Wednesday, 2 October 2013

The European Union Times

Asia, Europe markets fall over possible US shutdown

Posted: 01 Oct 2013 12:35 PM PDT

Financial markets in Asia and Europe have been rocked over concerns that the United States’ government might be heading for a partial shutdown.
Washington should agree to a new spending bill before the end of the financial year at midnight on Monday amid political divisions that have created a stalemate.
If the American lawmakers fail to agree on the budget deal, essential federal services could be shut down and hundreds of thousands of staff placed on unpaid leave.
The worries over the issue have caused stock indexes in Japan, Hong Kong, Australia and South Korea to decline.
Shares in the Asian economic powerhouse Japan closed down more than 2 percent while South Korea stocks shed 0.6 percent.
Australia’s main index also saw a drop of 1.4 percent from five-year highs, their biggest one-day fall since early August.
Across Europe, major markets in the UK, France and Germany also faced considerable falls.
“It is the fear of the unknown,” said David Kuo of financial website The Motley Fool, adding, “No one knows what is really going to happen and markets don’t like uncertainty.”
Kuo further said the US government spending is likely to face some reduction, “but we don’t know what areas are going to be affected.”
Meanwhile, the possible shutdown is not the only crisis Washington is facing as the US administration and Republicans are also fighting over extending the government’s borrowing limit.
The US Treasury Secretary has warned that the country will reach its debt ceiling by 17 October. The move leaves the US government with half the money it requires to pay its bills.
Source

Israel seriously mulling chemical weapons treaty

Posted: 01 Oct 2013 12:30 PM PDT

The Israeli government will consider ratifying the Chemical Weapons Convention, President Shimon Peres has announced. It follows Syria’s decision to give up its chemical arsenal.
Israel, which has never publicly admitted to having chemical weapons, remains one of only six countries in the world not to have ratified the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, which bans the use or production of chemical weapons and requires signatories to destroy their stockpiles over a period of time.
But now that the Syrian government is preparing to host experts from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), who are to inspect the chemicals weapons arsenals stored at several facilities in Syria, and supervise their destruction over the next nine months, the Israelis say they may join the treaty too.
“I am sure our government will consider it seriously,” Peres told reporters Monday in The Hague, which is home to the OPCW – the watchdog overseeing the convention.
The Israeli president added he believes Syria only joined the convention when faced with the threat of military force, but pledged that his government would nevertheless consider a call by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon for all countries to sign up to the treaty.
Syria is believed to have spent decades building up its chemical weapons program, and President Bashar Assad says that the biggest regional threat to the country’s security is Israel’s military power.
However, a recent report suggested that Israel too was stockpiling chemical and biological weapons as part of its defense against a possible attack from Arab neighbors.
A secret 1983 CIA intelligence estimate obtained by Foreign Policy magazine describes “a probable [chemical weapon] nerve agent production facility and a storage facility” located in Israel’s Negev Desert, and states that “other CW production is believed to exist within a well-developed Israeli chemical industry.”
Among the chemicals that Israel might have possessed at the time of the CIA report the “non-persistent agent” – identified by FP as nerve gas sarin – is mentioned. As of late, the Western countries have been blaming the Syrian government for using sarin against its own people.
Earlier this month, Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said that Israel would be ready to discuss the issue of ratifying the chemical weapons ban treaty when there was peace in the Middle East.
Other than Israel, the countries that have not yet joined the treaty include Myanmar, Egypt, Angola, North Korea and South Sudan.
Source

Evangelos Venizelos: Anyone against our bailout plan is the equivalent of Golden Dawn

Posted: 01 Oct 2013 12:23 PM PDT

These unscrupulous and heartless puppets of the pro-bailout coalition, are the willing servants and agents of the international loan sharks who fanatically obey the wishes of their masters and desperately fight the Golden Dawn, because they know that we are the only barrier to their unpatriotic plans.
One of the most ardent supporters of foreign occupation forces, is the megalomaniac “Il Duce” of PASOK named Evangelos Venizelos. He has for all practical purposes stated that whoever goes with the anti-bailout stance is essentially identical to the Golden Dawn. This statement by the politicians is a real badge of honor for us and demonstrates if nothing else, the real reason why they so viciously attack the Movement of Greek nationalists.
This partner of the international moneylenders can see clearly the struggle for freedom from slavery to the memorandum in the Golden Dawn, which is presenting a national liberation concept. Both he and his “responsible partner” Antonis Samaras are the main 2 puppets responsible for the surrender of our national sovereignty, both men feverishly push the open attack on the GOLDEN DAWN.

The extermination of Greek nationalists is essential for them if they are to succeed in the sellout of everything . They will also do anything to keep their small little club of thieves in power, they have gotten used to it and do not want to let that go so easily. So they will not hesitate to do anything in order to ensure that no danger will threaten their domination of the Greeks. They will persecute an entire political movement, even one with immense popular appeal. This shows that they have no limits. They next will begin to create thought crime laws for all citizens to stop them from resisting their plan. Their oppression of our people will become increasingly more and more visible.
They attack us because the System is afraid of Golden Dawn’s rise to 20%
After 40 years of scandals, corruption and the destruction of national sovereignty, the Greek state made arrests of active parliament members and our party leader. Why is the Golden Dawn prosecuted by the law?
The system knew that by the end of summer Golden Dawn would arrive at and perhaps surpass 20%! Everyone knew that there was no way in any election to form a government only with New Democracy/ SYRIZA / PASOK. So in this case the only opposition was the Golden Dawn!

The “constitutional” arc did not like this course of events because it was the beginning of the end and waited for the opportunity that arised, using the murder of Pavlos Fyssas. From that day with an incredibly coordinated action the “democratic” news undertook its goal to destroy the Nationalist People’s Movement. Bear in mind that this is the same press who defend with such passion on a daily basis the memorandum and harsh austerity measures against Greek people.
At the same time almost all constitutionalists say that the arrests are beyond the limits of legality and are being held by a government initiative, not based on proper judicial process, so we are talking about political persecution.
Yes the Golden Dawn is a nationalist party that was voted in democratically by 500,000 of our fellow citizens and only they are responsible to decide on who get’s elected right? Wrong!
The coalition opened a can of worms after the system decided to punish those most afraid of what is happening and not responsible for destroying our country.
The Greeks are now suspicious and reactionary and will not swallow what they are being fed. Especially after the thousands of felonies (financial and otherwise) that have been committed in our country by politicians and political parties over the years who enjoy complete immunity from the establishment.

The Systematic Coup Against Golden Dawn
Some brief comments on what happened on Saturday:
1) This is the first time since the fall of the junta that the leader and MP’s of a parliamentary elected political party are arrested and put in jail.
2) The system is claiming Golden Dawn was preparing a coup. Of course, how a coup were to be launched with sustained police raids of our offices and homes of leaders, random and reasonless detentions and arrests, and a climate of terrorism created by the Left-wing dummies of the system is not explained. The real coup, however, is the one launched by the Memorandum’s coalition of misery, and “other democratic forces”, against the only party rising in the polls.
3) The whole operation was designed in the well-known centers of usury and world domination , only local agents were its executors!
4) The prosecutions accusations against Golden Dawn were studied by prominent independent legal expert M. Dimitrakopoulos, who concluded that the case will collapse with a loud thud. What will be the answer and where will they hide, those orchestrators and performers of this persecution then?
5) The channels of billionaire thieves are celebrating this act as a “victory of democracy”. The people, however, know them well as the propagandists hiding the real situation in Greece. Simultaneously, anti-Greek international media, the same ones who condemn Greeks as “lazy” and deserving of their current predicament, are also rejoicing at this political repression.
6) Golden Dawn will stay, and the truth will triumph!
Source

White House orders government agencies to begin shutting down

Posted: 01 Oct 2013 12:05 PM PDT

The White House budget director has ordered federal agencies to begin closing down after the Senate and the House of Representatives failed to reach an agreement on a budget plan to avert a government shutdown.
“Agencies should now execute plans for an orderly shutdown due to the absence of appropriations,” Sylvia Mathews Burwell, director Of the White House Office of Management and Budget said in a memo.
The order was issued 10 minutes before the US government officially ran out of money.
“We urge Congress to act quickly to pass a Continuing Resolution to provide a short-term bridge that ensures sufficient time to pass a budget for the remainder of the fiscal year, and to restore the operation of critical public services and programs that will be impacted by a lapse in appropriations,” Burwell said.
A midnight deadline passed without agreement between the two rival groups in Congress despite an 11th-hour appeal by President Barack Obama.
It is the US government’s first partial shutdown in 17 years.
More than 700,000 government workers now face unpaid leave with no guarantee of back pay once the government reopens.
The Republican-controlled House insisted on delaying Obama’s Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, as a condition for passing the budget plan. But President Obama and Democratic leaders said they wouldn’t negotiate on healthcare reforms.
The Senate is set to meet again on Tuesday morning, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.
On Monday afternoon, the Senate voted 54-46 against a House bill that would have funded the government only if Obamacare was delayed for a year.
Analysts have warned that the US economy will seriously be damaged if the shutdown last for more than a few days.
The US stocks dropped sharply on Monday amid fears of political deadlock.
Source

Obama blasts Republicans, blames GOP for shutdown during White House address

Posted: 01 Oct 2013 11:55 AM PDT

In an address from the White House rose garden Tuesday afternoon, President Barack Obama blamed Republican lawmakers for triggering the first government shutdown in nearly two decades.
Pres. Obama spoke on Tuesday roughly 12 hours after a longstanding budget stalemate on Capitol Hill caused a midnight shutdown impacting a number of government agencies and initiatives across the board.
“At midnight last night, for the first time in 17 years, the Republicans in Congress chose to shut down the federal government,” Obama began his address.
“Let me be more specific: One faction of one party in one house of Congress in one branch of government shut down major parts of the government, all because they didn’t like one law,” the president said.
The shut-down erupted after the Republican-controlled House of Representatives failed to come to agreement with the Democrat-led Senate with regards to passing the federal budget. At the core of the issue was the GOP’s reluctance to accept Obama’s Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” which finally went into effect Tuesday morning amid the shut-down notwithstanding negative sentiment from the Republican Party.
“This Republican shutdown did not have to happen, but I want every American to understand why it did happen,” the president said Tuesday. “Republicans in the House of Representatives refused to fund the government unless we defunded or dismantled the Affordable Care Act. They’ve shut down the government over an ideological crusade to deny affordable health insurance to millions of Americans.”
“In other words,” said Obama, “they demanded ransom just for doing their job.”
In all, Congress’ failure to compromise on a budget is expected to end with 800,000 federal workers being sent home without pay and the shuttering of national parks and government programs aplenty.
“Veterans, who’ve sacrificed for their country, will find their support centers unstaffed,” Obama said Monday afternoon before the midnight deadline came and went without a compromise. “Tourists will find every one of America’s national parks and monuments, from Yosemite to the Smithsonian to the Statue of Liberty, immediately closed.”
On Tuesday, Obama said hundreds of thousands of civilian workers, many still on the job and many forced to go home, aren’t being paid “even if they have families to support and local business to rely on them.”
“We know that the longer this shutdown continues, the worse the effects will be more families will be hurt, more businesses will be harmed,” he said. “Once again, I urge House Republicans to reopen the government. Re-start the services that Americans depend on.”

When the midnight deadline hit early Tuesday, the presidential Twitter account announced, “They actually did it. A group of Republicans in the House just forced a government shutdown over Obamacare instead of passing a real budget.”
Hours later at the rose garden, the president warned, “We may not know the full impact of this Republican shutdown for some time. It will depend on how long it lasts.”
Notwithstanding the shutdown, though, the president announced that starting Tuesday morning, millions of uninsured Americans were provided the opportunity to purchase affordable health care through his hallmark legislation.
Speaking of the roughly 15 percent of uninsured Americans, the president said, “For them, and millions like them, this is a historic day.”
And while Republicans have largely opposed the president’s healthcare plan since before it was even approved in Congress, Obama dismissed allegations from his opponents that have yet to prove accurate.
“Most Republicans have made a whole bunch of predictions about this law that haven’t come true. There are no death panels. Costs haven’t skyrocketed,” he said.
Obama said that the US has actually experienced its slowest rate of health spending growth on record since his insurance plan was announced, and added that the demand for Obamacare was so significant that more than one million Americans visited newly launched websites for those programs early Tuesday.
“I know it’s strange that one party would make keeping people uninsured the centerpiece of their agenda,” Obama said of House Republicans.
The last government shutdown occurred in 1996 amid the administration of then-President Bill Clinton.
Source

Cameron says UK may quit ECHR ‘to keep country safe’

Posted: 30 Sep 2013 11:37 AM PDT

Britain could quit the European Convention on Human Rights so it can legally “chuck out” people threatening the country and its way of life, UK PM David Cameron said. Critics doubted Cameron’s honesty, saying such move would mean quitting the EU.
In the first public statement of its kind, the British prime minister told BBC1 that he was ready to cut ties with the Strasbourg court, to prevent it from interfering with British justice.
“I’m less interested in which convention we are signed up to. As Prime Minister, I want to know I can keep our country safe,” Cameron said.
When asked if the UK could go as far as to quit the ECHR, Cameron said: “It may be that that is where we end up.”
He then explained that such a step would enable Britain to “chuck out” those who are not welcome inside the country.
“Under a Conservative-only government led by me, there will be the ability to throw out of our country much more rapidly people who threaten us and our way of life,” Cameron said in a Sunday interview with BBC1, presumably campaigning for his Tory party some 20 months before the 2015 UK general election.
According to Cameron, the UK could start by scrapping the Human Rights Act and replacing it with a homemade Bill of Rights, so that when cases go to the ECHR there would be “a proper margin appreciation.” He indicated that the UK government could go further in that matter only with a Conservative-only administration.
But British Interior Minister Theresa May – Cameron’s fellow party member – on Monday openly pledged to scrap the Human Rights Act, should the Tories be re-elected in 2015, adding that such a promise is to be included in the party’s election manifesto. She also alluded that leaving the ECHR might be a future option for the UK.
“It’s ridiculous that the British government should have to go to such lengths to get rid of dangerous foreigners…If leaving the European Convention is what it takes to fix our human rights laws, that is what we should do,” May told an annual conference of the Conservative party.
The Human Rights Act has made the ECHR enforceable in UK courts since 2000, leading to judicial clashes and controversial decisions – such as the case with Palestinian Muslim cleric Abu Qatada. May herself was involved in the decade-long legal battle with the ECHR on Abu Qatada’s deportation from London to Jordan, where the alleged Al-Qaeda-linked cleric was wanted for conspiracy to carry out terror attacks. The move was repeatedly blocked by the Human Rights Court for fear that the suspected Islamist could be tortured and would not receive a fair trial in Jordan.
Already the subject of much hatred for British Eurosceptics, the ECHR further fueled public irritation by insisting that tens of thousands of UK prisoners, including murderers and rapists, should have the right to vote, and demanded that some of the life sentences be reviewed.
‘Incompetence or dishonesty?’
But given all the “anti-commonsensical” decisions of the Strasbourg court from a British point of view, Cameron is still “fundamentally dishonest” in his pledge to quit the ECHR, Gerard Batten of the UK Independence Party told RT.
According to Batten, were Cameron “genuine,” he would have been saying that it’s time for the UK to leave the EU.
“You can’t be a member of the EU without being a member of the Council of Europe and you can’t be a member of the Council of Europe unless you’ve signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights,” Batten explained.
“I can’t make up my mind whether it shows his incompetence, or his dishonesty,” the British politician added.
Moreover, Cameron himself has been instrumental in the EU’s accession to the ECHR in line with the Lisbon Treaty, which was unanimously supported in the European Council. If the prime minister seriously wanted to keep the UK away from the ECHR, “he would have stopped it in its tracks,” Batten pointed out.
Article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty, which was signed by EU member states in December 2007 and entered into force in December 2009, says that the EU shall accede to the ECHR. However, the accession process had not technically started before the 2010 EU talks, leading into the April 2013 draft accession agreement. The document effectively submits EU member states’ legal system to independent external control.
Source

US stocks drop amid fears of government shutdown

Posted: 30 Sep 2013 11:12 AM PDT

As a government shutdown looms over the federal budget in the United States, stocks in the country fall sharply and global investors cut allocation to US equities and bonds.
All 10 main industries of Standard & Poor’s 500 index dropped on Monday. Microsoft Corp. led the declines with a 1.1 percent fall among the largest companies while shares in finance, telephone and energy tumbled the most.
Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 112.04 points, or 0.8% while Nasdaq Composite declined 16.71 points, or 0.6 percent.
“We’ve been down this road before. It’ll last until there’s some disruption or event that’ll cause outrage in the public and then the politicians snap in line to settle it,” said Tim Hartzell, a chief investment officer at Sequent Asset Management, according to Bloomberg.
Some 54 global investors across the US, Europe, and Japan cut allocations to US stocks to a 4-month low of 41.7 percent, Reuter’s September global asset allocation poll showed Monday.
Also contributing to the US stock fall are growing concerns over US monetary and fiscal policies this month as investors wait to see when the US central bank will withdraw its huge monetary stimulus and by how much.
The US government is bracing on Monday for its first shutdown in 17 years as there is little hope of finding a compromise in Congress to keep the government funded.
Republicans do not consider the only plan President Barack Obama accepts. And Obama do not allow Republican lawmakers to dismantle any part of his Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.
If the government shuts down on Monday night, Washington will probably lose an estimated $200 million a day.
The shutdown will also affect jobs of more than 800,000 federal workers. Millions more could also be working without paychecks.
Source

Dianne Feinstein Accidentally Confirms That NSA Tapped The Internet Backbone

Posted: 30 Sep 2013 11:05 AM PDT

It’s widely known that the NSA has taps connected to the various telco networks, thanks in large part to AT&T employee Mark Klein who blew the whistle on AT&T’s secret NSA room in San Francisco. What was unclear was exactly what kind of access the NSA had. Various groups like the EFF and CDT have both been asking the administration to finally come clean, in the name of transparency, if they’re tapping backbone networks to snarf up internet communications like email. So far, the administration has declined to elaborate. Back in August, when the FISA court declassified its ruling about NSA violations, the third footnote, though heavily redacted, did briefly discuss this “upstream” capability:

In short, “upstream” capabilities are tapping the backbone itself, via the willing assistance of the telcos (who still have remained mostly silent on all of this) as opposed to “downstream” collection, which requires going to the internet companies directly. The internet companies have been much more resistant to government attempts to get access to their accounts. And thus, it’s a big question as to what exactly the NSA can collect via its taps on the internet backbone, and the NSA and its defenders have tried to remain silent on this point, as you can see from the redactions above.
However, as Kevin Bankston notes, during Thursday’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, Dianne Feinstein more or less admitted that they get emails via “upstream” collection methods. As you can see in the following clip, Feinstein interrupts a discussion to read a prepared “rebuttal” to a point being made, and in doing so clearly says that the NSA can get emails via upstream collections:
Upstream collection… occurs when NSA obtains internet communications, such as e-mails, from certain US companies that operate the Internet background, i.e., the companies that own and operate the domestic telecommunications lines over which internet traffic flows.
She clearly means “backbone” rather than “background.” She’s discussing this in an attempt to defend the NSA’s “accidental” collection of information it shouldn’t have had. But that point is not that important. Instead, the important point is that she’s now admitted what most people suspected, but which the administration has totally avoided admitting for many, many years since the revelations made by Mark Klein.
So, despite years of trying to deny that the NSA can collect email and other communications directly from the backbone (rather than from the internet companies themselves), Feinstein appears to have finally let the cat out of the bag, perhaps without realizing it.
Source

Thousands of Romanians protest Canadian gold mine project

Posted: 30 Sep 2013 10:55 AM PDT

Romanians protest against a Canadian gold mine project in the city of Cluj-Napoca on September 15, 2013.

Thousands of Romanians have staged demonstrations against a controversial Canadian project that would open Europe’s largest gold mine in the country.
On Sunday, approximately 4,000 people, who were carrying Romanian flags, marched in the capital Bucharest to show their opposition to the project, chanting “United we can save Rosia Montana.”
Demonstrators are against the plans by Canadian company Gabriel Resources to mine in the village of Rosia Montana in the region of Transylvania.
“I am here in defense of the environment and the cultural heritage of Rosia Montana but also because I am sick and tired of the way politicians treat us,” said one of the protesters.
In addition, some 2,000 protesters rallied in Cluj-Napoca, commonly known as Cluj and the second most populous city in Romania, chanting, “Rosia Montana is the heart of Romania.”
“Even if turnout is lower because of fatigue and bad weather, the people’s message is clear: they will keep on protesting until the Rosia Montana project is withdrawn and a law banning environmentally harmful mining projects is adopted,” AFP quoted Mircea Kivu, Romanian sociologist, as saying.
Critics warn that the project would damage the environment, as the Canadian company plans to destroy four mountaintops and wipe out three outlying villages in the area.
The project would also involve using an average of 12,000 tons of cyanide a year to mine, which is 12 times more than the amount used in the mining industry in the entire European Union.
Experts have said that the area holds an estimated 314 tons of gold and 1,500 tons of silver.
The demonstrations erupted on September 1 after the Romanian government approved a draft law granting national interest status to the Canadian project.
The government gave the approval after it received a bigger stake in the project by the Canadian company, which has been waiting 14 years to receive permit for the mine.
The recent weeks of protests forced the Romanian government to postpone a parliamentary vote on the bill until November. Prime Minister Victor Ponta has agreed to form a special committee to examine the project.
Meanwhile, the demonstrators chanted slogans against the US oil giant Chevron’s plans for shale gas drilling in eastern Romania using the controversial “fracking” technique.
The controversial drilling technique involves injecting large amounts of water, mixed with sand and chemicals, at high pressures to break rock formations and release the gas. The protesters say the exploration technique will poison their land.
Source

American exceptionalism an ‘outdated’ concept

Posted: 30 Sep 2013 10:34 AM PDT

The longstanding notion of US exceptionalism has deep roots in the American psyche, but as the world experiences a “tectonic shift in global geopolitics” the very idea of Washington’s superiority is being challenged, analyst Eric Draitser told RT.
Earlier this week, President Barack Obama reaffirmed Washington’s desire to engage in the affairs of other states, particularly in the Middle East.
“I believe America must remain engaged for our own security. But I also believe the world is better for it. Some may disagree, but I believe that America is exceptional – in part because we have shown a willingness, through the sacrifice of blood and treasure, to stand up not only for our own narrow self-interest, but for the interests of all,” Obama said in his address to the UN General Assembly in New York.
Analyst Eric Draitser believes Obama’s statement has nothing to do with the situation in Syria, but rather is about US-Russia political rivalry and a direct response to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who recently addressed the American nation through one of the most respected US media outlets, The New York Times.
RT: Obama says the US “has a responsibility to act,” but does that guarantee it will act responsibly?
Eric Draitser: No, of course it doesn’t. I think we should be very cautious about this so-called “American exceptionalism.” I think that what Obama was really pointing to, this was clearly a rhetorical response to Russian President [Vladimir] Putin’s OpEd in The New York Times, in which he questioned the very notion of American exceptionalism.
You see, here in the US, within our collective consciousness and within our sort of national mythology, this notion that the US stands somehow above and beyond all other countries of the world; that we represent not only certain abstract ideals, but certain political principals that somehow are not reflected by other states.
So what Obama is in fact saying with regard to American exceptionalism is nothing to do with the moral character or ethical makeup of the country. It has everything to do with the United States asserting its right to dominate politically, economically, militarily and otherwise anywhere that it sees fit.
And Syria really has become a sort of battleground between the US and Russia – not over chemical weapons, but over influence and over how geopolitics will look like in the US in the 21st century.
RT: So, bluntly as you say, this is not about the situation in Syria?
ED: Syria is sort of the pretext for this. What Obama is asserting a longstanding principle not only within the political establishment of the US, but within the very psyche of the American people: that somehow we’re better, that somehow we’re exceptional. And Obama is attempting to use that rhetoric as a way of putting himself on a moral high ground above Putin, above the Chinese, above any of the so-called “troublemakers” in the UN Security Council.
So, while it looks to the rest of the world that the US is a belligerent actor when it comes to Syria, Obama is essentially asserting, “No, no, we’re moral, we’re just and we’re righteous.”
RT: Eric, there is nothing wrong with national pride, no one is going to argue against that, but this is where it is crossing the danger line, right?
ED: Exactly right. Essentially, what we should understand is that the language that Obama is using is not only just to make the case that somehow the US is above other countries – it’s that the US is above international law, that the US is above the very institutions that the United Nations represents, and that it is above everything that has happened since WWII.
In other words, it’s the principle “might is right.” You don’t want to reduce it down to such a simplistic concept, but unfortunately that is the reality of international relations when it comes to the United States.
Of course the anger with the Russians, the anger with Putin is his and Russia’s inability to accept this principle and what we see is a tectonic shift in global geopolitics, as countries who even 10 years ago would not even dare to question the notion of American exceptionalism and America’s ability and… right to assert its military authority around the world. Now this is being questioned.
This is, of course, due to a combination of many different factors, not the least of which is America’s global prestige in decline.
RT: And how this has been accepted internally? You’ve highlighted there what America is thought of externally. After all, Russia has been saying for a while that there should be a collective global leadership. How is that going down with the average American?
ED: It’s a bit complex, because on the one hand Americans tend to have this sort of patriotic fever that you’ve been referring to earlier, believing in some of the issues of national pride, believing in the country. This is all well and good, but this has sort of blended with the growing discontent among regular ordinary Americans with US foreign policy: tired of the Afghan war, disgusted by the experience in Iraq and America’s adventurism all over the world. So, while that is not necessarily the vast majority of [American] people, a solid percentage of this country is so tired of war that they are not really willing to listen to whatever justifications are going to be made by the political leaders.
On the other hand, there are so many people burdened by debt, so burdened by the other economic problems that exist in this country, that they are sort of allowing the international angle to sort of go by the wayside. Unfortunately, when you allow things like this to happen regional conflicts and world conflicts develop very quickly.
RT: So collective global leadership is a nice idea, but is it realistic?
ED: It is realistic only insofar as all actors are willing to accept the basic principle of equal responsibility and equal authority. And of course the United States is unwilling to do that, as we’ve seen with the example of the UN Security Council. Notice the language of the policymakers in the US when it comes to the Security Council. It is not working exactly as was intended to, that the veto is working precisely as it was intended to. No, to describe the institution itself as dysfunctional, they describe the institution as – quote “lacking leadership” – something that [Russia’s] Foreign Minister [Sergey] Lavrov highlighted in his speech.
And I think that is couched as rhetoric, as a way for the US to say “we will talk the talk [about] shared responsibility and shared global leadership, but when it comes down to it – we’re the US and everyone either falls in behind us, or stands against us.”
RT: I guess you’ve got to look at the track record of what America has been involved in. Is this really bad for the experience, generally speaking?
ED: Sure, what we’ve also seen in recent years that the US for its war-making ability, for all of its vast military-industrial complex, it is unable to win wars. Because what we’ve learnt that wars are no longer simply won on the battlefield, they are won in a diplomatic sphere, they are won with counter-insurgency tactics, they are won over decades, they are not simply won in conventional wars.
The US would do well to rethink its global posture and to look to leaders such as Putin, the Chinese and to other actors around the world who have preached caution and preached international law and respect for the international law, because only through those positions we are going to actually move forward and create some kind of a lasting peace in Syria and beyond.
Source