap]n 20 March 2015, even Kenneth Rapoza at the anti-Russian magazine Forbes, headlined, “One Year After Russia Annexed Crimea, Locals Prefer Moscow To Kiev”, and he concluded that, “Despite huge efforts on the part of Kiev, Brussels, Washington and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the bulk of humanity living on the Black Sea peninsula believe the referendum to secede from Ukraine was legit.  At some point, the West will have to recognize Crimea’s right to self rule.” 

However, Barack Obama refuses to accept this. After all, if he were to accept it, then he would have to terminate the anti-Russia economic sanctions he initiated on the basis of Russia’s ‘seizure’ of Crimea, and he would have to acknowledge that the massive U.S.-led military buildup of NATO forces on Russia’s borders in order to protect against ‘Russia’s aggression’ needs to stop and, indeed, be withdrawn. But Obama doesn’t accept any of this; to do that would negate the whole purpose of his coup, and even his anti-Russian policy, including, perhaps, his refusal to cooperate with Russian forces that are trying to stamp out jihadist groups in Syria.

On 6 February 2016, I headlined “U.S. Now Overtly at War Against Russia” and reported that both U.S. ‘Defense’ Secretry Ashton Carter and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had announced the U.S. was initiating a quadrupling of U.S. troops and weaponry on Russia’s northwestern borders. 

On 4 May 2016, Dmitriy Sedov headlined at Strategic Culture, “NATO to Form Allied Fleet in the Black Sea: Plans Fraught with Great Risks” and he opened:

Finally, it has become clear what the world has been set to expect from the NATO summit to be held in Warsaw on July 8-9. Summing things up, it is clear that the Alliance is moving to the east. It plans to create a Black Sea «allied fleet». It should be done quickly – the standing force should be formed by July.

Sedov closed by saying that Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko “is impatiently waiting for the July NATO summit. The event can ultimately do away with whatever is left of ‘détente’, ‘reset’ etc. and bring the world back to the days of uncompromised mutual assured destruction.”

By slavishly doing the bidding of the plutocrats Obama is assuring his future as a multimillionaire, in the mould of the Clintons and other  notorious political shills. How millions of stupid liberals—and countless deluded Blacks who only see his color— still admire this abject criminal is one of the revolting facts of our time.

There is a backstory to that, and, naturally, it goes back to Barack Obama:

As I have previously explained, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had told Poroshenko, on 12 May 2015, to stop saying that Ukraine would restart its war against the separatist Donbass region and would invade Crimea and retake that too; but, Kerry’s subordinate, Hillary Clinton’s friend Victoria Nuland, told Poroshenko to ignore her boss on that, and then U.S. President Obama sided with Nuland and sidelined Kerry on Ukraine policy by making clear that he thought Poroshenko was right to insist upon retaking Crimea and re-invading Donbass.

In other words: the Minsk peace process for Ukraine, that had been initiated by Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande, was grudgingly accepted by Obama but he really had no intention of its being anything more than a pause in the war, after which NATO itself would become engaged in facing-down Russia over its ‘aggressive’ ‘invasion’ and ‘seizure’ of Crimea.

Game’s on for World War III, is Obama’s message to Russian President Vladimir Putin. At some point, either the American side or the Russian-NATO-EU side will have to back down on the Crimea matter, or else the bombs, on one or both sides, will be released against the other. Kerry has been trying negotiation, but his real enemy is his own boss.

There is every indication that, if Hillary Clinton, a super-hawk against Russia, becomes the next U.S. President, then the policies that Obama has been implementing will be carried out. 2016 could thus turn out to be a very fateful election in the U.S., and not only for the U.S. but for the entire world.

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

by
Bill Van Auken
wsws.org (excerpts)

Obama with Merkel during European “summit” (April 2016). Two democracy usurpers leading the world to further calamities. The needs of US imperialism come first, which require endless wars and immiseration. Don’t expect the corrupt corporate media to alert you to it.

Barack Obama ended his six-day trip through Saudi Arabia, Britain and Germany Monday with what amounted to a mini-war summit in the northern German city of Hannover. The meeting was attended by himself, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Francois Hollande and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi.

Obama used the occasion to announce a significant escalation of the US intervention in the Middle East—the dispatch of 250 more special operations troops, a six-fold increase over the current deployment of 50. This follows on the heels of an escalation of troop numbers in Iraq and an authorization of the use of US Apache attack helicopters in combat there.

The Syrian escalation has been ordered under conditions where the White House has reportedly fashioned a “Plan B” to be put into effect once the shaky cessation of hostilities in the country is deemed to have failed. The plan calls for the CIA, operating in conjunction with Washington’s reactionary allies in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf oil monarchies, to funnel massive quantities of new arms, including surface-to-air missiles, to the Al Qaeda-linked Islamist militias that serve as Western proxies in the war for regime-change.

The lessons of Obama’s presidency are vital. Workers and young people can wage an effective struggle against war only to the extent that they organize their strength independently of and in opposition to the Democratic Party and the capitalist two-party system.

The American president’s message to his European counterparts was that they must stop being “complacent” and work to build up their own military forces for interventions in the Middle East, North Africa and against Russia to the east.

This appeal appeared to be in line with the policies already being pursued by Washington’s NATO allies. Britain, France and Italy are in the advanced stages of preparing another imperialist incursion into oil-rich Libya, having cobbled together a puppet regime that can formally request foreign intervention in a country already shattered by the US-NATO war begun five years ago.

Obama’s host, Chancellor Merkel, proudly declared, “We are ready and willing to be militarily engaged,” citing the German military’s participation in ongoing interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Mali.

“We have to put in more equipment, more personnel,” Merkel said at a joint press conference with Obama. “We know the targets NATO has submitted to us. We think that the whole positioning of our federal armed forces reflects fully our sense that we need to shoulder this international responsibility.”

Seven decades after the fall of the Third Reich, German militarism, recklessly promoted by Washington, is back in business.

There was a certain valedictory quality to Obama’s public statements in Germany, with his administration coming to an end in barely nine months. He pretentiously titled a 49-minute speech he delivered Monday “An Address to the People of Europe.”

Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, described the Hannover speech to a group of businessmen as a “bookend” to a speech he delivered in Berlin in the summer of 2008 during his run for presidency. At that time, some 200,000 people poured into Berlin’s Tiergarten to cheer the Democratic candidate in the naive hope that he would put an end to the eight years of aggressive war, torture and criminality that characterized the Bush presidency.

This represented what was probably the high water mark of the phenomenon known as “Obamamania,” in which large numbers of people on both sides of the Atlantic were swept up in the cynical marketing of Obama, a junior senator and unknown political quantity, as the champion of “hope and change,” whose supposed sympathy for the oppressed and hostility to war would be assured by the color of his skin.

Playing a prominent role in this campaign were various elements of the pseudo-left both in the US and Europe, including the International Socialist Organization in the US, which described his election as a “transformative event,” and Germany’s Left Party, which praised his 2008 speech in the Tiergarten. These forces worked to channel antiwar sentiment behind the Democratic candidate, whose election served as a vehicle for their own move to open support for imperialist war.

At the time, the World Socialist Web Site described the speech as “a reactionary affirmation of Cold War anti-communism and an attempt to promote the new framework for US imperialist militarism and aggression, the so-called ‘global war on terror.’”

The speech, the WSWS continued, promised a more collaborative relationship with Europe’s capitalist powers and offered the prospect that “in return for their assistance in salvaging America’s neocolonial ventures in Afghanistan and elsewhere, they could anticipate a larger slice of the spoils.” To the American ruling elite, the speech signaled Obama’s “determination as president to prosecute US imperialism’s global hegemonic aims…”

Nearly eight years later, Obama addressed the “people of Europe” as a commander-in-chief who has overseen the continuation of the war in Afghanistan along with new military interventions in both Iraq and Syria. As president, he threw the US military into the war for regime-change that devastated Libya. He has provided military support to the Saudi assault that has driven the people of Yemen to the brink of starvation and personally directed a global campaign of drone murders and massacres that has killed thousands of innocent civilians.

The danger is growing of these various conflicts igniting a new world war, as the Pentagon executes its “pivot to Asia” with increasingly provocative military challenges to China, and the US and NATO carry out an aggressive buildup on Russia’s borders.

The election to choose Obama’s successor is notable for the virtual blackout by the two major parties, their candidates and the corporate media of the rising danger of world war.

Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner, is the favored candidate of the US military and intelligence complex, described glowingly by the New York Times last week as the “last true hawk left in the race.” The Republican frontrunner Donald Trump has called for a major increase in military spending and the return of torture.

The “democratic socialism” and “political revolution” of Democratic challenger Bernie Sanders include no challenge to American militarism, and he has pledged to back Clinton should she win the nomination.

The Socialist Equality Party has launched its 2016 election campaign. Our candidates, Jerry White for US president and Niles Niemuth for vice president, are breaking through the conspiracy of silence of the capitalist parties and candidates and raising as the most critical issue confronting American working people the danger of war. Their campaign is focused centrally on the building of an international antiwar movement based on the working class and directed against the capitalist system, the source of militarism and war.

The lessons of Obama’s presidency are vital. Workers and young people can wage an effective struggle against war only to the extent that they organize their strength independently of and in opposition to the Democratic Party and the capitalist two-party system.

At the same time, this struggle must be international, uniting the working class across national boundaries in a common struggle against imperialism and for socialism.

Obama in Germany: New joint aggression and growing imperialist rivalries

By Johannes Stern

Dateline: 26 April 2016 / wsws.org

An extremely ominous development is concealed behind all of the mutual flattery and declarations of friendship between German Chancellor Angela Merkel and US President Barack Obama over recent days.

Obama’s fifth trip to Germany was not simply a visit to the 2016 Hanover Fair, or a farewell tour by a departing American president, but rather was aimed at escalating both imperialist aggression in the Middle East and NATO’s military build-up against Russia. At the same time, it initiated a new stage in the return of German militarism.

Already at the joint press conference in Hanover on Saturday, Obama and Merkel spoke very openly about their plans. Merkel stated early on, “We have used the opportunity to discuss the various challenges of the international agenda.” These were “of course Syria, Libya and Afghanistan, but also Africa and the crisis between Russia and Ukraine.”

They had been in agreement “that the issues of security in the area around Europe could only be resolved through joint Transatlantic efforts for which European engagement and also German engagement on many issues [was] necessary.” Merkel noted that Germany had “shown in recent months that it [had] undertaken additional efforts in many places,” such as in Iraq, the “struggle against terrorism” in Syria and “Mali or other regions where we are now active.”

In addition, Berlin was prepared to “further engage militarily” and strengthen its armed forces. Merkel said reassuringly, “Germany is in it for the very long term in several areas, in which we will continue.” Weapons had been sent to the Peshmerga and thereby “supplied to a tense region, which in light of our historical development [was] a completely new step.” “Assuming responsibility in Africa” was “apart from the Congo mission, which we had for a short time previously, a new area.”

Do people ever learn from history?

The question is: Where are the German people in all this? Do they fail to see, to comprehend the enormity of the betrayals concocted by these pseudo-leaders right under their noses? Have they learned nothing from history? One can forgive the American masses for their notorious obtuseness in connection with international affairs, but the Germans? This is truly hard to believe. Are Europeans so anesthesized by the American brand of brainwash that they do not recognize the clear signs of approaching catastrophe?

On Germany’s prior decision to increase the defence budget Merkel stated: “I know that we obviously have to make additional efforts as regards our possibilities to defend ourselves. We have to put in more equipment, more personnel.” She recognised “the targets set for us by NATO” and said she “believes that the overall deployment of the German army now fully reflects our sense that we need to shoulder this international responsibility.”

Obama, who repeatedly praised Merkel in the highest tones, hailed Germany’s new war policy. “Germany is a vital member of the coalition to destroy ISIL. German aircraft support the air campaign, and German personnel in Iraq are training local forces. German assistance is helping to stabilise Iraq and rebuild the areas it liberates from ISIL,” he stated.

At the same time, Obama warned of the need to retain the “strength of our NATO alliance” and to strengthen it against Russia. With a threatening undertone, which was certainly aimed at those sections of the German ruling elite who prefer a closer strategic orientation to Russia, he declared, “We continue to augment, on a rotational basis, NATO forces in Eastern Europe, including the Baltic states. As I’ve said from the very beginning of my presidency, we have a treaty obligation to defend every NATO ally—and we will.”

These are not empty words. According to a news report by Der Spiegel, Obama called on Merkel at a so-called G5 meeting on Monday involving the prime ministers of Britain and Italy and the French President, to participate “significantly in the planned stationing of permanently rotating NATO units on the eastern border of the alliance.” Berlin had thus far taken a back seat in the planning and pointed to the German army’s significant participation in NATO’s new rapid reaction force.

It now appears increasingly likely that the government is ready to further strengthen its forces in Eastern Europe. Already at a 20 April press conference in Berlin with visiting Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite, Merkel reaffirmed that the “decisions from Wales” would be “further developed” at the coming NATO summit in Warsaw, and “we will do our part in accordance with this.”

Journalist Thomas Wiegold, who has close connections to the military and security establishment, commented on his blog “Eyes front!”: “The question is therefore not now whether the German army is to be present with troops on the eastern flank of NATO (and that means in part: practically on the Russian border). They have been for a long time. The question is much more if this presence is to be significantly strengthened. And if the German army will operate in continuous rotation with other troops at battalion strength, not company strength or less.”

Since the federal government announced that Germany would again play a role in world politics “corresponding to the importance of our country,” (Federal President Gauck on October 3, 2013), it has used Washington’s aggressive foreign policy to build up its own military and advance its own imperialist interests.

Significantly, it was announced on Monday that Germany would establish its own military base for Tornado fighter planes in Turkey. According to information from Spiegel Online the German government reckons “with a very long German intervention against the Islamic State” and is therefore planning a long term deployment at the Turkish Air Force Base in Incirlik. According to internal documents, a total of around €65 million is to be made available for a separate airstrip, accommodations for German soldiers and a fully equipped command post. In addition, the Bundeswehr is negotiating a long-term agreement with the Turkish government for the long-term stationing of German soldiers.

The much-vaunted close economic relations between the US and Germany are also increasingly marked by rivalry when it comes to profits and markets. At the industrial fair in Hanover, both Obama and Merkel made remarks with critical undertones. When they mounted the podium in Hall 3, Obama declared, “Now is another opportunity for me to say, ‘Come to us and buy American goods.’” Merkel had already stated at the opening of the fair on Sunday evening: “Buy German would also be very good” and added: “We love competition. But we also like to win.”

In a commentary titled “Obama and Merkel in Hanover: Each with their separate view,” Spiegel Online wrote, “The World’s Largest Industry Fair with host country USA is more than ever a test of strength between the largest and the fourth largest economy in the world.”

It is against this background that one can understand the ongoing tensions around the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreements (TTIP) that the EU is currently negotiating with the United States. Despite all the claims that the US wanted “to hurry” (Merkel), all the nations involved are seeking to negotiate the best conditions for their own interests and thereby make as few concessions as possible. Die Zeit wrote succinctly that “TTIP will not happen so fast” because each side is worried “they will not be able to rewrite the rules for other markets to benefit their own business lobby.”

What lies behind the German-American axis, which appears to take the form of close military and economic cooperation but where explosive tensions are developing ?

One indication is the interview given by the German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SPD) in the weekend edition of the Handelsblatt. Under the heading “The situation is more dangerous than in Cold War,” he stated, “The old order has not yet been replaced by a new one,” and he continued “This struggle for influence and hegemony is not taking place in a peaceful seminar environment, but is exploding violently.”

In other words, just as was the case prior to the First and Second World Wars, a new race for “influence” and “hegemony” is taking place between the imperialist powers that will once again “explode violently” if the working class does not intervene on the basis of an international and socialist program.

Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

Nauseated by the
vile corporate media?
Had enough of their lies, escapism,
omissions and relentless manipulation?

Dispatches from
STEPHEN LENDMAN

In Turkey, dissent is a criminal offense. Anyone criticizing Erdogan or exposing regime wrongdoing risks arrest, prosecution and imprisonment on charges ranging from insulting the president to espionage, treason or terrorism. 

Turkey’s PM Erdogan has shown a vicious disposition to carry out rightwing policies and go beyond the call in collaboration with Washington, the mark of a true accomplice.

Journalists, academics, public figures, human rights activists, even young children are vulnerable. So would world leaders be if Erdogan has his way. Last December, regime loyalist Mahir Akkar urged Putin be criminally investigated on charges of insulting and defaming Erdogan.

---

He wants Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov to stand trial for “insulting the president,” saying “we cannot turn a blind eye to defamation against our president by other presidents or officials.”

---

Turkish officials pressured Angela Merkel to hold German TV host Jan Bohmermann accountable for reading a satirical poem on ZDF television criticizing Erdogan – violating the nation’s constitution, affirming free expression even when offensive.

---

Turkish nationals in the Netherlands were asked to reveals names of anyone insulting Erdogan and their remarks. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said he’ll handle things through diplomatic channels. “Our ambassador in Ankara will ask for an explanation,” he said.

---

It is hardly surprising that this thug is one of Washington’s key allies in mischief in the Middle East and elsewhere. 

An Erdogan regime letter asked Turkish nationals living in the Netherlands to report “messages from people who are insulting our president, the Turkish nation or Turkey in general.” It asked for “names and the quotes” to be sent to Turkey’s Rotterdam Consulate General.” Turkish opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) Dutch branch chairman, Axu Ozalp, called what’s happening “very worrying.”

---

[dropcap]D[/dropcap]utch journalist Frederike Geerdink said Ankara’s campaign targets anything appearing on Facebook, Twitter, other social media and private emails. It aims to “influence how Dutch Turks behave.” Politicians in Holland call the scheme “the long arm of Ankara,” wanting control over diaspora Turks throughout Europe, perhaps others expressing criticism of a rogue regime.

---

I’ve blasted Erdogan in numerous articles, calling him a fascist despot, a megalomaniacal international outlaw, a psychopath – waging war on Kurdish nationals in Turkey, Iraq and Syria, supporting ISIS and other terrorist groups, wanting the Ottoman Empire recreated.

---

Let me go on record saying clearly. I’d do lots more than insult him. I’d make the same accusations to his face. I won’t be silenced or intimidated.  Maybe his “long arm” will target me. Put nothing past a crazed despot, wanting everyone and everything interfering with his iron-fisted rule eliminated.

About the author

STEPHEN LENDMAN lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."  ( http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html ) Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable