Tuesday 31 December 2013

Finance

Die Finanz-Eliten brauchen das Geld-Monopol


Eine internationale Finanz-Clique hat sich das weltweite Geldmonopol unter den Nagel gerissen. Sie wird es verteidigen bis zuletzt, weil ihre Macht vollständig auf diesem Monopol gründet. Wer dieses Monopol hält, kann das globale Wirtschafts-System dominieren. Die Idee hat eine lange Tradition: Sie beginnt mit dem Orden der Tempelritter im Mittelalter und führt über die Nationalsozialisten bis in die Logen der Gegenwart.
Die Entwicklung der Europäischen Union zu einem Superstaat schreitet schier unaufhaltsam voran. Die meisten Menschen nehmen das aktuelle Tagesgeschehen als eine schwer zu durchschauende, zufällige Aneinanderreihung politischer Ereignisse wahr. Sie halten die Entwicklung der Europäischen Union für zwangsläufig.
Der Autor Oliver Janich glaubt nicht an den Zufall. Er vermutet dahinter einen lang gehegten Plan, hin zu einer Orwell’schen Schreckensversion wie im Buch 1984. So ist die Idee der Europäischen Union mit gemeinsamer Zentralbank, Währung und Regierung schon über 70 Jahre alt. Die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa sollen alsVorbild für eine Neue Weltordnung dienen, in der nicht mehr der Einzelne über sein Schicksal entscheidet, sondern jeder Lebensbereich von europäischen Politikern und Bürokraten bis in Kleinste geregelt ist, da ist sich Janich sicher.
Der Bürger bleibt dabei außen vor. Seine Aufgabe beschränkt sich fast ausschließlich darauf, die Zeche zu bezahlen. Ein wirkliches politisches Mitbestimmungsrecht hat er nicht. Viele Europäer nehmen diese neuen Vereinigten Staaten von Europa zunehmend als Unterdrückungssystem wahr, denn die Souveränität der einzelnen Länder steht nur noch auf dem Papier. Massive Eingriffe in Privateigentum und totale Überwachung des Einzelnen drohen.
Janich will keine Verschwörungstheorien aufwärmen. Daher trägt er auf mehr als 500 Seiten viele Details zusammen, die in einem Schluss münden: Eine internationale Finanz-Clique hat sich das weltweite Geldmonopol unter den Nagel gerissen, um aus der Welt ein einziges, in sich geschlossenes System zu machen. Sie wird es verteidigen bis zuletzt, weil auf diesem Monopol ihre Macht gründet. Die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa sind, so ist Janich überzeugt, nur ein Schritt zu einer Welt, in denen nicht mehr die Völker herrschen, sondern die Finanz-Eliten.
Janichs Fazit finden wir unter der Überschrift:
„Das größte Geheimnis – die dunkle Seite der Macht“
Unser Gesellschaftssystem ist inhärent bösartig, weil es das Nicht-Aggressions-Prinzip, das Gebot der Nächstenliebe, verletzt. Das führt dazu, dass sich Psychopathen an die Spitze des Gewaltmonopols vorarbeiten. Sie wählen eine bestimmte Vorgehensweise und verfolgen eine Art geschichtlicher Kontinuität. Anhand von Primärquellen und glaubwürdigen Sekundärquellen kann man nachweisen, dass die Pläne für die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa bereits von den Nazis geschmiedet wurden.
Ebenso ist nachweisbar, dass die Nazis nicht einfach verschwunden sind, sondern in den Untergrund gingen und entscheidende Positionen in Nachkriegsdeutschland besetzten. Nicht nachweisbar ist natürlich, inwiefern diese Untergrundorganisationen heute noch intakt sind. Diejenigen, die sie aufgesetzt haben, sind mittlerweile fast alle tot. Es spielt jedoch keine Rolle, ob speziell die Nazi-Organisationen noch in ihrer ursprünglichen Form bestehen. Entscheidend ist, dassdie Strukturen, die die Nazis finanziert haben, nach wie vor intakt sind. Die Nazis finanzierten auch die Kommunisten, die ihrerseits eine Vision von den Vereinigten Staaten von Europa entwickelt haben, die praktisch identisch ist mit der der Nazis: Ein riesiges kollektives System, in der der Einzelne nichts, das Volk (Nazis) oder die Gesellschaft (Kommunisten) alles ist.
Es gibt eine wahrlich unheilige Allianz zwischen Finanzoligarchie, Logen, Geheimdiensten und Geheimgesellschaften. Die Frage, wer hier wen am meisten beeinflusst, ist insofern zweitrangig, da letztendlich immer das Gewaltmonopol und damit der Geheimdienst das Sagen hat.
Dabei ist es nicht so, dass alles bis ins letzte Detail planbar ist. Das Bild von Politikern, die wie Marionetten an Seilen der Machtelite hängen, ist zwar passend. Aber es handelt sich nicht um ein Theaterstück mit festem Drehbuch, eher umImprovisationstheater. Die Handlung wird grob vorgegeben, aber nicht jeder Dialog. Aufgrund der ungleichen Verteilung von Informationen und Interessen geht immer wieder etwas schief. Sonst hätten wir die Weltregierung längst. An diesem Punkt können wir durch Aufklärung ansetzen.
Das wichtigste Rätsel aber ist: Warum sind so viele Banker in diesen Logen? Die Frage kann beantwortet werden, wenn man sich mit der Geschichte des Templerordens beschäftigt, der zu Recht als Vorgänger der heutigen Banken angesehen werden kann und in dessen Tradition sich viele heutige Logen sehen.
Das wichtigste Geheimnis der Tempelritter war nämlich das Verständnis über das Wesen des Geldes. Einige Jahrzehnte, nachdem Jacques de Molay, Großmeister des Templerordens 1314 auf dem Scheiterhaufen verbrannt worden war, schrieb der Bischof und Philosoph Nikolaus von Oresme das Geheimnis der Templer auf (ohne sich auf diese zu beziehen).
Weicht das gesetzliche Wertverhältnis der Münzen vom Marktwert ab, verschwindet die unterbewertete Münze völlig aus dem Umlauf, während allein die überbewertete Münze im Umlauf bleibt.
Später haben diesen Zusammenhang auch Kopernikus und Thomas Gresham, der Begründer der Londoner Börse, beschrieben, sodass er heute als das Gesetz von Kopernikus-Gresham oder das Greshamsche Gesetz bekannt ist. Ich nenne es: das Arcanum der Tempelritter.
Denn auf der Kenntnis dieses Zusammenhangs beruhen der Reichtum und die Macht der Templer. Entscheidend ist die Umkehrung des Gesetzes: Legt der Staat kein gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel fest, setzt sich das werthaltigste durch. Die Templer gingen nun überall dorthin, wo der gesetzlich festgelegte Wert der Münze vom Marktwert oder vom gesetzlich festgelegten Wert in anderen Regionen abwich und tauschten entsprechend die zu hoch bewerteten Münzen in die zu niedrig bewerteten (entweder Gold oder Silber). Oft sicherten sie sich auch selbst das Geldmonopol, kauften die unterbewerteten Münzen anderswo ein und drehten sie der „eigenen Bevölkerung“ an.
Heutzutage hat das Geld überhaupt keinen Wert mehr und die Nachfahren der Templer können davon so viel produzieren, wie sie wollen, auf Papier oder sogar elektronisch auf Knopfdruck. Sie tauschen es in echte Sachwerte, Unternehmensanteile oder Rohstoffe um. Die Zeche zahlt der Normalbürger, bei dem das neu geschaffene Geld als letztes ankommt und der die Sachwerte erst zu höheren Preisen kaufen kann (Cantillon-Effekt). Mit dem so erworbenen Reichtum können sich die Nachfahren der Templer beim Gewaltmonopol und den Medien einkaufen. Voilà, fertig ist der Plan zur Welteroberung! Und das mit einer Erkenntnis, die man in einem Satz zusammenfassen kann! Faszinierend, nicht wahr? Die Antwort auf die Frage, warum so viele Banker in Logen sind, lautet also:
Die Banker sind nicht in den Logen, weil sie Banker sind. Sie sind Banker, weil sie in den Logen sind!
Dort wurden sie in das Geheimnis eingeweiht – vermutlich aber nur auf oberster Ebene. Wer also in einer Loge ist, kann schon daran ablesen, wie weit oben er in der Hierarchie steht, ob ihm dieses Geheimnis – neben dem ganzen Hokuspokus – mitgeteilt wurde. Und von mir bekommen Sie es praktisch umsonst, weil ich darüber auch im Internet schreibe.
Nun werden Sie einwenden, dass das längst kein Geheimnis mehr ist, Ludwig von Mises und die anderen alten und neuen Vertreter der Österreichischen Schule schreiben ja darüber. Aber erstens kennen 99 Prozent der Bevölkerung das Wesen des Geldes noch nicht und zweitens nicht den oben erklärten Zusammenhang. Das Schöne an diesem Geheimnis und der damit verbundenen Informationsineffizienz ist, dass den vielen nicht eingeweihten Helfershelfern die Brisanz dieses Themas nicht bewusst ist. Daher finden Sie immer mehr Artikel über die Österreichische Schule in den Medien, wenn auch längst nicht genug. Das liegt daran, dass auch die Chefredakteure und vermutlich die meisten Herausgeber gar nicht zum innersten Zirkel der eigentlichen Machtelite gehören. Was ich Ihnen hier mitgebe, wissen nur die ganz oben an der Spitze der Pyramide.
Für jeden Libertären und jeden normalen, geistig gesunden Menschen muss daher die wichtigste Aufgabe sein, das Geldmonopol zu attackieren. Das kommt so schön unschuldig daher: Lasst doch die Menschen entscheiden, welches Geld sie benutzen. Klingt für jeden einleuchtend und ist es ja auch. Jeder libertäre Politiker, der die Chance ungenutzt lässt, dieses Thema in die Medien zu bringen, ist nicht auf Ihrer Seite oder schlicht dämlich.
Wer das Geldmonopol abschafft, bricht gleichzeitig die Macht der Banken, Logen und Geheimdienste, also aller üblichen Verdächtigen. Denn ohne das Geldmonopol können sich die Staaten nicht finanzieren. Die aktuell größte Gefahr für das System ist daher die digitale und dezentrale Währung Bitcoin, wie die EZB bereits erkannt hat. Es wird zwar Versuche geben, Bitcoins zu verbieten, aber das muss scheitern, weil sie völlig anonym und dezentral gehandelt werden können. Es ist durchaus möglich, dass Bitcoins oder eine andere dezentrale Währung zum Zerstörer aller Staaten werden.
Der Geldadel hat das Problem natürlich bereits erkannt. Daher werden jetzt unter anderem von Rockefellers Club of Rome andere Geldsysteme propagiert, die alle ein Monopol voraussetzen, also Freigeld, zinsloses Geld, Schwundgeld, fließendes Geld, Monetative und so weiter. Dieses Geld würde nach dem Arcanum der Templer natürlich nur angenommen, wenn es per Gewalt durchgesetzt wird. Gelockt werden die ahnungslosen Bürger mit der Kritik am Zins, die schon die Nationalsozialisten verbreiteten und auch eine Zeitlang die Kirchen aller Konfessionen, als sie noch die direkte Macht hatten. Der Islam verbietet noch heute den Zins in den Ländern, in denen er über das Gewaltmonopol verfügt. Die Kritik am Zins habe ich bereits an mehreren Stellen widerlegt.
Der Versuch, uns zinsloses Geld schmackhaft zu machen, ist nichts anderes als der Versuch, die Macht der Logen zu erhalten. Es ist vermutlich auch eine der Methoden, wie man uns eine Weltwährung schmackhaft machen wird: Wollt ihr die total zinslose Währung? Jaaaaaaa!
So stellen sich die Psychopathen das jedenfalls vor. Die Verbreitung der Idee vom zinslosen Geld ist einer der besten Belege dafür, dass wir in einer pathologischen Plutokratie leben. Denn die meisten, die diese Idee verbreiten, tun dies ja nicht aus böser Absicht, sondern aus ehrlicher Überzeugung.

Jetzt wissen Sie, woran das liegt – am schmutzigsten Geheimnis der Welt: dem Arcanum der Tempelritter.
Wenn Sie einen Blick in die Geschichte werfen, erkennen Sie, dass das Ergebnis fast jeden Krieges die Einführung eines Geldmonopols mit ungedeckter Währung war. Gleichzeitig können Sie erkennen, dass diese Kriege – in der Regel auf beiden Seiten – von den Banken finanziert wurden, die später Teil des Bankenkartells, also an die Zentralbank angeschlossen waren. Beispielsweise war die Reichsmark vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg zwar auch eine Monopolwährung, aber sie war immerhin mit Gold gedeckt. Daher lag die Abgabenquote auch deutlich unter zehn Prozent und die deutsche Wirtschaft war als Folge des geringen Staatseinflusses die stärkste der Welt. So können Sie alle Kriege durchgehen, das Resultat war immer dasselbe: Die Banker hatten das Monopol auf Geld und damit die Macht.
Den ultimativen Beweis dafür, was das eigentliche Ziel ist, liefert im Übrigen unser eigenes Grundgesetz. Artikel 24 lautet:
Der Bund kann durch Gesetz Hoheitsrechte auf zwischenstaatliche Einrichtungen übertragen.
(1a) Soweit die Länder für die Ausübung der staatlichen Befugnisse und die Erfüllung der staatlichen Aufgaben zuständig sind, können sie mit Zustimmung der Bundesregierung Hoheitsrechte auf grenznachbarschaftliche Einrichtungen übertragen.
Der Bund kann sich zur Wahrung des Friedens einem System gegenseitiger kollektiver Sicherheit einordnen; er wird hierbei in die Beschränkungen seiner Hoheitsrechte einwilligen, die eine friedliche und dauerhafte Ordnung in Europa und zwischen den Völkern der Welt herbeiführen und sichern.
Zur Regelung zwischenstaatlicher Streitigkeiten wird der Bund Vereinbarungen über eine allgemeine, umfassende, obligatorische, internationale Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit beitreten.
Allen Beteiligten bei den Beratungen war klar, dass dieser Artikel zur Vorbereitung einer Weltregierung dient. Prof. Frank Schorkopf von Institut für Völkerrecht und Europarecht der Universität Göttingen schreibt zu den Beratungen zum Grundgesetz: „Dabei waren sich die Beteiligten einig, dass der Weg zu einer Weltregierung über ein geeintes Europa werde erfolgen müssen.
Wir müssen uns allerdings nicht auf die Einschätzung des Professors verlassen. Inzwischen wurden auch die Protokolle des Parlamentarischen Rates, der das Grundgesetz formulierte, veröffentlicht. In der Diskussion um die Formulierungen „kollektive Sicherheit“ und „dauerhafte Ordnung in Europa“ in Absatz 2 von Artikel 24 sagt Dr. Carlo Schmid (SPD) am 10. November 1948 zum späteren Bundespräsidenten Theodor Heuss (FDP): „Die Weltstaatbemühungen in allen Ehren! Die Idee ist des Schweißes der Edlen wert. Man sollte aufhören, bei diesen Dingen immerzu von Utopien zu sprechen, wie man es gern tut, um es sich leicht zu machen. Aber ich glaube nicht, dass wir zur Weltregierung kommen werden, ohne vorher durch Europa gegangen zu sein.“
Der Vorsitzende des Parlamentarischen Rates, Hermann von Mangoldt (CDU) antwortet: „Wenn man den Einwand hat: Ihr habt hier die Einwilligung in Beschränkungen der eigenen Hoheitsrechte nur für die europäische Ordnung vorgesehen (in Absatz 2; Anm. OJ), so lässt darüber hinaus der Absatz 1 alle Möglichkeit in weltweitem Sinn offen.
Das heißt, 1948 wurde nicht nur die Europäische Union, sondern bereits eine Weltregierung geplant und als Möglichkeit im Grundgesetz verankert! Und jeder, der behauptet, es werde eine Weltregierung angestrebt, wird mehr als 70 Jahre später als Verschwörungstheoretiker bezeichnet!
Ein besonders eigenwilliger Treppenwitz der Geschichte ist wohl, dass der Theodor-Heuss-Preis 2013 an Daniel Cohn-Bendit ging, der wegen seiner Äußerungen zu Sex mit Kindern in die Kritik geriet. Heuss war mit Carlo Schmid einer der Väter des Grundgesetzes.
Oder in Abwandlung des vom kürzlich verstorbenen Literaturkritiker Marcel Reich-Ranicki gern verwendeten Brecht-Zitates:
Und so sehen wir betroffen: Den Vorhang zu und keine Fragen offen.

Sunday 29 December 2013

CHINESE PEACEKEEPERS IN AFRICA?



WILL CHINA STEP UP IN SOUTH SUDAN’S

 CRISIS?

By Bill Humphrey

CHINA has long been a major, if quiet, contributor of troops to United Nations peacekeeping missions around the world. In the violent aftermath of an alleged attempted coup this week in Juba, the capital of SOUTH SUDAN, the time is ripe to think about changing that stance. As CHINA rises in world status, it must also take on more global responsibilities.

The United Nations mission in SOUTH SUDAN reported that 400-500 people were killed in street battles and crossfire, within the first two days alone. As many as 20,000 civilians may have sought refuge on UN bases in the country.

SOUTH SUDAN became independent from the rest of SUDAN by referendum in 2011, and its strongest foreign partner is CHINA. That country buys 82% of SOUTH SUDAN’S oil exports and provides infrastructural development investments. Indeed, CHINA was a major player in securing the peaceful partition of SUDAN last decade, as the largest trading partner of both states.

In neighboring CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC, the United Nations Security Council has just authorized a FRENCH-led mission to intervene in the mass sectarian violence in the former FRENCH colony. The Council members, including CHINA, unanimously approved this action.




Background Information: 

FRENCH TROOPS SHOULD HUNT QAEDA BEYOND MALI BORDERS
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/11/france-and-mali.html

FRANCE WANTS ACTION ON CENTRAL AFRICA “SECTARIAN POISON”
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/10/france-and-central-african-republic.html

EU FUNDS MILITARY PRESENCE IN THE SAHEL UNTIL 2020
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/11/european-union-acknowledges-need-of.html

INSTABILITY IN THE SAHEL COULD PROMPT INCREASED MIGRATION AND ILLICIT TRAFFICKING WHICH IS BOUND TO SPILL OVER INTO EUROPE. http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/11/mali-sahel-and-france.html

WHO COULD ACT IN SOUTH SUDAN?

SOUTH SUDAN is a former ANGLO-EGYPTIAN territory but does not retain close ties to either in the way that the CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC remains close with FRANCE. Instead, its recent separation from SUDAN brought it closest to the UNITED STATES and to CHINA. Thus, there is little prospect of BRITAIN repeating its SIERRA LEONE action and stepping in to halt clashes in Juba.

The UNITED STATES is dramatically expanding the number of military operations on the ground in SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA in the coming year. However, these have remained very small and are generally restricted to advisory or support roles assisting national governments.

Background Information: 

THE SECRET WAR BETWEEN CHINA AND THE US FOR AFRICA'S OIL RICHES
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.co.at/2012/12/usa-china-and-africa.html

AFRICOM EXPANDS MISSION IN AFRICA
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/07/africa-and-usa.html  

EU INVOLVEMENT IN MALI
Why the SAHEL is crucial to EUROPE'S neighborhood – and its security strategy

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/07/eu-involvement-in-mali.html

BUILDING A “COMMON EU VISION” FOR SAHEL SECURITY
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/11/hotspot-sahel.html

Two decades later, “SOMALIA” remains a watchword in the U.S. elite against closely policing AFRICAN conflicts. And with therecent near-defeat of President Obama’s plans for a “humanitarian intervention” in SYRIA, before he pulled it off the table, he seems unlikely to try again so soon. That SOUTH SUDAN’S oil is going to CHINA, not AMERICA, also won’t help.

Thus, despite close political friendship between the SOUTH SUDANESE leadership and the UNITED STATES, it will again fall to CHINA to play a lead mediating role in a SUDANESE crisis.

CHINESE PEACEKEEPERS IN AFRICA

CHINA’S contributions to UN peacekeeping missions have generally been non-combat peacekeepers in medical and engineering roles.
But in both SOUTH SUDAN in 2011 and MALI this year, elite CHINESE combat troops have been spotted in protective details for its non-combat peacekeepers. Engineering projects in AFRICA, both through the United Nations and through CHINA’S investment operations, often require armed protection.




Background Information: 

CHINA HAS BEEN TAKING OVER WESTERN NOTIONS OF SECURITY AND STABILITY AROUND THE WORLD IN FORM OF UN PEACEKEEPING MISSIONS
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2013/07/mali-and-chinas-western-foreign-policy.html

CHINA’S WINNING STRATEGY IN AFRICA
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/09/chinas-winning-strategy-in-africa.html

SEVEN ECONOMIES IN SUB - SAHARAN AFRICA ARE EXPECTED TO BE AMONG THE TEN FASTEST GROWING ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD. 
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/04/africa-forgotten-and-underestimated.html

Still, so far there has been no major People’s Liberation Army combat deployment in AFRICA. If CHINA is going to play a large investment role in Sub-Saharan Africa, it must be willing to play a security role, too. CHINA should step up and provide large combat troop deployments through the United Nations.

The United Nations is already on the ground in SOUTH SUDAN. It would not be difficult to expand this mandate and bolster its presence with CHINESE troops, as the FRENCH have done in MALI and the CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC. Nearby UN operations in DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO this year have already shown the potential for more aggressive peacekeeping to halt fighting.

CHINA: MAJOR POWER OR NOT?

CHINA should step up at the UN Security Council and offer its services as an intervention force in SOUTH SUDAN to create space for a political resolution to the crisis.
At the moment, CHINA is no doubt working furiously to get the clashing parties back to the table to avoid the oil taps shutting off. But the cost of waiting for this to happen – without an external intervention halting the fighting in the interim – will be mass civilian casualties and an overstretched UN mission trying to protect thousands of fleeing civilians.

Being a major military player in global affairs means sometimes being willing to step in between two bickering factions to protect innocent civilians.
No doubt CHINA fears this will be seen as meddling or neocolonialism, which could jeopardize their investments in the country. But given CHINA’S deep economic links – which have kept SOUTH SUDAN’S government going since independence – no one is better positioned than CHINA to intervene in SOUTH SUDAN’S crisis right now. 

Thursday 19 December 2013

CHINA AND THE MIDDLE EAST



A PAX SINICA IN THE MIDDLE EAST?


By Dr. Kang Wu
Source:  esi.nus.edu. sg

English-language media completely ignored a noteworthy statement that led Der Spiegel‘s GERMAN-language website October 12, a call for CHINA to “take on responsibility as a world power” in the MIDDLE EAST. Penned by Bernhard Zand, the GERMAN news organization’s Beijing correspondent, it is terse and to the point: now that CHINA imports more oil from the MIDDLE EAST than any other country in the world, it must answer for the region’s security. “AMERICA’S interest in the MIDDLE EAST diminishes day by day” as it heads towards energy self-sufficiency, wrote Zand, adding:
CHINA’S interest in a peaceful MIDDLE EAST is enormous, by contrast. Beijing is not only the biggest customer of precisely those oil powers who presently are fanning the flames of conflict in SYRIA; as a VIP customer, Beijing has growing political influence, which it should use openly. The word of the CHINESE foreign minister has just as much weight in Tehran and Riyadh as that of his AMERICAN counterpart.

AMERICA’S BUDGET DEFICIT

CHINA’S situation, Zand continues, is rather like GERMANY’S after reunification: a state whose economic power is growing will eventually be asked what it puts on the table politically. He concludes:
The time when AMERICAN could be counted on to secure Beijing’s supply lines soon will come to an end — AMERICA’S budget deficit will take care of that by itself. Whoever wants to be a world power must take on responsibilities.
I have no idea how CHINA envisions its future role in the MIDDLE EAST. AMERICANS will learn the intentions of the powers who gradually fill the vacuum left by Washington’s withdrawal from the world “well after the fact, if ever”. It is helpful, though, to take note of what the rest of the world is saying, particularly when not a single ENGLISH-language source made reference to it. Der Spiegel’s public call for CHINA to assume a leading geopolitical role in the MIDDLE EAST, though, did not appear out of context.

CHINA’S INTERESTS IN THE LANDS BETWEEN THE HIMALAYAS AND THE MEDITERRANEAN

AMERICAN commentators have regarded CHINA as a spoiler, the source of PAKISTAN’S nuclear weapons technology, IRAN’S ballistic missiles, and other alarming instances of proliferation. It is worth considering a radically different view of CHINA’S interests in the lands between the Himalayas and the Mediterranean: no world power has more to lose from instability than does CHINA.
IRAN’S nuclear weapons program poses the greatest risk to the region, and CHINA has been viewed as uncooperative in the extreme by WESTERN diplomats trying to tighten the economic screws on Tehran. CHINESE companies, moreover, have helped IRAN bypass trade sanctions, but at great cost, and with a complex result. The New York Times on September 30 profiled the problems of IRAN’S economy under the sanctions, and took note of the country’s dependence on CHINA:
One economist, Mohammad Sadegh Jahansefat, said the government had been taken hostage by countries benefiting from the sanctions – particularly CHINA, which he called the worst business partner IRAN had ever had.
“CHINA has monopolized our trade — we are subsidizing their goods, which we are forced to import,” he said, adding of its work in the energy industry, “They destroy local production and leave oil and gas projects unfinished so that no one can work with them.”

PAKISTAN A FORCE TO RECKON WITH?

CHINA’S capacity to exert pressure on the IRANIAN regime is considerable. Apart from its interest in avoiding nuclear proliferation in the PERSIAN GULF, CHINA has a number of points of conflict with IRAN. The one that should keep Tehran on its toes is the Islamic Republic’s border with PAKISTAN. IRAN announced that it had hanged 16 alleged Sunni rebels in Baluchistan province on the PAKISTANI border, the latest in a long series of violent incidents.
“With a population of 170 million, PAKISTAN has 20 million men of military age, as many as IRAN and TURKEY combined; by 2035 it will have half again as many. It also has nuclear weapons.

IRAN SITS BETWEEN TWO SUNNI POWERS -TURKEY AND PAKISTAN

– that depend to a great extent on SAUDI financing, and that also have excellent relations with CHINA. TURKEY’S still-disputed agreement to buy a CHINESE air defense system represented a revolution in CHINESE-TURKISH relations, motivated by a CHINESE promise to transfer the whole package of relevant technology to TURKEY and to help the TURKS to manufacture the systems, a more generous offer than ever Ankara got from the West. TURKEY is the logical terminus for the “New Silk Road” of road, rail, pipelines and broadband that CHINA has proposed to build in CENTRAL ASIA.

CHINA, it might be added, also has excellent relations with ISRAEL, whose premier technical university just was offered a US$130 million grant from Hong Kong magnate Li Ka-shing to fund part of the costs of building a branch in CHINA. CHINESE provincial and local governments will contribute another $147 million. The seamless interchange of ideas and personnel between ISRAEL’S military, universities and tech entrepreneurs is a success story in miniature that CHINA hopes to reproduce in scale. As SINGAPORE-based political scientist Michael Raska reports, CHINA’S military modernization envisions the spread of dual-use technologies to private industry.





Background Information:

RED SEA AND MEDITERRANEAN GAS TRANSFER LINK ENHANCES CHINA'S EXPORT TO SOUTHERN EUROPE AND THE BALKANS 


CHINA’S LAND BRIDGE TO TURKEY CREATES NEW EURASIAN GEOPOLITICAL POTENTIALS



Without attributing any geopolitical intention to Beijing, the visible facts make clear that CHINA has the capacity to exercise strategic influence in the MIDDLE EAST, and it has an unambiguous interest in maintaining stability. What CHINA might choose to do, Washington will learn after the fact, if ever. If CHINA wished to influence IRAN, for example, it has considerable means to do so, and a great deal else besides.


Sunday 15 December 2013

SYRIA


EX-CIA CHIEF: ASSAD WIN MAY BE SYRIA'S BEST OPTION

As Washington condemns Assad's conduct in SYRIAN conflict, former head of US intelligence says best, yet 'ugly', outcome for SYRIA is Assad's stay in power


Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring wrote in June 2012: ISRAEL’S INTERESTS

……..This is almost certainly because the ISRAELI Prime Minister would, on balance, prefer the Assad regime to continue; it is a known quantity and any new regime could severely destabilize the effective balance-of-power between two uneasy neighbors’………… 


Via AFP


The sectarian bloodbath in SYRIA is such a threat to regional security that a victory for Bashar ASSAD’s regime could the best outcome to hope for, a former CIA chief said Thursday. 
Washington condemned Assad's conduct of the conflict, threatened air strikes after he was accused of targeting civilians with chemical weapons and has demanded he step down. The United States is also supplying millions of dollars in "non-lethal" aid to some of the rebel groups fighting Assad's rule.
But Michael Hayden, the retired US Air Force general who until 2009 was head of the Central Intelligence Agency, said a rebel win was not one of the three possible outcomes he foresees for the conflict.
 "Option three is Assad wins," Hayden told the annual Jamestown Foundation conference of terror experts.

 "And I must tell you at the moment, as ugly as it sounds, I'm kind of trending toward option three as the best out of three very, very ugly possible outcomes," he said.
The first possible outcome he cited was for ongoing conflict between ever more extreme Sunni and Shiite factions. The rebel groups are dominated by Sunni Muslims, while Assad is generally backed by Syria's Alawite, Shiite and Christian minorities.
And the second outcome, which Hayden deemed the most likely, was the "dissolution of SYRIA" and the end of a single state within the borders defined by a 1916 treaty between the FRENCH and BRITISH empires.
"It means the end of the Sykes-Picot (Agreement), it sets in motion the dissolution of all the artificial states created after World War I," he said.

Background Information:

The British diplomat Mark Sykes and a FRENCH counterpart Francois Georges Picot divided the Middle East into zones of influence that later served as the frontiers of independent Arab states.
 A breakdown in the century-old settlement could spread chaos in LEBANON, JORDAN and IRAQ, Hayden warned.
 "I greatly fear the dissolution of the state. A de facto dissolution of Sykes-Picot," Hayden said.
 "And now we have a new ungoverned space, at the crossroads of the civilization."

Comment by Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring: Worthwhile to mention is that the Sykes – Picot agreement created the versatile situation in the Middle East in the first place.  Promising both, Jews and Arabs the same land, dividing the region into areas of strategic interests for both, the BRITISH and FRENCH mandate, without consideration of the ethnic and sectarian diversity the region is exposed too. Instead of taking a precautious as well as diplomatic approach, Sykes and Picot, in their ignorance, did exactly the opposite. Subsequently the Middle Eastern problem was created.  

 "The dominant story going on in SYRIA is a Sunni fundamentalist takeover of a significant part of the Middle East geography, the explosion of the SYRIA state and of the Levant as we know it."

Fighting erupted in SYRIA in early 2011, when Assad launched a crackdown on pro-democracy protests and has since evolved into a full-blown civil war that has claimed an estimated 126,000 lives.

 Assad, backed by IRAN and the LEBANESE Hezbollah militia, is locked in combat with a diverse group of Sunni rebel factions which are increasingly dominated by hardline jihadist groups.

Thursday 12 December 2013

AUSTRALIA

AUSTRALIA’S RESPONSE TO A RISING CHINA


By Arthur Moore 


Over the past two hundred years, AUSTRALIA  has grappled with the concern that its geographical location places it too far from its allies in terms of their potential support. Thus, as a large continent, Australia has tended to ally itself with the dominant naval power in the Asia Pacific region – first Britain and now the United States. However, the rise of China is challenging this historical basis of Australia’s defence policy.

On the one hand, Australia could move closer to the United States, strengthen its capabilities, and make the Australia Defence Force (ADF) more interoperable with US forces. The Howard government was successful in ‘breathing new life into the old alliance’ by supporting US-led operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the current government is continuing this trend. In November 2010, the United States and Australia conducted bilateral talks. They agreed to host US troops in Australia and grant US military access to Australian bases.  This has enormous significance because the last time US forces were stationed in Australia was during the Second World War. This represents a fundamental overhaul of Australia’s strategic position, as it gives the country greater strategic weight in the region, and restructures the ADF towards accommodating its new guests.

On the other hand, Alan Dupont, a renowned scholar in the field of Australian strategic studies emphasises that China is a status-quo power, and as such poses no threat to Australia’s security. Instead, the ADF should be more focused on stabilisation operations in its immediate region, such as in East Timor and the Solomon Islands. The likelihood of state conflict has reduced significantly, and other threats, namely international terrorism, or non-traditional security threats, present a much more significant challenge for AUSTRALIA.  ADF stabilisation operations in East Timor, Solomon Islands, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Afghanistan highlight the fact that intrastate conflict is more significant to Australia’s defence policy. The prevailing logic follows that if intrastate conflict leads to a power vacuum, it could be filled by an adversary that would significantly undermine Australia’s strategic position due to its close proximity to the Australian mainland.

Nevertheless, the rise of China does pose a challenge to US primacy in the region. In 2010, China’s actions in the South China Sea (SCS) were anything but benevolent, such as harassing fishing vessels and cutting off wires from surveillance ships. If the United States chooses to confront China in the future, this will inevitably lead to greater regional instability. In this situation, the US military would count on support from the ADF. But the question remains: What type of strategic risk does the ADF want to take on? If the ADF is required to operate in the SCS, then it will need new capabilities. The latest Australian White Paper, entitled Force 2030, emphasized the need for an expansionist maritime capability, such as more submarines and Air Warfare Destroyers, but these capabilities would only be effective in Australia’s immediate region, and they would only provide a ‘token force’ for US-led operations.  Either way, the ADF will be required to fill a number of different roles as it pushes towards an expansive strategic policy for the first time since World War II. This will include conducting much larger operations.

If the United States decides to step aside and accept Chinese supremacy while encouraging other countries to play a more independent role against China – countries like Japan and India - it would fundamentally alter Australia’s strategic position and its defence policy. Australia would be living in a region that is highly contested and unstable, and it would no longer be able to rely on a powerful ally for support.

Yet if current trends persist, the United States will not want to give up Asian primacy just yet. It has moved closer to Japan and South Korea, strengthening bilateral security and diplomatic ties. Its relationships with India and Vietnam are warming as well. If anything, the US position in Asia is getting stronger.

Despite being a half a world away, these developments impact directly on the ADF. If tensions increase, the ADF might be asked to provide support. This would require expeditionary capabilities that Australia  does not currently have. As mentioned previously, the acquisition of two Landing Helicopter Decks, Bay Class Amphibious Ships and Air Warfare Destroyers are not enough. Therefore, Australia’s defence policy will need to be extended to support allies in high-level contingencies.

Conducting high-level operations in comparison to stabilisation operations is a sizable demand because it requires more money and resources. This approach is orientated towards operating in tandem with US forces in high-level contingencies. But if the US stands back and accepts China’s bid for supremacy in the region, then AUSTRALIA   will need to be more self-sufficient and have an autonomous defence force posture. This will be difficult to achieve because of fiscal issues and public morale. Nevertheless, Australia has found itself in a position where it might not be able to rely on a great and powerful ally for support.

If current trends persist, Australia’s strategic policy will continue to expand the ADF’s operational capacity in the future. This is occurring within the context of China’s rise relative to America’s decline. One sure thing is that the Australian government prefers to maintain the status-quo with its present alliance. But that’s not to say it won’t respond to future developments in the Asian region by shifting the country’s strategic defence policy and the ADF’s corresponding orientation. 

SPAIN: ISLAMIC RADICALS INFILTRATE THE MILITARY


A SYMPTOM, NOT ONLY FOR SPAIN BUT FOR MANY CENTRAL EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

By Soeren Kern 
An investigation initiated by the American CIA and FBI in 2009 revealed that at least 100 Islamic extremists had infiltrated the U.S. military, and that some of these individuals had been in touch with Islamic radicals who had infiltrated military units in Spain, as well as Britain, France and Germany.

The military is an attractive employment option for many young Muslims born in Spain, where the unemployment rate is stuck at 27%, and the jobless rate for individuals under 25 exceeds 60%. Often, a stint in the military opens doors for civilian jobs with national or local police or other security-related occupations.
The Spanish military is quietly monitoring its Muslim soldiers in an effort to prevent the spread of Islamic radicalism within its ranks, according to a classified Defense Ministry document that has been leaked to the Spanish media.

The Spanish Army has also been systematically replacing its Muslim soldiers with new recruits from Latin America in an effort to reduce the potential for trouble in areas of Spain that have a large Muslim population.
Spain abolished the draft and transitioned to a professional military in 2002, but has been unable to find enough native Spanish volunteer soldiers to fill the ranks—due to a mix of apathy, pacifism and declining birth rates (Spain has a fertility rate of just 1.36 (2011), one of the lowest in the European Union).

RECRUITMENT OF MUSLIMS IS A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD

Like other European countries facing a similar dilemma, the Spanish Defense Ministry, in a desperate search for soldiers, is increasingly relying on Muslim recruits. But the push to boost Muslim enlistment has been a double-edged sword: while Spain needs the extra manpower, it also worries that some Muslim soldiers harbor extremist ideologies.
The leaked document was issued by the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Spanish Army, Lieutenant General Jesús Carlos Fernández Asensio, in October 2013.

The document—classified as "confidential" and published by the Madrid-based newspaper El País on November 19—states that the Spanish Army has detected within its ranks "the existence of personnel with clear indications of radicalism (ideological, religious or criminal)…in their private and social lives." The document continues:
"The conduct of these individuals constitutes a vulnerability for the institution of the Army and poses a potential threat to national security. In an effort to neutralize or at least reduce this risk, the Army has instituted a series of measures that will be applied by unit commanders on suspected military personnel to be determined at any given moment."

The measures include revoking the security clearances of any soldiers suspected of radicalism, and preventing such individuals from holding any job position where they might pose a security risk in any form or may have access to sensitive information.
The document lists more than a dozen jobs or locations that should be off limits to suspected radicals:
"Military police and other security-related units; the general staff headquarters; any premises where classified documents are handled; armories, arsenals and weapons depots; communications centers and locations housing information systems; job positions involving drivers, escorts and bodyguards, as well as those involving sharpshooters or the deactivation of explosives; or any other location determined by the unit commander."
Military units are also charged with monitoring "everything related to a suspect's proselytizing activities or actions, their level of radicalism and their public activities (social media, Internet surfing, types of newspapers being read, etc.)."
Units are, additionally, responsible for keeping track of any civilian lawsuits or criminal proceedings that may involve a suspected soldier "outside the scope of the Armed Forces," as well as "any notices of plans by a suspect to travel abroad."
The Defense Ministry recommends the "application, as far as possible, of staff regulations relating to psycho-physical fitness requirements, anti-drug enforcement policies, as well as the disciplinary regulations of the Military Penal Code." Such procedures would apparently provide the legal basis for suspected radicals to be discharged from the Spanish military.

The document also proposes the "development of an extraordinary rating system" for any soldier who displays a "significant change in professional conduct." A negative performance evaluation would be grounds for such a soldier to be discharged.
Although the document does not specifically define what is meant by the term "radicalism," it almost certainly refers to Salafist Islam and the Spanish Defense Ministry's concern about the increasing number of Muslim recruits within the ranks of the military.

The military is an attractive employment option for many young Muslims born in Spain, where the unemployment rate is stuck at 27%, and the jobless rate for individuals under 25 exceeds 60%. Often, a stint in the military opens the door to civilian jobs with national or local police or other security-related occupations.
There are no official statistics as to how many Muslims are serving in the Spanish armed forces, which currently has 140,000 active duty service members and 5,000 reservists.
But the issue of Muslim troops serving in the Spanish military is especially acute in the Spanish exclaves of Ceuta and Melilla on the northern coast of Morocco, which has long demanded that Madrid cede sovereignty of the territories over to Rabat.
Muslims constitute approximately 30% of the Spanish troops stationed in Ceuta and Melilla, where the real unemployment rate tops 40%.

In July 2012 it emerged that the Spain's National Intelligence Center (CNI) was investigating a tip it received from the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that al-Qaeda operatives had infiltrated Spanish military unitsbased both in Ceuta and Melilla, territories the Algeria-based Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has long threatened to "reconquer" for Islam.
The alert resulted from an investigation initiated by the CIA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in November 2009, after the U.S. Army psychiatrist, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, an al-Qaeda sympathizer, fatally shot 13 people and injured more than 30 others at Fort Hood in Texas. The investigation found that at least 100 Islamic extremists had infiltrated the US military, and that some of these individuals had been in contact with Islamic radicals who had infiltrated military units in Spain, as well as in Britain, France and Germany.

According to Spanish media reports, CNI investigators began searching for Muslim soldiers with a "non-classic" profile: individuals who show no special identification with Islamic culture and even appear to be "Westernized," who drink alcohol, smoke and eat without respecting the restrictions imposed by the Koran, and who do not participate in religious services of the local Muslim community.
As a result of the investigation, the Spanish military has replaced dozens of Muslim soldiers with recruits from Latin America. The mass discharges—due to "lack of trust or dubious loyalty"—have only increased tensions with the local Muslim community, who have distributed thousands of leaflets denouncing the "persecution of Spanish soldiers of the Muslim faith."

Worries over possible infiltration of radical Salafism in the Spanish military has dated back to at least December 2006, when a police investigation named Operation Dune (Operación Duna) dismantled a Salafi cell that allegedly planned to carry out attacks using explosives stolen by Muslim soldiers in Ceuta. The raid, which involved more than 300 police, resulted in the arrest of 11 Salafists, including ten Spanish nationals, at least three of whom were serving in the Spanish Army.

Since then, Spanish police have conducted more than 20 other raids across Spain in an effort to dismantle Salafist cells.