Brown's Wars

Today The Independent published a three-part story called Brown's Wars (Part 1: Under attack in the UK; Part 2: Meltdown on the frontline in Basra; Part 3: Overstretched in Helmand province) as well as stories on the car bomb attack at Glasgow Airport (Terror at Terminal 1: Horrific scenes as two men crash Jeep into airport).

Britain's new prime minister wasn't allowed a quiet entry to Downing Street 10. Two cars bombs were defused in the center of London, while Glasgow Airport was attacked by a flaming Cherokee Jeep. The terror alert was raised to the highest “critical” level. Passengers arriving at Glasgow Airport were stuck in their planes, unable to disembark. While the three attempted attacks didn't succeed in causing any casualties, they did succeed in spreading “terror”, “making the public feel uneasy wherever they go, causing disruption and economic damage.”

What is Gordon Brown to do? Attacks in Britain are directly linked to British actions in the Middle East. In Afghanistan, the British are losing the fight against the Taliban. Five years of Karzai government has not brought any improvement in the dismal living standards of the people. Afghanistan has one again become – under the noses of NATO commanders – a major producer of opium.

In Iraq, the remaining British troops are holed up at their base at Basra airport. When they do come out, they are killed. They only provide shooting targets, acting as a magnet for insurgent attacks, the city of Basra itself under the control of militias.

“The week's events tested the new Prime Minister in a way no one could have predicted.” (The Guardian: 'There was a man on fire. It was terrifying') If Gordon Brown wants to avoid carnage at home, he should call British troops back from Afghanistan and Iraq and denounce U.S. aggression. And lest we forget, call back Tony Blair as Middle East envoy. Stop the aggression and war crimes and the “terrorists” – even though they may very well be fanatics – are unlikely to attack. That is not capitulation, it is the right thing to do. Brown has got his work cut out for him, but will he deliver? Unlikely.

Hong Kong Hong Kong

gen ni zai yiqi (together with you, from the lyrics of a famous song beautifully performed by the late Teresa Teng). Ten years ago, today at midnight, Britain relinquished sovereignty over Hong Kong to China. Some had trembled at the mere prospect years in advance. Without the British, Hong Kong would be finished. The doomsday scenarios didn't happen. Hong Kong prospered thanks to closer relations with the mainland. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese tourists spent their yuans in Hong Kong, bringing added prosperity.

The Chinese PLA came to Hong Kong, but left the censors behind. Press freedom and the freedom to protest was left unchanged. The one thing Hong Kong doesn't have yet is general elections for the chief executive and the legislative council. The government in Beijing is afraid it could lead to unrest and turmoil. The Chinese leaders shouldn't worry too much. They remain too much traumatized by the Cultural Revolution. A bit of turmoil and disorder and chaos is good, it brings progress. But in the end, let's not forget, Hong Kong didn't enjoy even a tiny scrap of democracy under British rule. Now that Hong Kong is part of China, the Big Democrats of the West are raising a hue and cry... Hypocrites!

Living without China

Can you live without China? Not if you're living in Beijing. But outside of China, you can't either. (Reuters: U.S. family tries living without China)

Sara Bongiorni tried for a whole year to boycott anything “made in China” and lived to suffer. Her book A Year Without 'Made in China' should make interesting reading. The bottom line is, living without China destroys a big chunk of your prosperity. Living without China-made products makes almost everything much more expensive. Shoes become unaffordable, appliances gather dust because all spare parts are made in China... Food for thought...

This book should be recommended reading for all those in the American Congress who want to impose sanctions on China. Perhaps they don't care, because they have the money to buy goods 'made in America'. But the lesser well off and the outright poor will suffer. China's emergence as a big trading power is a blessing for the poor of the world, thanks to products produced by the poor of China, some will argue. Perhaps, but China's National People's Congress has voted for a new Labor Contract Law, which will offer better protection for migrant workers. As a result, some products will become a bit more expensive. But the rise of China will still be good for the poor inside and outside the country.

The family jewels

The C.I.A. spilled some of the family jewels, the old, outdated, discarded, forgotten jewels. Including a lot of black holes so as to continue to cover up its crimes against humanity. Interference in other countries' affairs, manipulation, illegal wiretapping, harsh interrogation methods, coups d'etats, political assassination, torture, secret prisons, spying on anti-Vietnam War groups, black operations, experiments with mind-control drugs... Even so, nothing much is released about foreign operations. The collection is nearly all about activities involving American citizens. Still, the dreadful list is long, 693 pages long. The whole shebang is available here.

American presidents from Truman and Eisenhower to Nixon and Reagan were terrified of the spread of “communism” or what they thought it represented, of the dominoes falling. To prevent it, anything was allowed, including torture and murder. Congo's Patrice Lumumba was murdered by C.I.A. agents, but they failed several times in their attempts to assassinate Cuba's Fidel Castro. From poison to make him lose his beard to exploding cigars, nothing worked. Bush is now even invoking the help of the “good Lord” to take away Fidel the sooner the better, blissfully ignorant that if the “Lord” is up to any “good” it would be Bush who is taken first...

Has the C.I.A. learned its lesson? Has it become any more civilized since 1973? Fat chance! In the deranged minds of the “good Lords” of the White House, “islamo-fascist terrorism” has replaced “communism” as the bogey-man. The dirty tricks, the coups, the assassinations, the crimes, they continue to be committed in violation of all the glorious principles and moral values the American Empire professes to adhere to. C.I.A. director Michael Hayden acknowledged the agency “did some things it shouldn't have done”. How nice! The fact is, it continues to do those things...

Get lost, Tony!

After 10 long years, Tony Blair is finally leaving Downing Street 10. While some still parrot that he has been a great British prime minister, the reputation of Great Britain in the Middle East has reached freezing point after Britain's participation in the two disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The fact that Blair refuses to make any self-criticism and blatantly continues to defend the indefensible, shows how far out on limb he his, out of touch with the British people, who wants its government to stop meddling in the Middle East.

Ten years ago Britain welcomed Blair full of hope after long years of Tory government. Blair would bring a fresh wind of change. Guess what? Ten years later Britain is clamoring for change, again. Blair failed to deliver the goods, and his successor Gordon Brown will also fail. He may indeed soften a bit the blind adherence of the British government to the war policies designed in Washington. But the new prime minister has been a long-standing member of Blair's government as Chancellor of the Exchequer and is therefore also responsible for Britain's crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Blair has barely left Downing Street and he's appointed special envoy for the Middle East by the Quartet (U.S., E.U., U.N. and Russia). Of course, the U.S. and Israel believe he would make a good envoy because they are absolutely sure he will defend their interests against the Arab peoples. (The Jerusalem Post: Livni: Blair would be perfect ME envoy) Others see it differently. “His selection for the job takes American policy in the Middle East to new heights of absurdity. [...] The decision is lunacy itself. The guiding question could only have been: who is the most profoundly resented and bitterly hated man in the Middle East. Bar Bush, the honour could only have gone to Blair.” (The Guardian: Adding insult to injury) and (The Times: Mixed welcome awaits Blair in Middle East role). Russia procrastinated a bit but finally relented, which shows the Russian government failed to stand up to Washington. (The Independent: Russians withhold approval of Blair envoy role)

How can Blair, the war criminal, bring any “peace” to the Middle East? Why is he not prosecuted for war crimes, now that he has lost his immunity? “Blair, who supported the American occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan, may not be a man of peace. He will not do anything to support the Palestinian interests but will do everything to support the Israeli occupation,” Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum told AFP. Indeed.

The big dividing line is now between the big powers (and that unfortunately includes China) and the peoples of the world. The central battlefield: the Middle East...

Fingerlicking bad

The U.S. is requiring foreign visitors to give finger prints of their ten fingers to be kept for 75 years in a database. Visitors who need visas will have their fingerprints taken at the U.S. consulates abroad. Those arriving on a visa waiver program will undergo the procedure at the airport. In the coming years, the U.S. plans to add facial and retina scans. (AFP: US to introduce 10 fingerprints system for visitors)

Doesn't this look very much like Big Brother? A needless invasion of privacy? If the U.S. was not invading foreign countries and killing its peoples, would it have to be afraid of foreigners? No, the country which is implementing those draconian security measures is not the former Soviet Union, not China, or Iran or Sudan. It's the U.S. of A.

In its paranoia to avoid further “terrorist” attacks, Washington is setting a very bad example. The European Union now also wants to take finger prints of foreign visitors arriving at its borders. In China, you only need a valid passport and visa. China welcomes foreign visitors, it doesn't treat them like potential criminals.

Olmert & Abbas

As a “goodwill” gesture, Israel is to release 250 Fatah prisoners. The only reason is that it hopes those 250 Fatah members will go and fight against Hamas to further damage the struggle of the Palestinians. Now, all of a sudden, Israel, the U.S. and the E.U. are willing to disburse millions of dollars to the Fatah government to bolster it against Hamas. (Aljazeera.net: Abbas: Time for 'serious talks')

The conference of the leaders of Israel, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority (or what's left of it, unable to represent the Palestinian people) is just a big show. Even after the expulsion of Hamas from the Palestinian government, Israel is not willing to resume peace negotiations for the simple reason that it does not want peace. If there is peace, Israel cannot continue to grab Palestinian land. That is the only thing the Zionists want and peace is an obstacle to the land grab.

The Palestinian people is once more being betrayed, this time by Mahmoud Abbas and its Fatah movement. Fatah has degenerated into nothing more than a police force in the service of the Zionists.

Now look at Gaza. Since the victory of Hamas, order has been restored and life can return to normal. Of course it will be very difficult to establish a viable economy, since all border crossings are closed. Even so, under these extremely difficult circumstances, Hamas will try to protect the Palestinians and their dignity.

There is indeed the danger that extreme Muslim groups will try to impose a strict Islamic order, but that is certainly not what the Hamas leadership has in mind.

“If I tell the truth...”

In an exhaustive story in The New Yorker, Seymour Hersh describes how Major General Antonio Taguba conducted an investigation on the torture of prisoners held by the U.S. Army at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. (The New Yorker: The General’s Report)

Taguba is ordered to limit his investigation to low-level soldiers to shield those higher up in the chain of command, including then secretary of state Donald Rumsfeld. Taguba was later sidelined and pensioned-off for trying to do his job.

Hersch shows how Rumsfeld and the top brass in the Pentagon encouraged the practice of torture but still denied any knowledge and strictly limited investigations to shield themselves.

Now that the truth has been published in the New Yorker, why is torturer-in-chief Rumsfeld not arrested and brought to justice? Because U.S. has lost all moral principles (if it ever had any) and is killing and torturing innocent people in pursuit of so-called “terrorists”.

Taguba says a lot of people are lying to protect themselves. While Taguba himself is ostracized for trying to uncover the truth. There is no place for an honest officer in the U.S. military. Only one officer, Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan is to be court-martialled in August in connection with the torture at Abu Ghraib. He may very well be guilty, but it's also clear he's a scapegoat so more senior officers up to and including the secretary of defense are not disturbed.

And Congress is doing nothing to launch its own investigation. Most of the detainees at Abu Ghraib were not “terrorists” and didn't even have anything to do with the insurgency. Based on lies, the U.S. invaded another country and started torturing its people and those responsible are left undisturbed. And then Americans ask themselves “Why do they hate us...?”

European nonsense

After a long night “dinner” ending at 5 a.m., the European heads of state and government finally reached a “consensus” on the watered-down European “constitution”. Every leader wanted to salvage some peanuts from the negotiations to spin it as a major victory back home. The result is a collection of nonsense, which, if submitted to a vote, would be rejected by European voters.

Some parties in European countries argue against granting more powers to the European Union because it is a bureaucratic entity stifling the will of the European peoples. The European Union no doubt is a bureaucratic monstrosity, but the solution is not to preserve the nation states. They should be abolished, or to borrow the words of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, vanish from the map.

The leaders of European countries are petty merchants chasing a chimeric goal of ephemeral gains. Each and everyone of them wants to return home clutching some stupid imaginary brownie points.

The result is that the “glorious European Constitution” has become a rubbish heap of unintelligible nonsense. As Lenin used to ask “What to do?”. Very simple! Abolish the nation states, create a Europe of the regions, and start to issue European passports.

Alas, such a solution requires a small degree of vision and none of the leaders of EU member states even has a tiny nano amount of the vision required to make “it” happen. Until they manage to gather that tiny amount of vision, the peoples of Europe will reject their “solutions”, which amount to nothing more than tiny fig leafs of failure.

Dealing with puppets

Iraqi “president” Jalal Talabani paid a week-long visit to China, apparently the first visit by an Iraqi president to China since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1958. Of course, unlike Saddam Hussein, Talabani is not a legitimate Iraqi president, he's only a running dog of American imperialism. Still, Chinese president Hu Jintao welcomed him as a genuine head of state and even described him as “an old friend of the Chinese people”.

If the Chinese government is willing to deal with the puppet government in Baghdad, then why did the Communist Party reject the puppet Japanese government of Pu Yi in Manchukuo in the thirties? Not dealing with the puppets of your very own enemy, but having no qualms to deal with puppets of U.S. imperialism oppressing and slaughtering the Iraqi people is not the “right thing to do”. Talabani revived a 1997 contract signed by the Saddam administration for China National Petroleum Corporation to develop the al-Ahdab oil field with a pre-war capacity of 90,000 barrels a day, only awaiting the new Iraqi oil law dictated by Washington to plunder Iraq's oil resources.

The Chinese government should be ashamed of being complicit to the plunder of Iraq's natural resources under the umbrella of the American occupation. Welcoming a puppet like Talabani, who only “reigns” in the Green Zone fortress is a disgrace. The Talabani puppet administration only “survives” because it is propped up by the war criminal trio of Bush-Blair-Cheney.

China also canceled a large part of Iraq's debt. This amounts to a direct subsidy of the American occupation. China pledged to help Iraqi reconstruction. How can Iraq be reconstructed as long as the American occupation continues?

China is starting to show the first signs of imperialist behavior.

Flying high

I had a ticket for a morning flight to return to Beijing but was invited to attend another factory visit. Oh well, no panic, we'll find a way to get back to the capital. Anyway, I was mentally prepared to spend several hours at the airport to catch the first available flight back to Beijing. Ten or fifteen years ago it would have been a nightmare and you would probably have ended up back at the hotel, hoping to catch a flight the next day. Once, in the eighties, I was stuck in Xian for three days.

Anyway, nowadays they have places at the airport where you can have a decent pint of beer and I had a book in my hand luggage – so everything was available to make the long wait less tedious and cumbersome.

Well, far from having to wait, I had to run. I arrived at Shenyang's Taoxian Airport at 2.08 p.m. and the guy at the China Southern ticket desk asked me whether a 3 p.m. flight would be O.K. with me. I had to run through the check-in and passport check and by 2.50 p.m. the plane was taxiing to the runway. Well, can't expect to have good luck each and every time, but still it's a nice illustration of how China has changed. If you wanted to buy a plane ticket in the eighties, you had to go to one building in Beijing – the dreaded CAAC – and queue up for an hour or more to be told that, “meiyou” all tickets were sold out.

Today, you book your ticket on-line or make a phone call and half an hour later the ticket is delivered at the door. And if you have to change your plans, you just go to the airport, buy a new ticket and be airborne 50 minutes later. No, not everything has changed for the better, but certain things certainly have...

Filip the flowerpot

Prince Filip of Belgium is nothing more, nor less, than a gilded flowerpot. He was invited to be present at a CEO breakfast, at the opening of a new production hall, at a seminar on doing business in Shenyang, and at a cocktail reception for visiting Belgian businessmen. Endless speeches follow each other, elucidating nothing in particular, full of stock phrases including a lot of “challenges and opportunities”.

The Prince, he just sat there in his designer suit, not uttering even one word in public. Perhaps that's all for the better, he's not really interested in the places he's visiting anyway and if you ask him next month where he spent two nights, he will probably have forgotten the name of the city. He did give a lecture at the prestigious Tsinghua University in Beijing – someday when I have nothing much to do, which isn't likely to occur in the next couple of years, I'll google it and have a look – but even on this occasion, the words he uttered are not his, the speech written by ghost writers and vetted by the Belgian government.

Some of the accompanying Belgian businessmen are certainly interested in China and the – erh “challenges and opportunities” – it offers. They can do without the prince. If they have a nice, interesting project and somewhere somehow an important decision is blocked, they'll be able to get to the vice mayor to make their case regardless of the presence of the prince. Others only want to hang around in the vicinity of the prince – never mind the country he's visiting – hoping someday to be granted a royal honor, an officership in the order of Leopold, or even better to be made a Baron. Those “businessmen” are not interested in doing business, they're interested in royalty.

Did the prince do anything worthwhile in Shenyang. The answer is no – he's just a gilded flowerpot...

North-eastern beauty

Everybody is aware by now that the major Chinese cities are changing and developing fast. Beijing is metamorphosing in anticipation of the 2008 Olympics. Shanghai has been transformed by the emergence of Pudong and is preparing for the 2010 World Expo. Smaller mega cities such as Shenyang are also changing fast.

In the eighties, the best hotel in Shenyang only carried three stars, located off the main square with the large Mao statue. The square and the Mao statue are still there, but the center of town has moved to another, larger, more modern square. One of the best hotels in town, the Shenyang Lido Sheraton, is located on the outskirts of the city.

Following the demise of the state-owned enterprises, Shenyang and the North-east hinterland, the center of China's Manchuria, has lagged behind, plagued by inertia and high unemployment. This now also belongs to the past. Shenyang has become a dynamic city, with modern apartment buildings and new economic development zones.

Visits of foreign dignitaries are still rather sparse, so even Prince Filip of Belgium received a royal welcome in the city, shutting down major intersections when his motorcade flashed by. Tomorrow we'll see whether his welcome was worth it.

The Prince

Prince Filip of Belgium is once again in China, supposedly opening doors for Belgian businessmen to sign lucrative contracts. Is anyone still stupid enough to believe this? I've said it before and I'll repeat it for good measure, the only doors he is opening are the doors to the toilets – come to think of it, not even those doors, he'll have his sycophantic courtiers and aides to do it for him.

The job of Prince Filip as “grand timonnier” of Belgian trade is finished, I wrote two years ago. Because there's nothing left of “Belgian trade”, there remains “Flemish” and “Walloon” trade. The regional governments can take care. Well, here he is again! So I decided not to show up at his glittering party at the China World Hotel. Why? Because he deserves no welcome. Nothing personal... Filip is a poor – rich – guy who never had the chance to live a normal live. Can't blame him. But he does have the choice to abdicate as successor to the throne, ditch his blue blooded wife and become a commoner – thereafter to let his hair hang down. He has a choice, it's all his, but he is blinded by the glamor of becoming King of the Belgians.

Monseigneur was supposed to show up at his very own glittering reception at 7 p.m., but a phone call to some of those present at the premises at 8.30 p.m. revealed that he hadn't shown up yet. The arrogance of royalty...

Brick carrying slaves

At least a thousand people and probably many more have been enslaved in brick factories and mines in Shanxi and Henan provinces. Children and adolescents have been kidnapped from the streets and railway stations in China to be enslaved in the most disgusting conditions by “modern” slave owners whose only purpose in life is to make money.

Local Chinese authorities have been complicit in this modern slave trade. One slave camp was owned by a village party secretary. Of course China has laws prohibiting such practices, but if the local authorities, the police and the slave traders are all working together and protecting each other, the laws can never be implemented. There has been a huge crackdown, hundreds of people have been rescued and exploiters have been arrested. Some of the slave traders and bosses will no doubt be executed. But will it solve the problem?

Communist party organizations at the local level have degenerated into exploiters and oppressors of the people. The party central in Beijing is powerless to stop them. After the crackdown, the ugly beasts will rear their heads again to kidnap innocent people from China's streets. Laws are not enough. The only way to crush the oppressors and exploiters is the dictatorship of the proletariat – that is democracy for the people and dictatorship for the enemies of the people. Nothing else will do. To solve this problem, a revolutionary mass movement is needed: to swipe away the slave owners hiding inside the Communist Party.

To rebel is justified!

(The Guardian: Enslaved, burned and beaten: police free 450 from Chinese brick factories), (The New York Times: Reports of Forced Labor Unsettle China), (The Times: Children snatched off the streets to work as slaves).

Hamastan

Hamas has gained control of Gaza and expelled Fatah from the strip. Some say Palestine will break up in two “states”: Gaza dominated by Hamas and the West Bank dominated by Fatah. There are now two Palestinian governments. The U.S., European countries and Israel are accusing Hamas of executing a coup. While the situation is indeed confusing, a few things are not that difficult to comprehend.

The Hamas government was formed after democratic elections in January 2006, pushed by the U.S. but – according to Washington – won by the wrong party. The Bush administration is only supporting democracy if its henchmen are elected, otherwise the losing party is allowed to launch a coup to make it clear to the voters that they made a mistake. Under Zionist pressure, all aid to the Hamas government was stopped.

It is also certain without any doubt that the U.S. is supporting Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, providing weapons and financial assistance. Let's ask a straight question: who is fighting for the rights of the Palestinian people: Fatah or Hamas? The U.S. is propping up the Zionist regime and Fatah at the same time. Guess who will be the losers? Israel's prime minister Ehud Olmert is calling on his “friend Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) to take the opportunity to exercise his authority”. Do the Palestinian people need any more guidance as to whom they should support?

Next question: Is Hamas a bunch of Islamic extremist fanatics? No they are not, they are providing social services, helping the people and standing up for the rights of the people. The secular Palestinian resistance movements such as the People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine did the same in the 70s, but the West did not support them, because it viewed them as “terrorists” and “communist sympathizers”. Now they are weak and cannot constitute the main force for the liberation of the Palestinian people. Fatah has degenerated into a bunch of corrupt politicians on the payroll of Washington.

Do not believe the rotten propaganda emanating from Washington, Jerusalem and European capitals. Fatah will lose because it betrayed the Palestinian people. Whomever supports them is supporting traitors. It is Hamas which deserves our support. Even non-believers should support Hamas and Hamas will welcome their support, because it is fighting for the rights of the Palestinian people.

(The Independent: Robert Fisk: Welcome to 'Palestine'), (AlJazeera.net: Hamas tightens control in Gaza), (CNN: Hamas seizes second Fatah base), (The Times: Analysis: the future is bleak for Abbas).

"Masked might"

The U.S. State Department is accusing China of a “deliberate effort to mask the nature of Chinese military capabilities”. The U.S. is trying to portray China as a dangerous rising military power, trying to “mask” its military spending and objectives.

If you have military might, you are going to use it – be it actively or passively – otherwise it's of no use. It is clear for all to see who is attempting to dominate the world, establishing ever more bases and troops in ever more countries, and the culprit is not China.

The U.S. says China is developing “robust anti-satellite weapons, ground-based lasers and satellite communication jammers designed to deny space access to other countries”. Which country is the overlord of space, trying to preserve its domination and “denying access to other countries”?

And finally, which country – China or the U.S. – is spending more on defense, or aggression? One need not be a rocket scientist to see the truth.

'Feral' Blair

Tony – the liar – Blair compared the news media to “a feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits” and further lamented that he “was not the first prime minister to face extraordinarily brutal treatment”. (The Independent: Simon Kelner: Would you be saying this, Mr Blair, if we supported your war in Iraq? ; The New York Times: Blair Compares News Media to ‘Feral Beast’ in Angry Parting Shot)

Yo' Blair! Getting a bit ahead of yourself, aren't you!? The real problem is that the news media were not 'feral' nor 'brutal' enough early enough to tear a budding war criminal like you – and your buddy Bush – too pieces so the Iraq war could have been avoided. Far from 'feral', the press was too weak and meek to denounce your blatant lies with sufficient ferocity to kick you out of office and into the place where you belong: the dock of an international war crimes tribunal. The lies you invented to start the Iraq war amount to incitement to genocide and mass murder and warrant the death penalty.

As Martin Bright observes (New Statesman: It takes one to know one): “In fact, the real media scandal remains the journalists who were complicit in justifying the spurious intelligence on behalf of the government and presenting it as fact to an unsuspecting public. Collectively, the profession failed in its duty by being too credulous in the weeks leading up to the war. Too many journalists who should have known better became willing collaborators in the government's propaganda machine, rather than holding the government to account.”

When you leave office in two weeks time, Mr Bliar, you will walk out of damned Downing Street No 10 a free man. 650,000 Iraqis are dead as a result of your lies. That will leave a permanent blood stain on the reputation of Britain. One of the reasons is, the British press was not 'feral' enough.

al-Yamamah

al-Yamamah... Never heard of it? Quite possible. The reason is the British government doesn't want you to know even the broad outlines – never mind the details – of one of the biggest corruption scandals of modern history. Anyway, some facts are bubbling to the surface... (The Sunday Times: How much hypocrisy can Britain get away with on this sordid deal?, Bandar lobbied No 10 to drop Saudi bribes inquiry)

British Aerospace seems to have paid huge bribes to Saudi princes, including Prince Bandar bin Sultan who allegedly received a billion pounds, for the privilege of selling 72 Typhoon jets. Blair's government is hiding behind the fig leaf of 'national security' to bury the facts. 'National security' was not the issue, rather the fact that the Saudi dictators threatened to cut intelligence and even diplomatic ties if an investigation into the corruption scandal would continue.

The British government violated international anti-corruption treaties and illegally impeded investigations by the Serious Fraud Office and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). If the international community fails to bring Blair to justice for war crimes, perhaps it could nab him as a corrupt arms dealer?

As to Prince Bandar, long-time Saudi ambassador to the U.S. and intimate friend of the Bush Dynasty, perhaps he will now be denied entry to the U.S. or be arrested as a common thief and join Scooter Libby behind bars, where they could together contemplate the criminal and disastrous invasion of Iraq.

The price of the al-Yamamah contract was deliberately inflated to win by corruption. Clean guys, Bandar and Blair...

Sensible dress code

Some like to wear a T-shirt and jeans, others a suit and tie. Everybody should have the choice to go wherever he likes in the attire he prefers. The China Daily has now come up with an interesting argument for wearing T-shirts instead of suits. (China Daily: Sensible office wear)

If you wear a suit and tie, the airco has to be kept at a lower temperature to be comfortable, wasting energy and increasing green house gas emissions. If “keeping good manners” wastes energy and contributes to climate change, perhaps it's time to ditch the “good manners”. The article in the China Daily concludes: “The corporate world should shake free of the idea that suits are the only appropriate office attire.” Maybe the Chinese can show the way?

Save the planet, dress less!

Vote for change?

The Belgian voters had some surprises in store during yesterday's parliamentary elections. It was widely expected that the parties making up the disastrous government of prime minister Guy Verhofstadt would lose. And lose they did, except for the liberal MR. That's a first discrepancy. While the Flemish voted for the opposition and against the government, the French-speakers dealt a mild rebuke to the scandal-plagued PS and made the MR the biggest party in Wallonia.

Second discrepancy: Sp.a lost 7.2% and felt it was a devastating defeat, mainly because they hadn't expected it. Sp.a chairman Johan Vande Lanotte announced his resignation and declared that the party would not join a new government. Verhofstadt's Open VLD lost 6.6%, a little less than expected, and did not perceive it as a big loss. Vehofstadt himself conceded defeat because it is inconceivable that he would return as prime minister in the next government, but the other Flemish liberals are ready to join a new government, never mind the voters, who rebuked them.

The big winner was Yves Leterme, who won close to 800,000 personal votes. His party, now renamed CD&V, lost big eight years ago. Voters wanted change and handed a victory to the “Purple Coalition” of VLD and Sp.a. Now the voters are unhappy with the government and expect change from CD&V. Well, that's an illusion. How can CD&V offer change instead of more of the same disastrous policies?

There is more. Leterme promised a further radical reform of the Belgian state, transferring more power to the regions. But to do that he needs a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives, which he doesn't have. Only a tripartite government would have enough votes, but that is unrealistic as the Flemish socialists have chosen not to join the next government. They could support the reform from the opposition benches, but that would not give them any credits at the next elections in 4 years. If Leterme cannot fulfill his promises, he will lose big in 2011.

And of course there was the big surprise of Lijst Dedecker, gaining 5 seats in the House and one in the Senate. Even in his wildest dreams, Jean-Marie Dedecker had only expected to get at most one seat. It shows that some voters like to support an underdog. The question is whether he will be able to built a lasting party.

It will be a long hot summer before the next Belgian government is formed.

Bush in Tirana

Since the end of World War II and until 1990, Albania, under the leadership of the Party of Labor, was a fiercely anti-imperialist country. Enver Hoxha railed against American imperialism as well as Soviet Social-imperialism. He had thousands of bunkers built to withstand a NATO invasion. Today, Albania is one of only a few countries where George W. Bush is greeted with smiles and hugs instead of protests. And the country's post-communist government is considering to become a NATO member. (CNN: Warm welcome for Bush in Albania)

Albania has really made a 180 degree turn. Some Albanians like Bush because he supported their ethnic brethren in Kosovo against the Serbs and is now pushing for the independence of Kosovo. Such a narrow-minded viewpoint is a mistake. You can support the independence of Kosovo without supporting Bush and you don't need American backing to achieve that aim. It is hypocritical to support the independence of Kosovo and the rights of the Kosovar people on the one hand and sent 120 troops to Irak and 22 to Afghanistan to help the Americans murder the Iraqi and Afghan people on the other hand. Moreover, the Albanian government allowed 500 U.S. Marines into the country to protect Bush during his seven-hour visit.

The Albanians gave Bush a disgraceful welcome. He deserves worse.

The new crusaders

Pope Benedict XVI, successor to the popes who have organized the Crusades to murder Muslims – and Jews – in the Holy Land, and George W. Bush, who continues to murder Muslims in Iraq, met up for a cozy half an hour chat at the Vatican. For the Catholics, the Pope is the representative of God on earth. How could this “Holy Father” shake the hand of a war criminal and mass murderer? And if God is looking on, how could he refrain from “pulverizing” those two?

According to some reports, (CNN: Bush calls meeting pope a 'moving experience') the Pope reproached Bush for the Iraq mess and Bush stood “in awe” before the Pope, whom he addressed with the rather unholy “sir”. What's the use of this meeting? Bush does not recognize the Pope as the head of his religion, since he belongs to a Protestant sect. And the Pope was unable to stop the bloodshed in Iraq. Just another meaningless photo-op.

Bush said the Pope was a “a very smart, loving man”. Loving to whom? To Bush or to the Iraqi people? You can't be loving both...

If the Pope wants to be remotely useful, he could have told Bush that God doesn't like his Iraq War and he would go straight to Hell if he wouldn't recall his troops immediately. Obviously the Pope didn't do that. Shame on him.

Faulty democracy

On Sunday, June 10, Belgians will go to the polls to elect a new Chamber of Representatives, while top politicians from three parties have waged a campaign to become the next prime minister.

So-called representative democracy as we know it is fatally flawed. I cannot speak for other voters, but nobody can represent my views in parliament. It is impossible, because nobody will have exactly the same views as I have. So you have to make choices as to which topics are more or less important and then chose somebody who has more or less the same opinion on the more important ones. Moreover, if I chose a representative, I should be able to meet him or her and try to influence his or her viewpoints. How many voters have the opportunity to do this?

Several websites offered voting tests to help voters determine for which party to vote. Those tests are equally flawed. (Doe de stemtest, Kieskompas) Most parties don't care about international issues, so no questions on those topics are included. Some tests only include the big parties, which is unfair to the smaller parties. Those tests only steer voters to the big parties.

The means to realize a better form of democracy do exist. Get away with the “representatives” and let voters decide on each and every issue. You could put a question online every day and invite voters to cast their votes. Then let independent administrators implement the outcome. You could put articles online with different points of view and even hold TV debates to help the voters determine their point of view.

Anyway, today I went to the Belgian embassy to vote the old-fashioned way, with a paper ballot and a red pencil. (Belgians outside the E.U. vote on June 8, so their ballots can be taken to Brussels in time for counting on June 10) The voting “booth” must have been one of the most luxurious anywhere. The ambassador had set aside the main room of the embassy, putting a table and a chair in the middle, so voters could even sit down to cast their vote, a luxury our compatriots in Belgium don't have.

Apart from that, it was still old fashioned. A Dutch colleague cast his vote electronically through the internet in his country's elections from the unlikely and dangerous location of Baghdad's Green Zone.

Shameless traitor

Former Taiwanese president Lee Teng-hui likes to portray himself as a staunch patriot fighting for the rights of the Taiwanese people against the big bully, China. Today he showed his real face, not as a patriot at all, not as a Chinese, not even as a Taiwanese, but as an agent of war-time Japanese imperialism.

His elder brother actually died in 1945 fighting in the service of the Japanese emperor. Now, more than 60 years later, Lee Teng-hui traveled to Tokyo to pray at the Yasukuni Shrine, where 2.5 million war dead are honored, including 14 convicted top war criminals and hundreds of thousands of Japanese imperial troops. The dead are not just “remembered”, they are considered to be deities who died in the service of the Japanese Empire. (CNN: Taiwan's Lee visits Tokyo's Yasukuni war shrine)

China and South Korea rightly complain when the Japanese prime minister visits the shrine. Current PM Shinzo Abe has not dared to visit yet since assuming office so as not to derail Sino-Japanese relations.

Now, here comes the Taiwanese traitor Lee Teng-hui praying at the same shrine... Over the years, the Chinese government has used several rather unflattering words to describe Lee. By visiting Yasukuni, he proved beyond any doubt that the Chinese government was right.

Lee said the visit was a “private, family event”. Being a traitor can never be “private”.

G8 and the people

The meeting of the world's richest 8 nations, the G8, will start today in Heiligendamm, Germany. Eight presidents and prime ministers are supposed to help solve some of the world's major problems such as poverty and climate change. All eight countries claim to be democratic, which means that their leaders claim to represent the people. But far from mingling with the people, they are hiding in a no-go area, surrounded by 11 kilometer long temporary fence. The biggest police operation in Germany since the end of the Second World War has been set in motion to protect eight leaders and their courtiers. 16,000 police or 5% of Germany total will be mobilized. The so-called "democratically elected" leaders are afraid of the people. Demonstrators of all stripes and colors are protesting against this elitist summit. (The Times: With three days to go, police are braced for further violence)

The composition of the G8 itself is wrong. Why let 4 European countries participate in addition to the president of the E.U. Commission? Why Italy, not Spain? With all due respect to Canada, why Canada, not Brazil?

How can the rich 8 solve anything if they don't talk to other countries? The big 'poor' countries held their own summit in Berlin and are invited to join the G8 in an "outreach session" on Friday. Why not join from day one?

The G8 should be discontinued. The place to discuss the world's problems is the United Nations. Not all countries have to participate in all meetings, because that would become too unwieldy to lead to any solutions, but all countries should be able to have their voices heard. The G8 is a nice photo opportunity for 8 presidents and prime ministers, but it never solves any problems. The last G* Summit in Gleneagles promised to double annual aid to poor countries to 50 billion dollar a year, but in 2006 global aid actually fell for the first time in 10 years. (The Independent: The true value of what the G8 gives in aid)

Stop the dictatorship of the G8 and bring some needed democracy to international relations.

Six days in June

Today marks another important anniversary. Forty years ago, Israel attacked its Arab neighbors, and occupied the Sinai, the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the West Bank in the Six Day War. (The Guardian: Six days of war, 40 years of failure)

On the first day of this unprovoked, preemptive war, Israel almost totally destroyed the air forces of Egypt, Jordan and Syria. In the next five days, its ground forces would significantly expand the territory of the Zionist state and bring a million Palestinians under its occupation. Its swift triumph proved to be a cursed blessing. In a peace deal with Egypt, Israel gave back the Sinai, but 40 years later it is still occupying the other conquered territories and that includes Gaza, as the Israeli army is still launching attacks and incursions to murder the Palestinian people. As philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz pointed out “justice and occupation are not compatible”. Today, injustice and occupation continue.

Forty years after a blatant and illegal land grab by the Zionists, after innumerable U.N. Security Council resolutions, the Zionists still occupy the land and Western governments, Russia and China are doing nothing to drive them back. But the peoples of the world are standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the Palestinian people. Their resistance will triumph and the state of Israel will disappear from the map, to be replaced by the democratic state of Palestine, a Muslim state where a minority of Jews will be protected and will be able to profess their religion.

June 4th remembered

Today marks another anniversary of the Tiananmen Incident which took place on June 4, 1989. It's already the 18th anniversary. People born in the year 1989 are now turning 18 years old and entering university. Most of them and many of their colleagues a few years older have probably never heard of the Tiananmen Incident or consider it to be a small footnote in China's contemporary history. The events are still very controversial in China. Apart from heightened security measures around the June 4 date, nothing is said about it in the press.

As I was in Beijing at the time, it's impossible to forget. On the other hand, continue to use the Tiananmen events to hit the current Chinese leaders over the head is also not nice. Yes, it would be better for the Chinese authorities to explain the truth of the matter, apologize, compensate the victims and move on. But as with the Cultural Revolution, it would open old wounds and lead to a discussion of controversial topics which could endanger the stability of the society so dear to the leaders.

Let's briefly recall what happened. Following the sudden death of Hu Yaobang, students started demonstrating against unresponsive university authorities and corruption. They wanted their voice to be heard by the government. In the early days of the movement, the authorities could easily have stopped the protests, but the leadership was divided. Once Deng Xiaoping labeled the movement a counter-revolutionary rebellion, there was no way back. Far from gaining the support of the people by thus labeling the movement, a wide cross-section of the Beijing population started supporting and sympathizing with the students. The leadership of the party itself was divided and thereby paralyzed until one side of the argument gained the upper hand.

Excessive force was used by the army, which lead to the deaths of many innocent protesters. How many is still a well-kept secret. The world was shocked and it took Deng three years (till 1992) to re-ignite China's economic development. According to the organization Chinese Human Rights Defenders, 13 Chinese are still imprisoned for actions related to the events. Some call them political prisoners, but they most probably committed acts of sabotage and destruction. You can't have it both ways: call those people political prisoners on the one hand and call the G8 protesters a bunch of hooligans if they burn a police car and sentence them to prison on the other hand.

Another legacy of June 4th is the E.U. arms embargo against China. It should be lifted, because it's nothing more than a stick to beat China. The country is not involved in any international conflicts and should be allowed to buy defensive arms. While the European countries are not selling arms to China, there is no embargo against the U.S., which is murdering the Iraqi people. On the other hand, if the Chinese government would honestly explain to its people and the world what happened on June 4, 1989 and the following days, foreign leaders who want to stigmatize China would have to look elsewhere for arguments.

Petrol or beer?

Comrade Fidel Castro has already warned that the bio-fuel craze would endanger the food harvest and push up food prices to levels unaffordable to the poor. “The transformation of food into energy is a monstrous act”. (Xinhua News Agency: Castro sees transformation of food into energy as monstrous act)

The New York Times also published an in-depth story on bio-fuels: How Biofuels Could Starve the Poor.

Now the powerful constituency of German beer drinkers is also feeling the pinch (The Taipei Times: Trouble brewing as German switch to biofuel raises beer price) Farmers in Germany are increasingly growing subsidized crops used to produce bio-fuels such as ethanol and bio-diesel instead of barley. The scarcity of barley is driving up the price of the key ingredient of beer, ... and ultimately of beer itself.

One could of course start drinking less, but the Germans firmly rule that option out. So something will have to happen to keep the price of a pint of beer reasonable. The organizers of Munich's Oktoberfest have already announced that the price of a one-liter mug would rise 5.5% to 7.90 euro.

German beer drinkers are now demanding an immediate stop to subsidies for biofuels.

If we have to choose between fuel for cars (petrol) and fuel for people (beer), the choice should be clear to all, except perhaps for idiots like Bush, who prefer to drive in a limousine instead of having a beer. The added bonus: the poor of the world will be thankful that food prices will stop rising. Cheers!

The Peace Top 121

The Economist Intelligence Unit has for the first time compiled a peace index, listing 121 countries according to peacefulness, based on 24 criteria. (The Economist: Give peace a rating) Norway comes out on top, followed by New Zealand, Denmark, Ireland and Japan. The bottom rung of shame is made up of (from the bottom up) Iraq, Sudan, Israel, Russia and Nigeria. Belgium in No 11, China No 60, the U.S. No 96. (The Guardian: Norway rated world's most peaceful country)

You can find the list at PRNewswire: First Global Peace Index Ranks 121 Countries.

Every list is a bit arbitrary, from the best restaurants to the best rock songs,... Even if the list is based on scientific criteria, the bare listing doesn't tell you much. Sure, Norway is pretty peaceful and Iraq definitely is not. But why is Belgium (11) more peaceful than the Netherlands (No 20), Taiwan (36) more peaceful than China (60), Vietnam (35) more peaceful than Madagascar (41)? Japan (5) wouldn't rank so high if it wasn't sheltering under the American nuclear umbrella. Without a detailed description of the underlying parameters, the list doesn't tell you much.

One of the major criteria should be whether a country has military bases or soldiers abroad. China doesn't have any (except for U.N. peace keepers), while Belgian soldiers are patrolling Kabul airport. You can legally buy a gun in Belgium, but not in China. The EIU should explain its methodology.

China deserves better, while the U.S. should be at the very bottom. The U.S. is the major exporter of war and destruction and the cause of Iraq's mess.

Boycott Israel!

The British University and College Union (UCU) has called on its 120,000 members to consider boycotting exchanges with Israeli colleges and universities, because they are complicit in the occupation of Palestine. As Dr John Chalcraft of the London School of Economics is quoted in The Independent: “A boycott will be effective because Israel considers itself part of the West: when Western civil society finally says 'enough is enough', Israelis, not to mention Western governments, will take notice. A non-violent international boycott, like that of South Africa, may well play a historic role in bringing down the Israeli system of apartheid.” (Lecturers vote to boycott Israeli academics)

He is right. Of course, the Israeli lobby is raising a hue and cry: anti-Semitism, a singling out of Israel, an assault on academic freedom,... While boycotts have a limited usefulness, it is appropriate in this case to show the world that Israel is not just another “civilized” country. Why? Because:
It does not have a constitution
It is illegally occupying other countries' territories
More than any other country, it is violating U.N. Security Council resolutions
It is a racist state, where Jews from all over the world are welcome to settle, but Arab citizens are discriminated against

The list of why Israel is not an ordinary country is much longer than this, but it suffices to illustrate why a boycott is appropriate. In The New York Times (Should British Academics, or Rock Bands, Boycott Israel?), Prof Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas calls boycotting Israel an indication of “moral blindness”. On the contrary, it shows moral courage to resist the Israeli lobby and stand shoulder to shoulder with the Palestinian people.

Darfur hypocrisy

There is no doubt that a genocide is going on in Sudan's Darfur region and that something has to be done about it. But on the other hand, some in the West, following once more the United States, claim that it is the worst atrocity going on in the world right now and that the only thing that can stop it is sanctions and a foreign intervention. Moreover, the U.S. is accusing China of investing in and trading with Sudan and thereby helping its government. There are even calls to boycott the Beijing 2008 Olympics.

Let's examine things a bit closer. Like Roger Howard writes in the Guardian (Where anti-Arab prejudice and oil make the difference), worse things are happening elsewhere. “The U.N. estimates that 3 million to 4 million Congolese have been killed, compared with the estimated 200,000 civilian deaths in Darfur. In the last month alone, thousands of civilians have been killed in heavy fighting between rebel and government forces vying for control of an area north of Goma.” So why is Darfur in the international spotlight and Congo isn't?

Howard continues: “The key difference between the two situations lies in the racial and ethnic composition of the perceived victims and perpetrators. In Congo, black Africans are killing other black Africans in a way that is difficult for outsiders to identify with. The turmoil there can in that sense be regarded as a narrowly African affair. In Darfur the fighting is portrayed as a war between black Africans, rightly or wrongly regarded as the victims, and “Arabs”, widely regarded as the perpetrators of the killings. In practice these neat racial categories are highly indistinct, but it is through such a prism that the conflict is generally viewed.”

In other words, Darfur is in the spotlight because Arabs or Muslims can be made the scapegoats. Let's also not forget that the U.S. is responsible for more deaths in Iraq than the Sudanese are in Darfur. This doesn't make what is happening in Darfur right, but it puts things in perspective. And while the International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued an arrest warrant for one of the perpetrators of the Darfur massacre, Ahmed Haroun, it neglects to issue arrest warrants for Bush and Cheney.

What is happening in Darfur is an internal conflict in Sudan. China is right when it points out that sanctions and boycotts will not solve the problem. Nick Donovan is pleading in The Times (At last, a way to stop the grotesque cruelty in Sudan) to implement an oil embargo immediately and not to withdraw it until the crisis is resolved. Well, more lives could be saved by implementing an oil embargo on the U.S. until it leaves Iraq...

China is right saying that only a political process can solve the Darfur issue. It has named Liu Guijin as a special representative for Darfur to help advance the peace process. The Sudanese authorities might listen to the arguments of China, an important trade partner, but will certainly not listen to the U.S., which is only talking about sanctions and armed intervention.

The fuss about Darfur is one more example of Western hypocrisy.

Anti-war “face” resigns

Cindy Sheehan has had enough. Following the death of her son Casey (24) in Iraq in April 2004, she founded Gold Star Families for Peace, heckled Bush and became the “face” of the American peace movement. On Memorial Day (May 28) she wrote her resignation letter. She came to the heartbreaking conclusion that her son “indeed died for nothing”. She is disillusioned in the Democrats, who failed and continue to fail to stop the Iraq war.

“People of the world look on us Americans as jokes because we allow our political leaders so much murderous latitude and if we don’t find alternatives to this corrupt "two" party system our Representative Republic will die and be replaced with what we are rapidly descending into with nary a check or balance: a fascist corporate wasteland.” (Daily KOS: "Good Riddance Attention Whore")

She regrets that she “bought into this system for so many years”. Unfortunately, she still does to some extent. She talks about “our brave young men and women in Iraq”. What's so brave about invading another country and murdering its inhabitants. The “American men and women in uniform” are not brave at all, on the contrary, they're cowards for not standing up to their war criminal commander-in-chief. They 'dare' to murder Iraqi women and children, but they don't dare to say “no” to Bush.

The peace movement is useful to undermine the will to fight in imperialist countries, but it can only do that much. The force that will defeat the U.S. occupiers is the armed resistance. Words are useful to undermine the morale of the occupiers, but the power is still coming out of the barrel of the gun. If Cindy Sheehan really wants the war to stop, she has to take the next step – even more difficult and painful no doubt – to actively support – be it in words only – the Iraqi resistance, the same people who killed her son. And that, probably, is a step too far. People do have their limits.

“I have used all my energy trying to stop this country from slaughtering innocent human beings.”

Anyway, thank you, Cindy, for your three years of struggle against the criminal Bush administration. You deserve to take a rest. The Iraqi resistance will continue the fight.

The U.S. and Iran talking...

For the first time in 27 years, ambassadors of Iran and the U.S. sat opposite each other and talked. And guess what the Americans asked: that Iran stops arming militants in Iraq, a neighboring country with which it fought a devastating 8-year war. Of course, the U.S. will continue to arm its occupation army – thousands of kilometers away from its shores.

The Americans are daydreaming – why would Iran stop arming the resistance, while the U.S. continues to arm the occupiers? After all, under international law, the resistance has the right to fight the occupiers. Where does the U.S. get the “right” to meddle in Irak – not only to meddle, but to actually occupy the country – while denying Iran that same “right”. Furthermore, compare the weaponry being transferred: from the U.S. side the most lethal weapons money can buy – fighter jets, attack helicopters, cluster bombs, mothers of all kinds of bombs, tanks, humvees, ... anything, save perhaps nuclear weapons. Perhaps...

Now turn to Iran: some rifles and improvised explosive devices? To its Shia brethren? Yes, no doubt. But the U.S. is also saying Iran is arming al-Qaeda, which is completely preposterous and another attempt to misuse Osama the Bogeyman. The Ayatollah's Iran and Saddam's Iraq were mortal enemies and the U.S. is accusing both of supporting al-Qaeda, which neither actually did. Even the CIA analysts know this, but that will not stop the Bush administration to spew another fountain of lies. Even the Times is printing this nonsense (Forked Tongues).

The hypocrisy of U.S. imperialism is boundless. It accuses Iran of “funding the enemies of stability”. Who but the U.S. destabilized Iraq? Saddam's Iraq was not the best of worlds, but there were no “terrorists” and no al-Qaida, no suicide attacks and, no matter how murderous the regime, a lot less innocent victims than in Bush's Iraq.

The Iranians clearly identified the core issue: “the U.S. should not be in Iraq at all.” (The Independent: Iraq is the only topic of conversation as the US and Iran finally meet)

War criminals come in different categories. Saddam was a small war criminal and he was hanged for one of his lesser crimes. Bush is a Big War Criminal and he continues to occupy the Oval Office.

As an afterthought, just in case you didn't know: more innocent people – especially children – are dying from bombs dropped from U.S. planes than from suicide attacks or roadside bombs. Who is using the most lethal weapons in Iraq? (Tomgram: Nick Turse, The Air War in Iraq Uncovered)

Nuclear war

At a time when the Bush administration is imposing ever more stringent sanctions on Iran because the country is supposedly developing nuclear weapons, the U.S. itself is planning a new generation of weapons of mass destruction.

“Nearly 20 years after the Berlin Wall crumbled, the United States is allocating more funding, on average, to nuclear weapons than during the Cold War. The Bush administration is pumping this money – more than USD6 billion this year – into renovating the nuclear weapons complex and designing new nuclear weapons. Such hypocrisy is one of the main obstacles to nuclear arms reductions because it runs the risk of shattering the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in which the nuclear-armed states pledged to begin the process of disarmament if the non-nuclear states opted not to pursue the deadly technology.”

“During the Cold War, spending on nuclear weapons averaged USD4.2 billion a year [...] annual increases will push the nuclear weapons budget to USD7.4 billion by 2012. [...] Spending on nuclear weapons research, development and maintenance in the DOE budget far outpaces the funding devoted to the development of alternative energy sources, a critical need in the age of global warming and dwindling oil supplies. ” (Alternet: Is Bush Leading Us to Nuclear War?)

Enough said. Who is leading us to Armageddon? The “jihadists” or the U.S.?

“Zambombazo”

“zambombazo” (Spanish), "bang" (English), “badaboum” (French), “estrondo” (Portuguese), “colpaccio” (Italian), “самбомбасо” (Russian), “knal” (Dutch)

Comrade Fidel Castro said he never used the word before. Bush made him do it, because that's the word which best characterizes Bush, “an apocalyptic person”. (Prensa Latina: Bush Expects Everything to be Solved with a Bang, Granma (in Spanish): Bush lo espera todo de un zambombazo)

I like that word, zambombazo. It sounds nice, much better than “bang” or “knal”... Moreover, el Commandante en jefe is right, Bush likes everything with a zambombazo. Remember that pretzel Bush almost choked on? It came out with a zambombazo. With one zambombazo decapitation strike, Bush tried to take out Saddam. Although that one was a fizzle. Hundreds of zambombazos couldn't incapacitate Osama and the shock and awe zambombazo didn't deter the Iraqi resistance. Baghdad out of control, try a zambombazo surge. Every zambombazo Bush ever tried isn't worth to be described by this beautiful Spanish word. Because it was never more than a small insignificant bang!

The scary thing is that Bush has his finger on the button to launch thousands of nuclear weapons and destroy the world in one big apocalyptic zambombazo to find out if God exists. The world should listen to Fidel's wise words: stop Bush before the final zambombazo.

License for mass murder

The U.S. House (280 to 142) and the Senate (80 to 14) voted to spend another 95 billion dollar to kill, murder and maim the peoples of Afghanistan and Iraq and set no deadline for the withdrawal of the occupiers. The Democrats have blood on their hands and now stand accused – together with Bush – of committing war crimes. Bush signed the bill immediately, so his war machine wouldn't run out of money. (The Washington Post: Bush Signs Iraq Spending Bill)

In the Senate, the Democrats had the power to block the bill if they all had voted against it. Instead, 37 Democrats voted yes and only 10 no. Yes, some of the heavyweights voted against the bill, such as senators Barack Obama, John Kerry, Edward Kennedy and Hillary Rodham-Clinton. They couldn't even make a majority of the Democratic senators vote “no”. And credit is due to three Republican senators – Burr, Coburn and Enzi – and one independent – Sanders – who opposed the bill. (The New York Times: Senate Roll Call on Iraq Spending) In the House, a majority of Democrats (140 to 86) voted against the bill, including House speaker Nancy Pelosi, but only two Repuiblican representatives – Duncan and Paul – joined them. (The New York Times: House Roll Call on War Spending Bill)

The bottom line is: the majority of the representatives of the American people have voted to let their country continue to commit war crimes. And wonder why so many people hate America... (MSNBC: The entire government has failed us on Iraq) (Truthout.org: Deadly Illusions, Rest in Peace) Instead of impeaching Bush and arrest him, the Democrats finance war crimes.

Theater and substance

The second Strategic Economic Dialogue between China and the U.S. has ended in Washington. Vice premier Wu Yi and treasury secretary Henry Paulson talked a little substance, but the rest was all theatrics. Not only that, is was the wrong theater.

But first the substance: U.S. financial-services firms get easier access to the Chinese market, there will be more flights between the two countries and the U.S. may export more coal technology to China. That's about it and that's all very nice. But do you need a vice premier and 17 government level officials, including the Chinese minister of commerce, to achieve this? Certainly not. The exchange rate and the trade deficit will still be used by Congress to undermine China's foreign trade, perhaps by imposing punishing import tariffs. Madame Wu's trip did nothing to even try to start to solve those two issues. Can it therefore be called a success? A strategic dialogue is meant to address the big issues, not to deliver the peanuts. (The Wall Street Journal: Congress Fumes As China Talks Show Few Gains)

The theater was even more wacky. Madame Wu getting a kiss from Bush... What message does this send to the world? Madame Wu and anti-China hawk Nancy Pelosi amicably chatting. Madame Wu charming her critics in Congress. I have said it before and will repeat it here for good measure: there's nothing wrong with the U.S. and Chinese governments talking to each other. But those images of being good buddies are over the top.

Instead of getting a kiss from a war criminal, Wu Yi could have told Bush that what he is doing in Iraq is not very nice and he'd better pack up and leave.

Return to paradise?

In 1966, a few thousand people, living on a chain of 65 coral islands in the Indian Ocean, were forcefully evicted when Great Britain leased the biggest island to the United States for 50 years. Most of them moved to Mauritius and the Seychelles. Diego Garcia became the most important U.S. military base outside the U.S., home to the B-52 and the B-2 strategic bombers. B-52s flew out of Diego Garcia to bomb Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 60s and 70s. They flew out of Diego Garcia to bomb Afghanistan and Iraq in the past years. Diego Garcia is indispensable to the U.S. quest for world domination. It also acts as a supply base for its aircraft carrier battle groups and nuclear submarines. Today, about 4,000 U.S. military and civilian personnel occupy Diego Garcia. (United States Navy Support Facility) (Infoplease: Where in the World Is Diego Garcia?)

Now, Britain's Court of Appeal ruled that about 5,000 inhabitants of the Chagos Islands are allowed to return. (The Times: Paradise found for evicted islanders) Never mind the ruling of a British court, the U.S. government is putting pressure on the British government not to let the islanders return, because it could compromise security: the lone superpower, afraid from a few thousand peaceful islanders! It will be a hot potato landing on the desk of Blair's successor, Gordon Brown.
(The Guardian: Chagos islanders win right to return)

It is far from certain they will be effectively allowed to return. The British government could appeal the decision to the House of Lords and the U.S. will do everything to prevent their return. A small island people is fighting against two colonial masters who will not allow them to return to their little paradise, because it is too close to a military base from which death and destruction is unleashed. The Chagossians should not only be allowed to return and be compensated, the U.S. base at Diego Garcia itself should be dismantled and returned to the people.