US has to come to terms with its place in the world, just as Britain did when its empire collapsed: Le vecchie signore vogliono comandare fino all'ultimo giorno.

 

US has to come to terms with its place in the world, just as Britain did when its empire collapsed

Ken Livingstone
Ken Livingstone
is an English politician, he served as the Mayor of London between 2000 and 2008. He is also a former MP and a former member of the Labour Party.
US has to come to terms with its place in the world, just as Britain did when its empire collapsed
Trump’s threats of war, sanctions and promises to make America great again could be dismissed as the ranting of an eccentric politician. But this isn’t all about Trump. What he advocates is representative of much of the US elite.

The president and his generation of Americans grew up in a world where the USA was the greatest superpower in human history. It was not just their vast arsenal of nuclear weapons and their war machine but, in 1945, around 50 percent of the entire world’s economy was in the United States of America, with Britain and the USSR hobbling along with around 10 percent each. America dwarfed the power that the British empire had in the 19th century.  

In the years that followed, America would intervene all over the world, not to spread democracy, but to overthrow governments that were not working in America’s commercial interests. Whether it was the coup that removed the government of Iran in 1953 and brought back the dictatorship of the Shah; or the military coup in Brazil in 1964 that overthrew a socialist, democratically elected government; or the dozens of other coups around the world, America crushed any opposition to its economic interests.

Some 45 years after the end of the Second World War came the collapse of the Soviet Union, by which time America’s share of the global economy was down to 25 percent. The collapse of the Soviet Union unleashed a wave of assumptions about the future. The most significant of these was Francis Fukuyama’s 1992 book ‘The End of History and The Last Man.’ This was met with acclaim around the world as he argued that the ideological evolution of humanity was over with the triumph of Western liberal democracy. Fukuyama had previously worked in the US State Department under Ronald Reagan and later worked for the first George Bush. Now he is a senior fellow at Stanford University and has just published a book called ‘Identity’ looking at the current political situation. But it was his 1992 book that dominated the political debate as he predicted that the collapse of communism meant there was only one system left for our planet: pragmatic liberal democracy, and the world would never change again.

In an interview in The Guardian, Fukuyama talks about the “ruthless cunning of Vladimir Putin” and points out that Trump and Brexit are a backlash against multiculturalism and international cooperation. He warns that “globalization has clearly left a lot of people behind. There is greater automation, greater inequality.” He says he believed the financial crash would see a surge of left-wing populism and was therefore surprised by the rise of Trump.

Across much of the capitalist West, tens of millions have seen their lives get worse and this has fueled the growth of far-right groups and racial hatred. But different things are happening elsewhere in the world, of which the most significant is the rise of China. Around 40 years ago, China was a basket economy with 90 percent of its people living in poverty, but the economic strategy of China has lifted over 500 million Chinese out of poverty and their economy has grown to a point where it is about to overtake the USA. Not surprisingly, this has caused a backlash in the American establishment.

Paul Wolfowitz, a key player in America’s invasion of Iraq, had warned back in 1992 in a secret memo to Defense Secretary Dick Cheney that “our strategy must now refocus on precluding the emergence of any potential future global competitor.” But with the growth of China’s economy and America’s economic decline, Wolfowitz’s strategy has now become the consensus in the American government, including Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. During Obama’s administration, they were pushing aggressive policies by expanding NATO to encircle Russia and devising a strategy for the economic containment of China. Obama’s Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) tried to create an economic bloc around the Pacific that would exclude China. Fortunately, this was rejected by most Asian governments and never happened.

America’s paranoia about China ignores why Beijing’s economy has soared. Unlike the West, which allows the financial sector to dominate and set the economic agenda, China focused on scientific and technological development, investment in infrastructure (like high-speed rail) and kept its financial center under firm regulation, thus avoiding its banks collapsing as they did in the West in 2008.

Sergei Glazyev, a key adviser to President Putin, has warned against the continuing US and EU sanctions against Russia, and the capricious policy of the Trump administration that has seen the start of a trade war. He warns that “if the US keeps contradicting international law… the first measure we would have to take together with China and other countries who are suffering from US aggression would be to get rid of the dollar as the key international currency.” China, he said, “has created the most progressive system in the world for directing economic development, combining planning with market self-regulation, and subordinating private initiative to the needs of raising the general welfare through an increased volume and efficiency of production.”

Another consequence of China’s growth is BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa). These countries are increasingly cooperating and as their economies continue to rise, we will never again see a world in which one country’s economy can dominate the whole planet, as was the case with America after 1945.

This global economic shift has caused a backlash with former British prime minister Tony Blair claiming: “America needs Europe united and standing with it, not isolated as individual nations, able to be picked off one by one by the emergent new powers.”

China’s President Xi, speaking at the G20 conference two years ago, warned that “we can no longer rely on fiscal and monetary policy alone,” and called for spreading visionary and inclusive economic growth driven by innovation in science and technology… “to spearhead the fourth industrial revolution.” He went on to promise direct support to help the countries of Africa see their economies grow.

Xi also said“the Silk Road Economic Belt is progressing rapidly and the Maritime Silk Road is well underway. But this is not China creating a sphere of influence but rather a means of supporting the development of all countries. We are not building China’s backyard garden but we’re building a garden to be shared by all countries.”

Also, in September 2016, Russia’s President Putin advocated“big, ambitious, complex and long-term tasks” to transform Russia’s Far East into a hub of Eurasian development. At the same time, President Obama was still pushing for the TPP and demanding that “America should write the rules, not China.” A significant response to Obama came from Germany’s Minister of Economic Affairs Sigmar Gabriel, who said: “In my opinion, the negotiations with the United States have de facto failed because we Europeans did not want to subject ourselves to America’s demands.”

These views were not shared by Britain’s Prime Minister May, as she launched what seemed to be the beginning of a new Cold War against Russia. Her views were echoed by the Sunday Telegraph’s editor, Allister Heath, who called for Britain to take the lead in creating a new global military and economic alliance to enforce democracy but also capitalism across the globe. Heath’s column was titled ‘Forget NATO. We need a new world alliance to take on totalitarian capitalists in Russia and China.’ Heath continued: “NATO is no longer enough: it is too European, too many of its members are outright pacifists and Turkey’s membership is problematic.” Heath claimed that the new alliance he was advocating “would be the biggest shift in geopolitics since the creation of the UN. It would dramatically shift the global balance of power, and allow the liberal democracies finally to fight back. It would endow the world with the sorts of robust institutions that are required to contain Russia and China…”

No one power is ever going to dominate the world again. The choice we face is to cooperate with the emerging new economies like China and those that will follow around the rest of the Third World or get caught up in an economic Cold War led by the American establishment and its UK ally. America has got to come to terms with the world as it is now, just as Britain had to the same when its empire collapsed. We should work with China and Russia and the other emerging economies and, in doing so, ordinary people around the world will benefit – including in the USA, if only America stops looking back to the past.

We’re not imposing our ideas on anybody, while the other side tries to impose their new, totalitarian, politically correct ideology and way of thinking on all of society.

 

Supporting family values is not fascism, it’s caring for humanity – World Congress of Families envoy

Supporting family values is not fascism, it’s caring for humanity – World Congress of Families envoy
Standing strong for traditional family values is not fascism, as the mainstream media often insinuates, but merely a concern for the future of humanity, Aleksey Komov, of the World Congress of Families (WCF), has told RT.

Liberal media, spurred on by hate-mongering “watchdogs” like the Southern Poverty Law Center, have lost their collective mind over the 13th WCF meeting that took place in Verona, Italy in late March, labeling the attendees “far-right” and “neo-Nazis” who attack women and roll back the rights of sexual minorities.

Also on rt.com Russian Orthodox priest says abortions ‘scarier than the Holocaust’

Komov, who represents the WCF at the UN and in Russia, dismissed these claims as “complete fake news,” arguing that the World Congress of Families was being held simply because “it’s important to support the family for any healthy society, so that people can have children and nations can flourish in the future.”

Family values are in danger because there are very powerful international lobby groups pushing for gender rights, introduction of same-sex marriage, abortions, euthanasia as well as legalization of drugs and prostitution. We think that this is destructive to the ‘natural family’ and a madness that will bring humanity to destruction.

As for the participants, they were “politicians, scientists, scholars and activists” from the US, Europe, Russia, Latin America and Australia. Italy’s Deputy Prime Minister, Matteo Salvini, “gave a fiery speech” and two other Italian ministers attended, as did representatives from 60 countries, including leaders of US conservative groups and members of the Russian parliament and the Orthodox Church, the activist said.

RT

According to Komov, the media’s bashing of the WCF has been so harsh because “those people, who wanted to demonize Russia, are very angry at us because, despite all the sanctions and all the massive disinformation – despite all the efforts to make us enemies of each other – the conservative friendship stands.”

Also on rt.com Senators push for chemical castration of pedophiles to protect Russian kids

And the attacks weren’t restricted to the internet. More than 10,000 “LGBT and feminist” protesters descended on Verona during the event, with riot police even being forced to interfere and roadblocks being set up at various points around Verona’s Piazza Bra, where the conference took place.

Activists even tried to “shut down” the event “through calling the hotels where the participants were staying and using threats to make those hotels cancel their bookings. There were even physical threats of attacks against the attendees. Can you imagine this happening in Europe in the 21st century?” Komov wondered.

But it’s impossible to shut us down, because the vast majority of people, not only in Italy but in all of Europe, in Russia and all over the world are with us. Defending the traditional family is a winning concept.

Komov pointed out that there was also a rally in support of the conference in Verona, which attracted twice as many people as the anti-WCF protest and took place without incident – or media attention.

RT

Despite their demonization in the media, the WCF and its activists never resorted to the means employed by their opponents, Komov said. “We’re very peaceful people. We are for freedom of expression and freedom of thought, religion and education.”

We’re not imposing our ideas on anybody, while the other side tries to impose their new, totalitarian, politically correct ideology and way of thinking on all of society.

Komov also addressed media speculation that he was “Putin’s agent” by saying that the level of connection between WCF and the Russian government has been “exaggerated.” However, he acknowledged that the congress fully backed Moscow’s stance of promoting family values and made no secret of the fact that WCF has received support from like-minded private Russian foundations, as well as from the Orthodox Church.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

From Our Partners

Solo la Polonia si oppone apertamente allo strapotere dei social media

 

Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki has hit out at the growing “censorship” enforced by social media giants, saying that it is reminiscent of “authoritarian regimes” like the one Poland once lived under.

He promised that such practices would be more closely “regulated” under Polish law, and also called for similar measures to be taken by the European Union. Last month, the Polish justice ministry proposed a bill that would ban social media firms from deleting content that does not contravene Polish law.

“We lived in a censored country for nearly 50 years, a country where Big Brother told us…what we don’t have the right to think, to say, to write,” wrote the prime minister in a Facebook post, referring to Poland’s communist past. Morawiecki was himself an underground anti-communist activist in the 1980s.

“That is why we look with concern at any attempts to limit freedom,” continued Morawiecki. “A byword for freedom has always been the internet – the most democratic medium in history.”

“[But] gradually large, transnational corporations, richer and more powerful than many countries, have started to dominate [the internet],” he warned.

“Recently ever more often we are dealing with practices that had seemed to be a thing of the past,” wrote the prime minister. “Censorship of free speech – the domain of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes – is returning today in the form of a new, commercial mechanism to combat those who think differently.”

“Poland will always uphold democratic values, including freedom of speech,” he pledged. “Social media cannot act above the law. Therefore we will do all we can to set out a framework for the functioning of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other similar platforms.”

This will involve “regulation” through “relevant national rules”. But Morawiecki also said that “we will propose that similar provisions apply throughout the European Union”.

Meanwhile, the European Conservatives and Reformists – a political group in which Poland’s ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party is the leading member – tweeted yesterday to condemn the “banishing” by Big Tech firms of Parler, a social media platform favoured by supporters of Donald Trump.

The Polish government’s rhetoric echoes recent remarks by Trump, who has been an ally of PiS. Yesterday, Trump also hit out at Big Tech firms, saying they are “doing a horrible thing to our country” and promising to take “counter moves” against them.

Trump was last week permanently banned from Twitter, while Facebook has also blocked him from posting indefinitely and Snapchat has suspended his account. Parler’s app has been pulled by Google and Apple, and Amazon has removed it from its cloud service.

Some in the EU – even those not usually sympathetic to Trump – have expressed concern at the moves. German chancellor Angela Merkel described Twitter’s decision as “problematic”. “Freedom of opinion is of fundamental importance,” said her spokesman.

“The fact that a CEO can pull the plug on POTUS’s loudspeaker without any checks and balances is perplexing…[and] displays deep weaknesses in the way our society is organised in the digital space,” said Thierry Breton, the European Commissioner for the internal market.

Poland’s government has long been critical of social media giants, whom it accuses of bias against conservative voices. In 2016, a deputy justice minister accused Facebook of “censorship” for deleting content by the far-right nationalist groups that organise Warsaw’s annual Independence March.

“There is clearly something wrong with freedom and democracy” when Facebook allows “the most vulgar” of content yet “harasses patriotic Polish pages”, said Patryk Jaki, who is now a PiS MEP.

In 2019, the then digitisation minister, Marek Zagórski, met with members of Facebook’s board to ask that their “rules used for blocking content be better adapted to the prevailing customs in Poland”.

Last month – before Trump’s latest troubles with social media platforms – Poland’s justice minister, Zbigniew Ziobro, announced a proposed law to “protect freedom of speech on the internet”.

The justice ministry declared that some groups in Poland have become “victims of ideological censorship” and “abuses by large internet corporations”.

In response, they want to introduce legislation that would stop social media firms from deleting content that does not violate Polish law or from banning users for posting such content.

Polish users would have the right to have such cases adjudicated by a special new Court for the Protection of Freedom of Speech.

Poland’s government has itself faced accusations that it seeks to limit free speech. Under Ziobro – who also serves as prosecutor general – a number of cases have been brought by prosecutors against people for the crime of offending religious feelings, which carries a prison sentence of up to two years.

Ziobro himself recently requested that an opposition MP be stripped of parliamentary immunity to face such charges. Last year, a deputy prime minister, Jarosław Gowin, demanded that Netflix remove a “blasphemous” comedy film that depicts Jesus as gay.

A study by the OSCE found that, among nine types of defamation and insult laws, Poland has the joint most and, unlike many other countries, imposes custodial sentences for all of them. As well as offending religious feelings, it is also illegal to insult the president, monuments, and the Polish nation or state.


La strategia americana e' sempre la stessa: armare un proxy per affogarlo dopo averlo usato.

 

American taxpayers have now spent more than ONE BILLION dollars on arming Ukraine. But are they getting value for their money?

American taxpayers have now spent more than ONE BILLION dollars on arming Ukraine. But are they getting value for their money?
In recent months, NATO forces have doubled down on their stand-off with Russia, with Ukraine at the epicenter. Massive military exercises are roaring ahead in Eastern Europe which only seem to be making the situation more tense.

The escalations kicked off in May with the colossal DEFENDER Europe drills. That show of firepower saw 28,000 troops deployed across the continent. Now, months later, a new row has been ignited after a British warship, the HMS Defender, crossed the border into Crimean waters in the Black Sea. This was in addition to a similarly fractious exchange between the Dutch Navy and Russian fighter jets in the same area, off the coast of both Russia and Ukraine.

Military support for Kiev has become a mainstay of US foreign aid policy to the tune of over one billion dollars since 2014. Washington has consistently set a goal to fund the Ukrainian Armed Forces with a view to bringing them in line with NATO standards.

Last month, POLITICO reported that the US government was freezing further military aid to the Eastern European nation, suspending exchanges worth up to $100 million. The move follows Russia’s drawdown of military forces near the Ukrainian border and what was widely hailed as a productive summit between US President Joe Biden and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Shortly after the story broke, Biden’s spokesperson-in-chief, Jen Psaki, released a statement saying that “the idea that we have held back security assistance to Ukraine is nonsense,” while insisting that the US has prepared “contingency funds in the event of a further Russian incursion.”

Also on rt.com Ukraine has surrendered itself to control from West, no point in meeting Zelensky when decisions are made in Washington – Putin

Though the statement did not disclose the amount of these contingency funds, it could well refer to the $100 million that the White House has purportedly put on ice. Instead of withholding the cash, the argument goes, it is being saved in case circumstances change.

Whatever the case may be, continued American funding for Ukraine seems all but certain. In light of recent events and a US-Russia relationship that is beginning to show signs of restoration, the colossal aid package is now under greater scrutiny than ever before.

Cash for Kiev

Since 2014, the US has delivered around $2.7 billion in aid to Ukraine, according to USAID data. A significant portion of the total amount, approximately $1.3 billion or 47%, was handed out by the Department of Defense (DOD). USAID lists total aid for 2020 as only partially reported, and very little data is available for Fiscal Year 2021. That said, in March 2021, the DOD announced a $125 million defense package for Kiev, followed by another $150 million announced in June.

One avenue of DOD aid to the country is so-called Foreign Military Financing, or FMF, which is a program that provides government funds to nations for use in the US military-industrial complex. Specifically, the funds are used to purchase “US defense articles, services, and training.” In addition to FMF, Ukraine also receives aid via the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which aims to “enhance the capabilities of the military and other security forces of the government of Ukraine to defend against further aggression” and “to assist Ukraine in developing the combat capability to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Also on rt.com EXCLUSIVE: Amid ‘political repression,’ Ukraine becoming American ‘colony’ in Europe, says sanctioned opposition leader Medvedchuk

More specifically, the initiative provides the country’s armed forces with lethal assistance such as “anti-armor weapon systems, mortars, crew-served weapons and ammunition, grenade launchers and ammunition, and small arms and ammunition,” as well as non-lethal intelligence support in the form of radar technology, surveillance drones, and equipment geared towards enhancing Ukraine’s cyber capabilities.

Are Americans getting bang for their buck?

The stated long-term objective of US military and security assistance to Ukraine is to prepare it for membership in NATO. However, in reality, the country has taken almost no significant steps towards joining the bloc in the last several years. Calls from senior officials in Kiev to pave the way for it to sign up appear to have fallen on deaf ears in Washington, with a number of other member states understood to have serious reservations about the prospect.

That, however, hasn’t stopped American government officials using NATO membership as a pretext to send cash to Ukraine, in the hopes of keeping it firmly within the US sphere of influence. While the country might not be part of the club anytime soon, it is a convenient proxy in hostilities between the US and Russia.

Aligning the country’s defensive capabilities with those of the bloc and “improving interoperability with NATO” serve to guide Ukraine towards an eventual Membership Action Plan to join the American-led group. There is plenty of evidence showing the destabilizing effect that NATO encroachment has on relations between Russia and the West, and how enlargement of the military bloc has forced Russia to adopt a defensive position.

Be that as it may, if the US continues to provide assistance to Ukraine without bringing an end to the ongoing conflict in the Donbass region of Eastern Ukraine, it is unlikely that other members of NATO would back offering membership to Kiev, given it could only further escalate tensions in the region.

Following the Biden-Putin summit in Geneva in June, the Russian president said he had reached an agreement with President Biden on implementing the Minsk protocols, which have been hailed as a roadmap for ending fighting in Donbass. The Minsk protocols were signed by former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, as well as delegations from the breakaway regions of Donetsk and Lugansk. France, Germany, and Russia also put their signatures to the pact. Poroshenko’s successor, Volodymyr Zelensky, however, has since called for re-negotiation, prompting a response from Moscow that there would be no alternative to the Minsk protocols.

Since 2016, the military assistance provided to Ukraine under Zelensky has seemingly emboldened Kiev to set aside its commitment to the Minsk protocols, feeling confident in the defense safety net and stream of military financing provided by the US. Russia previously held large-scale military exercises near the Ukrainian border in April, in what was interpreted as a signal to Kiev that a resolution by military force is out of the question.

Obstacles to peace

If foreign aid is the main incentive, Ukraine would be making a tactical error to once again back the Minsk protocols, ending the conflict in the Donbass and potentially risking a cut in military aid from the US.

This is especially true when considering that the stipulations under Minsk II would require Kiev to adopt a more decentralized constitution, possibly containing a neutrality clause, which could rule out Kiev officials’ dream of NATO membership once and for all, and put the funding dangled over it at risk.

Meanwhile, the raging conflict in Donbass has given Western observers an impression of unwavering Russian aggression, thus making the case for more financing for the Ukrainian military and a path towards NATO membership.

Also on rt.com The NATO-Ukraine Sea Breeze exercise could ultimately help create the circumstances for real conflict with Russia in the Black Sea

As for the aid itself, the total amount of support which the US has provided to Ukraine is undoubtedly a significant sum, but ultimately pales in comparison to the cash Washington can find for its main foreign policy priorities. In 2011 alone, the American taxpayer provided around $11 billion to Afghanistan.

Now, given the US is withdrawing from the Afghan theater, Ukraine is likely to get an even greater share of that spending. Given tensions between Moscow and Washington remain at all-time highs, few politicians will bat an eye at the prospect of sending more and more cash to that troubled corner of the world.

Lettera aperta al signor Luigi di Maio, deputato del Popolo Italiano

ZZZ, 04.07.2020 C.A. deputato Luigi di Maio sia nella sua funzione di deputato sia nella sua funzione di ministro degli esteri ...