“GEOPOLITICAL INCONSEQUENCE”

Can Joe Biden's current rhetoric be credible in light of his country's dark and widespread Real Politik? The uncertainties of an old fox in American politics.

 

By Charles H. Slim

The world is no longer a place where distances limited the possibilities of getting to know situations, idiosyncrasies and experiences of the different peoples that inhabit it. In short, the variety of existing realities can be seen almost at the same time. Among them and the most important is the policy in which and thanks to the wonderful era of digital communications -vehiculated by the internet- there is no longer the possibility of hiding anything that cannot be exposed by the camera of a mobile phone that will be replicated by millions with the "click" of the same phone or mouse thousands of miles away.

With this in mind, it is clear that geopolitics as such has radically changed and its approach as well. Today we are privileged witnesses of radical changes in terms of global geopolitics and especially those involving the powers that are deciding control of the world. What until the end of the 20th century and the first of this century governments sharply and hermetically censored or manipulated rudely, today is within the reach of all those who are interested in matters that involve relationships and respect for the law. international between nations.

One of the situations that are taking great interest these days is the referent -and apparent- recompaging of Washington's foreign policy framed in the decisions made by President Joe Biden to end the doctrine of perpetual war that began back in 2001-and under the excuse of 9/11, which at the hands of Donald Rumsfeld and Admiral Arthur K. Cebrowski spread war and instability in the Middle East and Asia with remarkable impunity. From then on, the tactic of preventive and dirty war using mercenaries (such as those who tortured and assassinated Haitian President Jovenel Moise and his wife), death squads (created by the CIA) and "proxies" groups (such as the Kurdish FDS militias, or those of the ELS installed in Syria) was taking shape, having as main testing grounds in Afghanistan and Iraq and its gloomy improvement against Syria.

It was in these places that the Americans (with the collaboration of Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey) managed, trained and ameliorated international terrorism hoaxes of presumed Islamist leanings such as "Al Qaeda" (a remnant of the CIA intellectually created by Zbigniew Brzezinski) and the subsequent scarecrow called "ISIS" that appeared in 2014 that was nothing more than the improvement of a secret program of the US military intelligence put to work in 2006 (after eliminating the head of the "Al Qaeda-Iraq" hoax, the Jordanian Abu Muzab Al Zarqawi) and led by General David H. Petraeus to try to counter the unstoppable actions of the Iraqi resistance.

Another chapter to be forgotten is undoubtedly the systematic practice of torture, murder and disappearance of people as witnessed by the CIA flights, the graphic documents of the infamous concentration camp in Guantánamo, Cuba, the Abu-Graib prison. and the countless concentration camps spread across Iraq in which military intelligence officers, CIA civilians (including doctors, psychiatrists, and psychologists) and Israeli Mossad colleagues committed the unimaginable and most aberrant against humanity of thousands of prisoners. Iraqis.

Too much garbage exposed to the light of day that complicates Washington for today to refer to itself as a moral advisor.

Despite the fact that the great media powers did everything they could to carry out a damage control, making use of all the existing arguacies and for having and even trying to blame all these aberrations on the outsider of Donald Trump, this was useless. In this way and trying to create an appearance of "return to legality", Biden (who also approved the lies that drove these wars and participated in hundreds of civilian deaths from drone attacks) must today play the role of a driver of those errors and for this to propose a new mystique to refloat the credibility in which democracies and autocracies enter into conflict. This has been religiously raised by the obsequious of the region, in particular some media and the Argentinean Anglophile intelligentsia, who have already begun to spread this simplistic and reductionist rhetoric as the "good news" for politics.

But considering these sinister episodes in the contemporary history of your country and their consequences for millions of human beings (in which Joe Biden also has a lot to do), one might ask who are the autocrats and who are the democrats? It seems that the White House continues with the same discursive tricks and petulance as always when referring to itself as "the leader of the democracies" of the world. But in view of its contemporary antecedents, can it be? Or we could also question; What do Americans understand by democracy? The internal situation regarding respect for the human rights of US citizens themselves is another highly debatable chapter of their political-social reality and is not at all different from the situations that Washington criticizes. Today in the face of the Cuban crisis, both Washington and its repeaters in Argentina do not stop making remarks about the violations of human rights on the island and the "concern" of organizations such as HRW that we have already seen, have their one-eyed before much more serious violations in which the US and its allies have a stake.

Likewise, it is known that this is only a screen. Within the United States, terrible things happened and are happening that were not born with Trump and of which these organizations and the obsequious South Americans are inhibited from speaking. Social inequality, anti-Semitism, arabophobia, Islamophobia and racism (Black Matter and the policy of the wall for immigrants) are a stale reality that, in addition to being current, escapes this attempt to cover the sun with our hands.

When President Joe Biden speaks of respect for international law when he has proceeded unilaterally geopolitically and does not make a sincere and timely criticism of the contribution that his country has made to the chaos in various regions of the globe, his current position is not credible.

It is certainly very difficult to make this rhetoric coincide with this factual background. Military interventionism, subversion and coups promoted by the CIA using its “aid” NGOs as a cover (USAID), commercial and financial blackmailing that uses unilateral sanctions (such as freezing of bank accounts and confiscations) without legal support and The humanitarian consequences that these geopolitical rinses have caused in millions of inhabitants of various latitudes are not to be despised. Double standards and double standards are evident. Joe Biden and his Secretary of State Anthony Blinken may fool themselves or the unwary who do not see beyond their noses talking about the "danger of the Russian and Chinese autocracies" or the benefits of democracy and its contribution to it, but neither Russia or China invaded any country causing the waves of refugees such as those that the US and its allies have unleashed since the beginning of the "fight against terrorism" (such as those caused with Iraq, Libya and Syria), nor do they support states that appropriate of territories and fiercely oppress its inhabitants. The media that promote these guidelines do not seem to warn that the coat and tie worn by Western politicians does not give them the category of Democrats that they hold so much. In light of this, notorious eloxymoron arises when speaking of "democracy" when deceit, subversion and war are used to impose it.

Despite this, the South American media and especially the Argentines who are part of the conglomerate of the pro-American establishment do hard work to disguise and in others to deform this sinister reality. In most cases it is pure obsequiousness with a notable contempt for the non-Anglo-Saxon, especially the Muslims and the Arabs, but they also show great myopia when it comes to the system they defend so much. In this sense, they seem to ignore what are the springs and the existing power tensions between the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the executive power represented in the White House, which are far from being considered as part of the “articulation of the democratic life”. There is little democratic in this relationship and this is projected in the facts of its foreign policy that costs thousands of people their lives and their property.

Biden's speech is just that, a speech. There is nothing that in fact succeeds in proving that your country's policies are better than others. The tale of promoting freedoms and much-talked about democracy has only been a figurehead to infiltrate countries and regions that the State Department seeks to subvert and when that happens, there is no respect for any freedom. The problem for US politicians (Democrats or Republicans) is that they confuse freedom with economic consumption, financial investment and believe that those countries that do not have their junk food chains, service providers that satisfy them or nightly whiskey bars with prostitutes and free circulation of drugs (provided by the money laundering business), there is no possibility of free market development or progress. Perhaps the description sounds too vulgar or simple, but this is transferable to the upper echelons of finance and the economy that is digital from New York and the City of London. Destroying a country, plunging it into misery and despair has been the tactic most used in the last twenty years by Washington and its allies to intervene with various purposes with the chant of "democracy."

But the EU has not been left behind. It should not be forgotten that -in addition to Great Britain- partner countries such as France (very present supporting the CIA in Syria), Germany and other subordinates such as Italy and Spain contributed their two cents to create chaos in North Africa in 2010 ( what the media called the Arab Spring) being one of the main reasons for the current instability and the endless wave of immigrants that has shaken the EU since then. But if that seems far off, know that recently the European Parliament passed between roosters and midnight legislation that authorizes governments to intervene and spy on all private digital communications of all citizens around the globe. Purpose? Absolute control of what you think. So where is freedom and democracy? This should not surprise us.

Several years a go it was discovered that the United States during the administration of Barak Obama, its intelligence agencies such as the NSA and the CIA had -with the complicity of local agencies- tapped the communication lines of the leaders of Germany, France and even Great Britain. Britain despite the fact that before public opinion they are partners and part of NATO. In reality, for years and under the cover of secrecy, double discourses and taking advantage of the media psychosis created since September 11, 2001, these western states -not China or Russia- have been spying on their citizens under the argument of the "fight against terrorism" which, as we have already seen, in addition to having a root in Israel's invasive practices, is only a ploy to achieve geopolitical purposes. The delusional and paranoid consequences of these persecutions number in the millions.

So how will Biden make his speech compatible with the reality of his policies with their global consequences?

 

 

 

 

 

“THE FICTION OF RAMALAH”

The popular uprisings of May and June have exposed a reality that many already knew and today cannot be hidden. What autonomy does the Palestinian National Authority have? Do you really have one?

By Yossi Tevi

When the young Yasser Arafat together with some friends began the guerrilla actions against the Israeli occupation back in the early sixties, he could never have conceived in his imagination that a Palestinian would oppress or even murder another Palestinian on the orders or for the money of the Zionist enemy. Much less could he have imagined that one of his closest friends and associates of the cause will end up being functional to the Jewish entity. What happened last June and what continues to happen to this day in the West Bank has made it clear, Arafat was wrong.

It is true, you are not mistaken, we are talking about Mahmud Abbas or also known as “Abu Mazen”, the current de facto prime minister of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) who after being recruited in his youth by Arafat with the passing of Over the years and after the death of the PLO leader in 2004, he drove the hopes of the Palestinian people to the abyss.

To understand a little the current political situation of the Palestinian people, we must bear in mind that beyond the existing divisions (common in every community) and despite Israeli efforts, they have not broken the central objective of their platforms and it is, the liberation of the Palestinian territory from a foreign European occupation materialized in a political entelechy called Israel. In that there is no discussion between nationalists, socialists or Islamists and even among the Israeli left. Nor is there any doubt that this struggle is eminently political beyond the fact that Israel and the international Zionist organizations should disguise it as religious.

As usual, the Anglo-American media widely influenced by Zionism, made the personality of Yasser Arafat a hateful caricature that I do not even hesitate to get into aspects of her privacy that we understand from a distance the purpose she was pursuing. Likewise, and beyond these dirty campaigns, Arafat did not lose the respect, much less the support of his people and even sympathizers of the cause around the world.

In this context, the historic intervention of the United Nations through the sanction of various resolutions such as 242, 338 and 446 (non-binding) has been, to say the least, sterile. And it is precisely because of the legal characteristics of its resolutions that Israeli lawyers have given the interpretation that has suited them and have even failed to comply with them precisely because they are not binding. In addition to this, Israel has managed to evade sanctions for the flagrant violation of Chapter VII of the Charter for having the support of the United States, Great Britain and France, members of the Security Council demonstrating an abject complicity of international actors who continually tear their clothes -giving tricks to others- in the name of democracy and respect for human rights. Many wonder about this, what is the use of this body if it cannot enforce its resolutions with a little equity?

The beginning of the “Intifada” in November 1987 made the state of occupation and the constant increase in Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories visible worldwide. Along with this, the collapse of the USSR and the Persian Gulf War in 1991 catapulted the conflict to another level, from being a merely regional one to one with a global reach. This last event had definitive consequences for the PLO and in particular Yasser Arafat to seek to approach other Arab states with which it would have tried to avoid dealing and seek more pragmatic solutions with its intimate enemy.

When in the mid-nineties Arafat and Rabin began to establish secret contacts to reach a negotiation between both parties, both sides had to deal with internal pressures from the most extremist sectors of their political structures that were not willing to give up an iota. of their claims. In those moments, Arafat, who had not hesitated to fight for years against Israel, understood that it was time to put away his rifles and negotiate a peaceful coexistence, something that Yitzak Rabin would publicly agree with. Abbas, with a reserved personality and innate political pragmatism, was already actively involved in these tasks since 1989, was the ideal representative to contact and begin to negotiate with the Israelis.

It was thus after the Iraq disaster in the Gulf War and with advanced secret negotiations, on October 31, 1991 delegations from Israel, the PLO, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan met in Madrid where, despite the reluctance of the far right Israelis, the first guidelines for an agreement would be outlined.

Meanwhile, Israeli repression and the appropriation of territories to build settlements were on the rise. Similarly, Mahumd Abbas was still in talks with his Israeli counterparts.

In this way, at the beginning of 1993, another round of secret talks were carried out on neutral ground, with a department in Oslo, Norway, the place chosen to hold them. In this regard, the Mossad and the PLO's Mukhabarat established a ceasefire and focused on preserving calm and focusing on policing the dissident and more volatile elements within their own ranks.

After the negotiations, Israelis and Palestinians, under the auspices of Washington, would conclude an agreement that Arafat and Rabin would sign in the gardens of the White House. But that epic painting didn't last long. As soon as the agreement began to take effect, the Israeli ultra-rightists (including the settlers) did everything to violate it and even tried to incriminate the PLO in all kinds of events, even going so far as to point out that the Palestinians had been behind the terrorist attacks. in Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994, something that despite pressure and threats to abandon the negotiations, Rabin never accepted something that would cost him his life when he was assassinated on November 4, 1995 by a Jewish extremist.

Despite having established a Palestinian National Authority (PNA) in 1994 and exercising a fairly limited jurisdiction, Israel and especially the extremist Zionists were not willing to accept its progress and it was for this reason that they began to look for all kinds of arguments to erase with the elbow what they had signed by hand. In this context in which Mahmoud Abbas was the prime minister of the incipient ANP (and at a time when Ahmed Quorei and Ehud Barak were negotiating to implement the agreements in Washington) came in September 2000 the provocations of Ariel Sharon and his supporters on the Esplanade of the Mosques, the continuity in the appropriations of territories to build settlements of settlers brought from other latitudes, the massacres against Palestinian civilians and the retaliation of the Islamic resistance against Israeli civilians was escalating to the point that Yasser Arafat was losing control of the This situation was used by Israel to dismantle the infrastructure of the PNA (such as destroying the Rafah airport and its political headquarters in the West Bank) and, if possible, physically eliminate Arafat and his bosses.

The generation of this atmosphere was clearly functional to Tel Aviv and this would become clear only a few months later.

As Prime Minister Abbas could do nothing. Tensions with other branches of the Palestinian resistance due to the failure to obtain results on what was negotiated in Oslo, was exceeding it, leaving him the only endorsement of Arafat's support. At the same time in Tel Aviv the most recalcitrant Zionists knew that they could not do without Abbas since he was an obligatory interlocutor between Arafat and them with whom they could also establish conversations, something that they could not with the more radicalized of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others, leftist branches of the Palestinian resistance whom they directly only sought to destroy.

With the second intifada generated that September 28, 2000 by the deliberate provocation of Ariel Sharon and some very suspicious murders -such as that of the Israeli tourism minister Rehavam Zeevi-, Israel attacked and degraded the PNA forces to such an extent that they no longer it could control its own dominions in the West Bank and Gaza, something that would end in internal conflict with Hamas. In this chaotic framework, Ariel Sharon and his cabinet took the opportunity to try to completely eradicate the PNA and even, in March 2001 after cornering the old Arafat and his main leaders of "Force 17" in the bunker of the "Rais" in Ramallah had to back down due to increasing international pressure. At that time, the toughest, such as Mossad chief Meir Dagan, considered that the opportunity should be seized to eliminate them. The most lucid and cautious such as Yigar Palmor and his chief of staff Yair Yitzaki suggested to Sharon that he stop the actions since a bad image was being created before the international community and they would leave Arafat as a martyr.

By 2002, 73 years old Arafat, who already had strange symptoms in his health, became clear that he could no longer command the affairs of his people. Abbas, subjected to unbearable pressure, decides to resign and gives way to Ahmed Quorei, who from October 2003 would serve as prime minister until 2005. In the meantime, on November 11, 2004, Arafat ends up dying of poisoning with “Polonium 210” (an agent radioactive that could have leaked into cigarettes or food) at the “Percy” Military Hospital in Paris, making it clear that for a long time -since the process of this is not immediate- sought to eliminate it.

From that moment the PNA was emptied of power and little by little it was transformed into a mere administrative entity subject to and obedient to the decisions of Tel Aviv. Abbas's pragmatism became an obsequence that does not help the Palestinians and that the resistance opposition led by Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Mashal abroad would not tolerate. From then on, Abbas's authority was gradually dissolving to reach an irrecoverable unpopularity. Added to this, his alignment with Tel Aviv politics seen with the bloody repression of the demonstrations that broke out throughout the West Bank (with 11 dead) after the usurping attempts of the Jewish settlers in Shiekh Jarrah, Jerusalem and the massacres in Gaza showed that Abbas and his people only try to maintain their privileges and their "power" by condescending with Israel at the cost of the injustices and brutalities suffered by its own residents.

For greater evils and demonstrating the close and sinister cooperation that exists between the "Shin Bet" (responsible for all kinds of crimes against the Palestinians) and the intelligence of the PNA (who work together with the Israelis to arrest Palestinian children and youth) , they target those who post photos, videos or articles on social networks against the actions of Israel and the PNA. Thus the arrests of critics of his management have become a common thing in recent weeks with surprise raids and arrests. Such is the case of the renowned Palestinian activist Nizar Banat, who in the early hours of the morning of June 24, after his house in Hebron was raided and subjected to blows with iron bars, was removed by the Mukhabarat and later ended up dead. The relatives of Banat and his neighbors do not hesitate to accuse Abbas's PNA's collusion with Israel since the videos and documents that Nizar uploaded on the internet showed with crude realism the arbitrariness, corruption and bestiality with which they usually proceed. both governments. Today, the demonstrations calling for his resignation are increasing, but at the same time, the repression and arrests (especially against women) of his Mukhabarat and "Al Fatah" cells that are directly functional to the ultra-right administration of the current Israeli Prime Minister Bennett.

In conclusion, a government that lacks real power, that survives and economically maintains its structure - police, intelligence and administrative - through clandestine agreements (mediated by the CIA) with an enemy that daily oppresses its own people cannot be anything else. than a mere fiction. A mirage of what Yasser Arafat had long envisioned has turned the “Muqataa” (Palestinian Government House) into Abbas Prison.