A dispatch from RT (Russian Television)

Published time: September 06, 2013 13:29

 

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin gives a press conference at the end of the G20 summit on September 6, 2013 in Saint Petersburg (AFP Photo)

The alleged chemical weapons use in Syria is a provocation carried out by the rebels to attract a foreign-led strike, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at the G20 summit.  There was no 50/50 split of opinion on the notion of a military strike against the Syrian President Bashar Assad, Putin stressed refuting earlier assumptions.

Only Turkey, Canada, Saudi Arabia and France joined the US push for intervention, he said, adding that the UK Prime Minister’s position was not supported by his citizens.

Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, South Africa and Italy were among the major world’s economies clearly opposed to military intervention.

President Putin said the G20 nations spent the “entire” Thursday evening discussing the Syrian crisis, which was followed by Putin’s bilateral meeting with UK Prime Minister David Cameron that lasted till 3am Moscow time.

Russia “will help Syria” in the event of a military strike, Putin stressed as he responded to a reporter’s question at the summit.

“Will we help Syria? We will. And we are already helping, we send arms, we cooperate in the economics sphere, we hope to expand our cooperation in the humanitarian sphere, which includes sending humanitarian aid to support those people – the civilians – who have found themselves in a very dire situation in this country,” Putin said.

Putin said he sat down with US President Barack Obama on the sidelines of the G20 summit and talked for about half an hour in “a friendly atmosphere”.

Although the Russian and the American leaders maintained different positions regarding the Syrian issue, Putin said they “hear” and understand each other.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry will continue discussing the situation in Syria “in the short run,” Putin said.

Meanwhile, President Obama reiterated in his summit speech that the US government believes Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces were behind the chemical weapons use.

Obama pledged to make a good case on the issue for both the international community and the American people, saying many nations are already “comfortable” with the US’ opinion.

While admitting “a number of countries” at the summit stressed any military action plan should go through the UN Security Council, Obama said the US is in a different “camp” that questioned the UNSC effectiveness.

“Given the Security Council’s paralysis on this issue, if we are serious about upholding a ban on chemical weapons use, then an international response is required and that will not come through the Security Council action,” Obama said.

‘A dangerous precedent’

Both presidents stressed that the situation in Syria could create a dangerous precedent, but supported their points with contrasting arguments.

Obama stressed his “goal” and US “responsibility” was to maintain international norms on banning chemical weapon use, saying he wanted the enforcement to be “real.”

“When there is a breach this brazen of a norm this important, and the international community is paralyzed and frozen and doesn’t act, then that norm begins to unravel. And if that norm unravels, then other norms and prohibitions start unraveling, and that makes for a more dangerous world,” Obama said.

Putin, on the contrary, stressed that setting precedents of military action outside a UN Security Council resolution would mean the world’s smaller countries can no longer feel safe against the interests of the more powerful ones.

“Small countries in the modern world feel increasingly vulnerable and insecure. One starts getting the impression that a more powerful country can at any time and at its own discretion use force against them,” Putin said, citing the earlier statement made by the South African President.

Such practice would also make it much harder to convince North Korea to give up its nuclear program, Putin pointed out.

The meeting of the leaders of the major world economies – G20 – took place in St. Petersburgh, Russia. The participants of the summit focused on economic issues during round-table talks, including unemployment, the lack of global investment, and better international financial regulation. While on the sidelines the conversation shifted to the issue of the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria and the possibility of military action in the war-torn country.

OpEds—

The isolation of America

By Paul Craig Roberts

Washington preens itself on being “the world’s greatest democracy.” Washington uses the claim that it is spreading democracy as a justification for its naked aggression–a clear and unambiguous war crime–against other countries. Washington cloaks its illegality in democratic rhetoric despite the obvious fact that its wars are not a consequence of democratic decision.

Washington has used deception and lies to gain acceptance of its extra-constitutional and extra-legal wars, but Washington’s wars have all been launched outside the constitutional/democratic framework of the United States.

Obama’s war against Libya occurred without the participation of Congress. And now Obama is again revealing that the US is so far removed from democracy that he plans to attack Syria without a vote by Congress. Where is the democracy when a Caesar makes the decisions that the Constitution reserves to Congress?

Polls indicate that 80 percent of US citizens believe that a US military attack on Syria requires approval by the House and Senate. Yet, the Obama regime is purposely avoiding any such vote. The Obama regime has also ignored the letter signed by 162 members of the House of Representatives demanding to see evidence, debate it, and vote prior to any US military strike.

It is an act of treason for the US military to carry out any war orders without congressional authorization. Any military commander who violates his oath to defend the Constitution of the United States has committed high treason against the United States. If the US were truly a lawful democracy, such commanders would be subject to arrest and trial.

The fact that the executive branch and the military operate outside the Constitution and democratic process is proof that the US is not a democracy.

In yesterday’s columns I noted that Obama, his media whores, and worshiping Obamabots are overlooking considerations of critical importance. One is that military aggression is a war crime. In the past, Bush and Obama had cloaks for their war crimes, such as a “coalition of the willing,” NATO, some limited “congressional consultation” or vague resolution, or a UN resolution that is then stretched to cover the regime’s actions.

None of these things are adequate legal cover. Their worth comes from the fact that other countries and institutions besides the US executive branch are involved in the war crime. There is safety in the numbers. Charging the entire Western world with war crimes means only that the entire Western world will defend the validity of their excuse.

But this time the regime has no cover. There is no “coalition of the willing,” no UN resolution, no NATO support, and Obama has ignored both Congress and the American people. For Obama to proceed with his attack on Syria would be the action of an unaccountable dictator. He would have no cover for his war crime.

Obama’s effort to rush to war with Syria has already destroyed the credibility of the US government as a truthful, honest government. The entire world, even Washington’s most subservient puppet states, have recognized that Washington has no evidence to back its accusations. No one believes Obama or Kerry. Both have revealed themselves to the entire world as brazen liars.

This has destroyed all trust in the US government. And now Obama seems determined to prove that America has a dictator, not a democracy.

It is difficult to imagine a more serious blow to the US than the one Obama has delivered.
All of the important props for Washington’s propaganda, such as “the world’s greatest democracy,” have been kicked out from under what now stands revealed as a criminal enterprise.

Russia’s President Putin has openly expressed his contempt for the lies that are flowing nonstop from the mouths of Obama and Kerry. Putin called Obama’s claims “utter nonsense.” Putin said that if the Americans have any proof, “let them show it to the United Nations inspectors and the Security Council.”

In fact, the evidence that exists indicates that the chemical attack originated with the rebels and may have been an accident caused by “rebels” transporting chemical weapons given to them by the Saudis but without instruction to correct handling. The reporter, Dale Gavlak, who spoke with the rebels, who were themselves harmed by the weapons, is a Middle East expert from the University of Chicago who has reported for the Associated Press, National Public Radio, and the BBC. http://original.antiwar.com/Dale-Gavlak/2013/08/30/syrians-in-ghouta-claim-saudi-supplied-rebels-behind-chemical-attack/

For another perspective unreported by the US media, see Ambrose Evans-Pritchard’s report in the UK Telegraph that Saudi Prince Bandar, head of Saudi intelligence, attempted to bribe and intimidate Putin into abandoning Syria to the Americans. Reportedly, Bandar offered Putin a Saudi-Russian oil cartel and offered Putin protection against Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10266957/Saudis-offer-Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html

As farfetched as all of this sounds to Americans, it is more plausible than anything Washington says.

Washington’s claim that the Syrian “rebels” have no access to chemical weapons is obviously false. On May 30, an Istanbul newspaper reported that Turkish police apprehended al-Nusra “rebels” with sarin gas that al-Nusra planed to use in an attack on Adana. http://www.todayszaman.com/news-316966-report-police-foil-al-nusra-bomb-attack-planned-for-adana.html

Having repeatedly declared that the use of chemical weapons requires a military response from the US, what will Obama and Kerry do when it comes clear that the “rebels,” not Assad, are responsible for the chemical weapons? Will Obama and Kerry attack the “rebels”? Will Obama and Kerry attack Saudi Arabia for giving the chemical weapons to the “rebels”? Don’t hold your breath.

My Ph.D. dissertation supervisor, G. Warren Nutter, was brought into the Pentagon by Melvin Laird as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs and given the task of winding down the Vietnam War. Nutter opposed US foreign policy based on secrecy and deception. He was convinced that US foreign policy had to be transparent, consistent with the country’s principles, and carry public support. A policy based on secrecy and deception would undermine democracy and the trust of the public and foreigners in the US government.

Today there are no Warren Nutters in Washington, and there have not been such people in government for many years. As Nutter foresaw, the consequences are the loss of public confidence in government and the isolation of the US in world affairs.

Obama now stands on the verge of military aggression as isolated as Adolf Hitler when Germany attacked Poland.

UPDATE: 4:00 PM US East Coast Time

The White House Fool, learning from the alternative media and not from his moronic advisers that he is isolated in the world and has no cover for his war crime against Syria, has announced that he is going to wait until he gets approval from Congress.

No doubt the White House Fool was also moved by the letter from 161 members of the House of Representatives that to engage in hostilities without congressional authorization is unconstitutional. The letter contains the threat of impeachment:

“We strongly urge you to consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria. Your responsibility to do so is prescribed in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

“While the Founders wisely gave the Office of the President the authority to act in emergencies, they foresaw the need to ensure public debate – and the active engagement of Congress – prior to committing U.S. military assets. Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution.” http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/08/31/impeachment-congress-fires-opening-shot-across-obamas-bow/

We can be thankful that at least 161 members of Congress recognize their responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable to the Constitution. Perhaps the lies from the executive branch became so brazen that they lost their effectiveness. Instead of fearing a hyped “terrorist threat,” people now see the threat of a White House Tyrant.

About Dr. Paul Craig RobertsPaul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West is now available. 

» Gangster State US/UK — Paul Craig Roberts

On July 23 I wrote about how the US reversed roles with the USSR and became the tyrant that terrifies the world. We have now had further confirmation of that fact. It comes from two extraordinary actions by Washington’s British puppet state.

David Miranda, the Brazilian partner of Glenn Greenwald, who is reporting on the illegal and unconstitutional spying by the National Stasi Agency, was seized, no doubt on Washington’s orders, by the puppet British government from the international transit zone of a London airport. Miranda had not entered the UK, but he was seized by UK authorities. http://rt.com/op-edge/uk-gay-greenwald-freedom-police-679/

Washington’s UK puppets simply kidnapped him, threatened him for nine hours, and stole his computer, phones, and all his electronic equipment. As a smug US official told the media, “the purpose was to send a message.”

You might remember that Edward Snowden was stuck for some weeks in the international transit zone of the Moscow airport. The Obama tyrant repeatedly browbeat Russia’s President Putin to violate the law and kidnap Snowden for Obama. Unlike the once proud and law-abiding British, Putin refused to place Washington’s desires above law and human rights.

The second extraordinary violation occurred almost simultaneously with UK authorities appearing at the Guardian newspaper and illegally destroying the hard drives on the newspaper’s computers with the vain intention of preventing the newspaper from reporting further Snowden revelations of US/UK high criminality.

[pullquote] The question is: are there sufficient brainwashed people in both countries to sustain the US/UK myth that “freedom and democracy” are attained via war crimes? [/pullquote]

It is fashionable in the US and UK governments and among their sycophants to speak of “gangster state Russia.” But we all know who the gangsters are. The worst criminals of our time are the US and UK governments. Both are devoid of all integrity, all honor, all mercy, all humanity. Many members of both governments would have made perfect functionaries in Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany.

This is extraordinary. It was the English who originated liberty. True, in 1215 it was the freedom of the barons’ rights from the king’s infringement, not the freedom of the commoner. But once the principle was established it spread into the entire society. By 1680 the legal revolution was complete. The king and the government were subject to law. The king and his government were no longer the law and above the law.

In the 13 colonies the Englishmen who populated them inherited this English achievement. When King George’s government refused the colonies the Rights of Englishmen, the colonists revolted, and the United States was born.

The descendants of these colonists now live in an America where their Constitutional protections have been overthrown by a tyrannical government that claims it is above the law. This raw fact has not stopped the US government or its puppets from continuing to cloak the war crime of military aggression in the faux language of “bringing freedom and democracy.” If the Obama and Cameron governments were in the dock at Nuremberg, the entirety of both governments would be convicted.

The question is: are there sufficient brainwashed people in both countries to sustain the US/UK myth that “freedom and democracy” are attained via war crimes?

There is no shortage of brainwashed Americans who love to be told that they are “indispensable” and “exceptional,” and therefore entitled to work their will on the world. It is difficult to discern in these clueless Americans much hope for the revival of liberty. But there is some indication that the British, who did not inherit liberty but had to fight for it for five centuries, might be more determined.

[pullquote] Washington’s UK puppets simply kidnapped him, threatened him for nine hours, and stole his computer, phones, and all his electronic equipment. As a smug US official told the media, “the purpose was to send a message.” [/pullquote]

The British Home Affairs Committee, chaired by Keith Vaz, is demanding an explanation from Obama’s lap dog, the British prime minister. Also, Britain’s watchman over anti-terrorism enforcement, David Anderson, is demanding that the UK Home Office and police explain the illegal use of anti-terrorism laws against Miranda, who is not a terrorist or connected to terrorism in any way.

Brazil’s foreign minister has joined the fray, demanding that London explain why the UK violated its own law and abused a Brazilian citizen.

Of course, everyone knows that Washington forced its UK puppet to violate law in order to serve Washington. One wonders if the British will ever decide that they would be better off as a sovereign country.

The White House denied involvement in Miranda’s kidnapping, but refused to condemn the illegal action of its puppet.

As for the UK’s destruction of press freedom, the White House supports that, too. It is already happening here.

Meanwhile, get accustomed to the police state: http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/now-big-brother-targets-your-fedex-ups-packages/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Paul Craig Roberts is a former distinguished establishmentarian, onetime cabinet member in the Reagan administration, academic, and contributing editor of the Wall Street Journal. Today, his voice is one of the most clear and eloquent against the same establishment.

By Pepe Escobar, RT.com 

AFP Photo / US Navy / MC2 Tony D. Curtis

US President Barack Obama now pledges to transfer the responsibility of the shadow ‘Drone Wars’ from the CIA to the Pentagon – so the US Congress is able to monitor it. 

Until virtually yesterday the Obama administration did not even recognize in public the existence of the shadow ‘Drone Wars’.

The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) at the Pentagon – which would then be in charge of the‘Drone Wars’ – is bound to remain secret.

And the Pentagon is not exactly yearning to retouch its definition of a “militant”, a prime candidate to be‘target-assassinated’; “any military-aged male in a strike zone”. “Muslim” male, it goes without saying.

Obama’s rhetoric is one thing. His administration’s ‘Drone Wars’ are another thing entirely.

The President now insists GWOT is no longer a “boundless global war”.

That’s rhetoric. For the Pentagon, the “entire globe is a battlefield”.

That is the operative concept since the beginning of GWOT, and inbuilt in the Pentagon’s Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine.

And if the entire globe is a battlefield, all its causes and consequences are interconnected.

The rules of the game

What’s the difference between a British soldier (the UK is attached to GWOT via the “special relationship”), stationed at an army barracks, gruesomely hacked to death with a meat cleaver in a London street and a Syrian soldier beheaded/disemboweled/cannibalized in “rebel”-held territory by a mercenary Sunni jihadi?

The difference is that the Nigerian-British killer in London is a terrorist, and the jihadi in Syria is a freedom fighter.

What’s the difference between an alleged – never conclusively – proven Chechen-American principally responsible for the Boston bombing and a little Pashtun girl killed by a US drone in Waziristan?

The difference is that the Chechen-American is a terrorist, and the Pashtun girl is not even acknowledged by the Pentagon (and even if she was, she’d go down as “collateral damage”.)

And what if the “collateral damage” is a US citizen, as in Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, the 16-year-old son of Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, ‘target-assassinated‘ by a US drone in Yemen in October 2011?

It will take 19 months for the administration to admit he was “terminated” – but still with no justification attached.

GWOT’s rules of the game won’t change – no matter how soaring Obama’s rhetoric.

When the US – or “the West” – kills or ‘target-assassinates’ Muslim civilians, that’s never terrorism.

When Muslims supported by “the West” kill other Muslim civilians – as in Syria – they are not terrorists; they are Reaganesque “freedom fighters”.

When Muslims kill Western soldiers – as in London – they’re terrorists.

When Muslims happen to come from regime-changeable Iran and Syria’s government, not to mention Hezbollah, they are by definition terrorists.

And when Muslims are lingering in Guantanamo just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time when the US invaded a Muslim country, they remain terrorists – the umpteenth Obama promise to close Guantanamo notwithstanding.

U.S. President Barack Obama listens as Medea Benjamin, an activist from the organization called Code Pink, shouts at him while he speaks at the National Defense University May 23, 2013 in Washington, DC (Win McNamee / Getty Images / AFP)

Pick your favorite blowback

Take a look at the trailer of Dirty Warsfeaturing Jeremy Scahill’s investigation of Washington’s shadow war. Pay attention to what a Pashtun peasant says: “If the Americans do this again, we are ready to shed our blood fighting them”.

That’s blowback. And not only Pashtuns are ready – but pan-Arabs and Muslims born and bred in “the West”.
The new “lone wolf” catchphrase/hysteria barely identifies the future proliferation of Muslim individuals whose anger finally explodes.

They may not be affiliated with any al-Qaeda-style franchise or copycat. What they do embody is the notion that if “the West” can get away with killing Muslim civilians, there will be a price to pay.

That’s 1, 2, 3, one thousand blowbacks.

And reasons for a thousand blowbacks are piling up.

The Bush administration’s ‘Shock and Awe’ over Baghdad 10 years ago was Western terrorism inflicted on Iraq’s civilian population.

The ‘Drone Wars’ are Western terrorism inflicted on civilian populations from Yemen to Pakistan’s tribal areas.
The sanctions packages imposed for years on Iraq and later on Iran are slow-motion Western terrorism inflicted on civilian populations to “prepare” them for regime change.

Meanwhile “the West” simply won’t quit its ability to fabricate more blowbacks.

NATO’s war “liberated” Libya and turned it into a failed state. The result is Sahelistan; northern and western Africa on fire.

Suicide bombers in Niger have just attacked a military camp and a uranium mine operated by French company Areva.

Responsibility was claimed by Mokhtar Belmokhtar, a former leader of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) who late last year formed the splinter group Signatories in Blood, then led the attack on a natural gas plant in Ain Amenas in Algeria last January, and later may – or rather may not – have been killed.

The bottom line is that the entire globe will remain a battlefield – a self-fulfilling Pentagon prophecy.

So many Belmokhtars to fight, so many Syrian jihadis to support, so many “al-Qaeda” to target-assassinate, so many Muslim lone wolves to track.

Obama’s rhetoric is just a show. GWOT is bound to remain a serpent biting its own tail, eagerly feeding itself till the end of time.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.