Bias Argentine Media

MAIN STREAM MEDIA INFLUENCE IN ARGENTINA

It is interesting to see how mainstream print media is used to convey political massages in a subtle way, the common reader is most likely unable to detect.  

Take for example MercoPress and the Buenos Aires Herald, allegedly two, totally unconnected and independent media outlets, one being based in Buenos Aires and the other in Uruguay. Nevertheless both use the same topic and methodology to convey their political stance.

In the Buenos Aires Herald editorial dated the 12 October 2011, the editor in chief Carolina Barros and her team voice no doubt regarding the re – election of President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and thus encourages the opposition to stop wasting energy on gaining opposition votes, but instead challenge her to name the cabinet in order to supply important clues as to the policies the government intends to apply in the wake of the looming global eco – financial storm. Something the voters should have a right to know.    

Shortly after the Buenos Aires Herald editorial was published, MercoPress poster an article on its web portal which cited that according to an opinion poll taken by Poliarquia Consultancy, one of whose customers is La Nacion newspaper (know to lean towards the opposition), the majority of voters allegedly demand changes in the cabinet, (what a coincident, just as requested in the Buenos Aires Herald editorial!!) and the always media effective fight crime and insecurity issue. (see http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2011/07/election-time-equals-crime-time-on.html ).  An always welcome topic, the opposition tends to jump onto, in order to promise changes.

Since every one is certain that the current government of Argentina will win the upcoming elections the opposition has nothing to focus on, other than try and point voters towards public security issues and how the voters should question the future cabinet composition. 

The Buenos Aires Herald editorial then goes on with the usual mainstream media views on Eco – financial aspects which have been indoctrinated upon mainstream media by their corporate financiers who, needless to say, follow their own agenda in order to achieve certain objectives, one of them being to force Argentina to improve its relations with the USA in order to obtain international credits and rejoin the international financial markets. If Argentina would comply with such request it once again would step into the dept trap it has in recent past, when complying with the World and Inter American Development Banks and the IMF. Economies of developing countries, especially in Africa and Latin America, have endured decades of bitter experiences of falling into debt traps that sap productive resources, benefit speculative financiers and weaken state capacities to govern.

Despite Argentina’s ban from the international financial markets it sustained its economic growth for was and is not subject to international market fluctuations and professionals with  knowledge of macroeconomics and world affairs who intend to convince political and financial leaders of Latin American countries to accept massive "development loans" from the World Bank and USAID 

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_International_Development#Controversies_and_criticism) Once ensnared, the supplicants thus are subjected to pressure on different issues from Washington. Needless to say the fact that Argentina is doing rather well economically speaking, despite being not part of the international financial system does not suit the USA and its corporate entities in and outside the US as well as the European policy makers. Thus these entities use mainstream media to portray a bleak economic forecast for LATAM and Argentina in order to create uncertainty among common people as well as financial markets. 

See

http://en.mercopress.com/2011/10/14/fighting-crime-and-changes-in-the-cabinet-demand-argentine-voters-says-poll?utm_source=feed&utm_medium=rss&utm_content=argentina&utm_campaign=rss

http://www.poliarquia.com/

http://www.buenosairesherald.com/

EU Austerity

PERMANENT AUSTERITY - DEMOCRACY AT STAKE?

On the one hand EU governments implement austerity measures on society to tackle the finance crisis and on the other hand they have no scruple whatsoever to give 700 billion Euro of tax money to the banks without asking taxpayers, thus one has to assume that the entire system has a serious fault. 

Are conspiracy theorist right when they claim that the “New World Order” is imminent and that the EU dept crisis is a long-term strategic plan of the Paris Club, the IMF and the World Bank to justify austerity measures which in reality are an excuse to undermine democratic values and set the stage for the New World Order?    Maybe such theory is somewhat farfetched but if one looks closer at the recent developments surrounding the financial crisis and the response of governments and financial institutions of the “free world” one cannot avoid seriously questioning certain moves initiated by these governments and financial entities in order to undermine democratic values.      

The EU’s response to the economic crisis is setting member states on course towards a model of permanent austerity, including widespread attacks on social rights. To prevent any resistance, the model being put forward by the EU aims at minimizing or even totally getting rid of democratic interference.

(The European) 

see also: http://www.alternet.org/vision/152606/the_real_reason_why_police_cage_peaceful_protestors/

GEOPOLITICS Argentina

Argentina

NOT EVERYTHING IS SOY

The minute Soy prices fall, “economic experts” warn of a looming crisis in Argentina. Even if Soy prices fall, Soy may be the most prominent commodity but clearly not the sole one Argentina exports. (See http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2011/07/share-of-cake.html ). It seems that these so called experts humbly reiterate what they are told to say by commodity lobbyists.

Speculators and the stock exchange may alter commodity prices but this does not change the fact that CHINA and as well as the rest of the World still needs to be fed, thus export of food commodity will continue.   

LATAM CHINA AND EUROPE

When reading “corporate” US and EUROPEAN media one cannot avoid detecting a certain jealousy regarding LATAM (LATIN AMERICAS_ economic growth and increased economic ties between LATAM and ASIA, especially CHINA. Could it be that the EUROPEANS lacked foresight regarding CHINA and ASIA and now try to recover lost terrain? EUROPEAN – US entities such as the Paris Club, IMF and the World Bank don’t miss a chance to paint a bleak picture on LATAM and its economy in order to shake the fragile markets, where in reality the economic outlook is everything but bleak in these parts of the world.

TURKEY EYES AT LATAM 

  

In recent past TURKEY has become a major player on the world stage, both geopolitical as well as Geo- strategically and to some extent economically. TURKEYS far sight on current geopolitical developments are showcased once more as it wittily focuses on advantages it could gain from developing economic ties and defense agreements with BRAZIL. Both countries pledged to increase cooperation’s in the construction industry as well as natural resource extraction and last but not least the defense industry.  

Amidst the current global shake up, TURKEY and BRAZIL are among countries that continue growing and thus could even push the G-20 group to revise its economic policies. TURKEY and BRAZIL’S economic capacities could be utilized to expand relations and find options to ease the effects of the current worldwide economic situation.  

That TURKEY is flexing its muscle in the MIDDLE EAST is a fact and thus it comes as no surprise that the rift with its neighbor Iran is growing. As mentioned previously in my blog (http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2011/08/saudia-arabia-usa-turkey-versus-iran.html ), the new alignments between TURKEY, SAUDI ARABIA and the USA versus IRAN, SYRIA, RUSSIA and CHINA will cause for tens times in the region.  

See also:

http://www.crethiplethi.com/a-different-path-assessing-turkeys-foreign-policy-in-latin-america/islamic-countries/turkey/2011/

Food for Thought on Argentina

China, Argentina Using Economic Strategies Obama/U.S. Politicians Ignoring

Article by

Marc Chamot

Article published with the permission of the author
The original article appeared on www.examiner.com 

China, Argentina Using Economic Trade Advantages & Strategies Obama/U.S. Politicians Ignoring in the Name of Free Trades, Pro-Globalization & Wall Street Profits:

Bureau of Labor Statistics says fewer Americans are now employed. According to stats, around January 2001, 123.5 million non-farm employees were working.  

In January 2008, employment rose to 138 million, and now it’s at lower levels than what it was in 2001. As of July 2011, it’s at current levels of only 131.2 million Americans employed.

Unemployment more than doubled than what it was ten years ago. In January 2001, unemployment was at 6%, then on October 2009 it was at its highest 15.6% and now it’s down to 13.9%. So basically growth has stagnated and USA Today had a team of economic experts to outline what could be done about JOBS.

Every advice involved in the U.S.A Today article, was spending more money to stimulate the economy.

Such as, providing states billions more, mainly to states that keep spending money like there was no tomorrow. California has just demonstrated what they can do with taxpayer’s money they don’t have, like granting millions of dollars for undocumented’s education. No, that won’t work.

Advertisement

Add workers at a discount or tax credit. Yes, that could work. But unfortunately, the nation is losing more tax money with this plan.

Share jobs to save jobs. No, I can’t see anybody taking 20% cut, if they didn’t have to.

Lower corporate taxes, most don’t pay taxes as it is, look at the General Electric tax scandal, they didn’t pay a dime after tax deductions through tax code loopholes. So what more do they want?

Train the Jobless. That would work, but that costs money.

Cutting the Red Tape, ease down on carbon regulations and restrictive FEES. Maybe, but it isn’t the whole solution.

Actually what is going to work? There’s a track record and this can be repeated here. It is what I have been writing about for the past four years.

I appreciate the New York Times coverage on things. It’s dubbed a left-wing liberal newspaper, but to me, it’s valuable source for information and another great source for my opinions and here’s the New York Time’s SOLUTION that pro-globalists and free traders don’t want to admit to; “The Argentine government intervened to keep the value of its currency low, which boosts local industry by making Argentina’s exports cheaper abroad while keeping foreign imports expensive.

It then taxed those imports and exports, using the money to pay for a New Deal-like public works binge, increasing government spending to 25 percent of G.D.P. today from 14 percent in 2003. As a result, the country has 400,000 new low-income housing units, as well as a long-delayed, 235-mile highway between the northern cities of Rosario and Córdoba.

In Argentina unemployment has been cut to fewer than 8 percent today from over 20 percent in 2002, and the poverty level has fallen by almost half over the last decade.”

El gobierno argentino intervino para mantener el valor de su moneda baja, lo que impulsa la industria local por lo que las exportaciones de Argentina son más barato en el extranjero, manteniendo las importaciones extranjeras caro.

Luego se ajustan los impuestos a las importaciones y exportaciones, utilizando el dinero para pagar por un nuevo acuerdo como exceso de obras públicas, el aumento del gasto público al 25 por ciento del PIB hoy del 14 por ciento en 2003. Como resultado, el país cuenta con 400.000 nuevas viviendas de bajos ingresos, así como una retrasada autopista de 235 millas entre las ciudades del norte de Rosario y Córdoba.

En Argentina el desempleo se ha reducido a menos del 8 por ciento actual comparado con más del 20 por ciento en el 2002, y el nivel de pobreza se ha reducido casi a la mitad durante la última década ".

And that’s WHAT China is doing too, and that's why they are growing and were NOT. While were heading the opposite way, unlike the United States, imports is far cheaper and domestic products higher, and that’s KILLING our economic prosperities, advantages and JOBS for Americans.

Here’s more on expertly researched and expertly written and here comes one from Ian Mount’s inArgentina Turnaround Tango.  

“ARGENTINA may seem like one of the last countries on earth to offer lessons for dealing with economic malaise. 

Once the eighth-largest economy in the world, it steadily slid through the 20th century, thanks to decades of repressive dictatorships and inconsistent market experiments. 

This ended ignominiously in 2001, when it defaulted on $100 billion in sovereign debt, plunging over half its 35 million people into poverty.

That, at least, is the Argentina people know. Since then, it has performed an economic U-turn — an achievement largely unnoticed outside Latin America, but one that President Obama and Congress should look to for inspiration.

Argentina is not without problems, but its recent economic record speaks for itself: the economy has grown by over 6 percent a year for seven of the last eight years,unemployment has been cut to under 8 percent today from over 20 percent in 2002, and the poverty level has fallen by almost half over the last decade.

The streets of Buenos Aires are choked with cars as Argentines are on track to buy some 800,000 new vehicles this year; the wine mecca of Mendoza is full of high-end tasting rooms, hotels and restaurants offering regional haute cuisine; and plasma TVs and BlackBerrys have become household staples among the urban middle class.

Argentina has regained its prosperity partly out of dumb luck: a commodity price boom has vastly benefitted this soy, corn and wheat producer.

But it has also prospered thanks to smart economic measures. The government intervened to keep the value of its currency low, which boosts local industry by making Argentina’s exports cheaper abroad while keeping foreign imports expensive.

It then taxed those imports and exports, using the money to pay for a New Deal-like public works binge, increasing government spending to 25 percent of G.D.P. today from 14 percent in 2003. As a result, the country has 400,000 new low-income housing units, as well as a long-delayed, 235-mile highway between the northern cities of Rosario and Córdoba.

It has also strengthened its social safety net: the Universal Child Allowance, started in 2009 with support from both the ruling party and the opposition, gives 1.9 million low-income families a monthly stipend of about $42 per child, which helps increase consumption.

Because the amount depends in part on how often the child attends school, it is also likely to improve the country’s long-term educational performance. The results have also paid off politically: President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner recently won about 50 percent of the vote in an open primary against nine other presidential candidates.

Why have Argentines embraced bigger government? In part because the preceding era showed how poorly austerity measures — the sort now being pushed by conservatives in the United States — promote growth.

In the late 1990s, Argentina cut government spending drastically on the order of its lenders at the International Monetary Fund. Predictably, between 1998 and 2002, Argentina’s economy shrank by almost 20 percent. It was only after Argentina turned its back on these austerity demands, and defaulted on its debt, that it began to recover.”

Aquí hay más de experta investigación y escrito por expertos y aquí viene una de Ian Mount en  Tango Turnaround  en Argentina.

"ARGENTINA puede parecer uno de los últimos países en la tierra para ofrecer lecciones para tratar el malestar económico.

Una vez la octava economía más grande del mundo, que se deslizó a través del siglo 20, gracias a décadas de dictaduras represivas y experimentos inconsistentes mercado.

Esto terminó ignominiosamente en 2001, cuando dejo de pagar $ 100 billones en la deuda soberana, sumiendo a más de la mitad de sus 35 millones de personas en la pobreza.

Eso, al menos, es la Argentina que la gente conoce. Desde entonces, se ha realizado un cambio de sentido económico - un logro en gran medida inadvertido fuera de América Latina, pero que el presidente Obama y el Congreso deben mirar en busca de inspiración.

Argentina no está exenta de problemas, pero sus resultados económicos recientes hablan por sí mismos: la economía ha crecido en más del 6 por ciento al año durante siete de los últimos ocho años, el desempleo se ha reducido a menos del 8 por ciento actual de más de 20 por ciento en 2002, y el nivel de pobreza se ha reducido casi a la mitad durante la última década.

Las calles de Buenos Aires estan ahogadas por los coches, los argentinos están en vías de comprar unos 800.000 vehículos nuevos este año, la meca del vino de Mendoza está llena de locales de degustación de alta gama, hoteles y restaurantes de alta cocina regional, y televisores de plasma y los BlackBerry se han convertido en productos básicos del hogar, entre la clase media urbana.

Argentina ha recuperado su prosperidad en parte por cuestión de suerte: un auge de precios de las materias primas ha beneficiado enormemente a este productor de soja, maíz y trigo.

También ha reforzado su red de seguridad social: la asignación universal por hijo, que comenzó en 2009 con el apoyo tanto del partido gobernante y la oposición, da a 1.900.000 familias de bajos ingresos un estipendio mensual de alrededor de US $ 42 por niño, lo cual ayuda a incrementar el consumo.

Debido a que la cantidad depende en parte de la frecuencia con la que el niño asiste a la escuela, también es probable que mejore el país a largo plazo del rendimiento educativo. Los resultados también han dado sus frutos políticos: la presidenta Cristina Fernández de Kirchner ganó recientemente el 50 por ciento de los votos en una primaria abierta en contra de los nueve candidatos presidenciales.

¿Por qué tienen los argentinos abrazado un gobierno más grande? En parte debido a la época anterior demostró lo mal que las medidas de austeridad - del tipo que ahora son maniobradas por los conservadores en los Estados Unidos - promueven el crecimiento.

A finales de 1990, Argentina redujo drásticamente el gasto público en el orden de sus acreedores en el Fondo Monetario Internacional. Como era de esperar, entre 1998 y 2002, la economía de Argentina se redujo en casi un 20 por ciento. Fue sólo después que Argentina dio la espalda a estas demandas de austeridad, y de pagar su deuda, que comenzó a recuperarse ".

The bottom line folks, we have elected a whole bunch of politicians that have pro-global mindsets and they REFUSE to budge away from this type of thinking. They don’t care if it brings our nation to the brinks of ruin, and they will make sure foreign imports rule in U.S. markets.

That’s why in 2012, it is imperative we pursue more house cleaning in U.S. congress. Obama, Democrats, Republicans no matter who they are, they ALL NEED to go, they’ve done enough damage to our country.   

CORPORATOCRACY

SPREADING THE WORD  

One does not need to be an economist to see that LATIN AMERICAS economy is booming, much to the “dislike” of the IMF and WORLD BANK, especially when it comes to issues concerning ARGENTINA it seems. The reason of which is obvious.

After ARGENTINA’S default in 2001, which many argue was caused to a large extend by the IMF, ARGENTINA was austere from the world financial markets, which as it turns out was not so bad after all. First ARGENTINA took the bold initiative to pay back its dept with the IMF in order not to be hostage to their policies, thus giving them leverage on dealing with their crisis independently.  Being band from the international financial system and thanks to the commodity boom ARGENTINA could “freely maneuver” in “niche markets”, without needing to adhere to international financial doctrines.  Focusing on ASIA rather than the US also helped, despite its large trade volume with the USA.

Needles to say, this independence is something the USA and its “CORPORATOCRACY” (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy) are desperate to undermine, thus they do not miss a chance to use their influence to lobby to promote bias media coverage in order to spread bleak economic outlook for LATIN AMERICAN and its politics. Especially since most of LATIN AMERICA has shifted from US friendly governments to political independent ones.

SHARE OF THE COMMODITY CAKE 

Geo politically as well as strategically the current manipulative tactics by organizations such as the IMF and the WORLD BANK and governments of the developed world are of significance, because LATIN AMERICA is a major supplier of food commodities, natural resources and in the not too distant future also water commodities. 

(See http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2011/06/water-golden-commodity-of-future.html). 

Naturally the 1^st world are showing keen interest in the region and use all means in order to gain economic as well as political influence. (The latter of which is becomes increasingly difficult) World leading food producers such as the influential and controversial MONSANTO Corporation, CARGILL, to name but a few all have keen interest to obtain control over LATAM food commodities and subsequently governments in order to control world food markets and societies. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Criticism )

CORPORATOCRACY – ENRON - AZURIX SOUTHERN WATER PLUNGE  

Thus it becomes evident why for example WASHINGTON voted against loans for ARGENTINA from multilateral development banks. Allegedly the AZURIX Corporation, (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azurix ) which says ARGENTINA refuses to honor a ruling by the WORLD BANK arbitration tribunal to compensate it for prematurely eliminating a 30 year water concession during the countries devastating 2001 economic crisis, pressured WASHINGTON to take actions against ARGENTINA.

The visionary move by ARGENTINA, to reinstate government control over its water resources caused dismay among US corporations for they lost a lifetime opportunity in future investment, for those who control water will feed the world.  What further cause’s annoyance among US political as well corporate establishments is that the US loan hurdle will not affect ARGENTINES funding for 2012.

(See http://en.mercopress.com/2011/09/29/us-decision-to-vote-against-loans-for-argentina-will-not-affect-funding-for-2012?utm_source=feed&utm_medium=rss&utm_content=argentina&utm_campaign=rss )

Looking more closely at AZURIX it seems even more ludicrous that this company, which was part of the ENRON Corporation (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_Corporation, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal ) which filed for bankruptcy protection in 2001 amides one of the biggest and most complex bankruptcy cases in U.S. history due to mismanagement, demands of ARGENTINA to honor a deal set up during the pressure of financial collapse (also in 2001) which would have benefited AZURIX to a great extend and control basically ARGENTINES water resources, making  ARGENTINA totally dependent on a foreign entity.  

“PSY OPS” 

In military term one refers to PSY OPS (Psychological Operations) when deliberately spreading misinformation in order to gain strategic advantages. In today’s global eco-political stage, governments which are facing stagnating economic growth use similar tactics by spreading negative economic outlooks on countries that do not fit within their strategic agenda or are dogging conservative economic and financial doctrines imposed upon them by the so called developed world. This has been the case in recent past regarding LATAM, particularly BRAZIL and ARGENTINA, whose economies are thriving.

(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_%28United_States%29 ) 

Thus the IMF and the WORD BANK periodically keep spreading word through its loyal media outlets such as THE ECONOMIST, on the dangers of BRAZILS and ARGENTINES Economies overheating, being fully aware that such comments cause turmoil in the markets. What apparently plays into ARGENTINA’S favor is its ban from the international financial market, much to the discontent of the developed world, because it seems that this helps the county to avoid the casino finance vultures homing in on its markets. Thus the country can grow economically without worrying about economic market trends.   (See http://en.mercopress.com/2011/09/23/argentine-central-bank-dismisses-imf-warning-on-risk-of-overheating-economies )

The problem is that those countries who themselves face financial turmoil and are at the brink of default try to dictate financial and economic terms to emerging markets without realizing that the geopolitical landscape is shifting. When the WORLD BANK tries to impose financial terms and conditions on ARGENTINA one should not forget that such moves are politically motivated. The UK for example is a major shareholder of the WORLD BANK as is the US, thus the UK as well as the USA use their influence within the WORLD BANK, IMF and the PARIS CLUB to achieve their geo strategic objective. A recent example is BRITAIN’S oil exploration near the MALVINAS Islands (FALKLAND Islands), which prompted a “war of words” between ARGENTINA and BRITAIN, the latter of which went to war over the islands dispute in 1982.

(See:  http://en.mercopress.com/2011/09/29/why-support-argentina-financially-when-the-country-threatens-falklands )

LOOKING EAST,…….. A BLESSING OR CURSE?

The fact that LATAM is increasing its trade with China is not well seen by the World Bank as it threatens to undermine economic doctrines developed by the World Bank, IMF and the Paris Club (all 3 entities are predominantly under control of the USA and Europe ) in order to control the markets. Thus the World Bank was quick to voice its concerns over LATAM relying too much on trade with China and that this strategy could backfire. 

The office of the Chief Economist for the Latin America and Caribbean Region of the World Bank indicated it its SEMIANNUAL REPORT that the LAC (Latin American and Caribbean) region has made tremendous advances in the last 10 years and that sovereign debt default risk of several LATAM counties, including CHILE, COLOMBIA and PERU is lower than that of FRANCE. Needless to say CHILE COLOMBIA and to some extend PERU have close eco - political ties with the USA, thus it is clear why the report left out BRAZIL and URUGUAY.  

The report warns that the “CHINA CONNECTION” must be monitored sharply for though it has nurtured rapid growth, the partnership also has the potential to collapse.  What the report neglects however is the fact that the world population will always be in need of food and thus countries with vast amount of food commodities and other natural resource will most likely continue to grow economically. 

"There is little evidence that CHINA can play a role in fostering productivity growth for LATIN AMERICA," the WORLD BANK'S chief economist for the region, Augusto DE LA TORRE, stated in a press conference.

Now why would he make this comment? Is it genuine or politically motivated? Don’t forget that the WORLD BANK is de facto run by the USA, UK and EUROPEAN entities, all of which are struggling with their financial crisis and stagnating economy.

 DE LA TORRE further cited that "In the context of the lackluster economic performance in the U.S. and EUROPE, the key question is whether LAC can leverage its connection with CHINA and turn it into an [independent] source of long-term growth."

In my opinion, and for reasons I mentioned in numerous articles on this blog, LATAM will be able to turn into a source of long-term growth, provided it does not solely focus on CHINA but includes other countries in the FAR EAST. Despite the complex structure of today’s economy and close ties to politics one should not only rely on casino financial market indicators but also on common senses and logic. 

Interesting reading:

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-san-francisco/china-argentina-using-economical-strategies-obama-u-s-politicians-ignoring

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Have you ever thought why no mainstream media reports on the "Occupy Wall Street" protests, which is in its 6th day ?????

Updated 27 September 2011  

with a link to
http://rt.com/news/wall-street-protest-arrests-331/

which confirms my question

PALESTINE

Telling The UN Six Home Truths
Article by David Singer, Analyst for "International Analyst Network".
Article Republished with the permission of the Author.  ISRAEL’S Prime Minister - BENJAMIN NETANYAHU - has announced his intention to address the UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY in NEW YORK this week in connection with the proposed application by the PLO for recognition of a PALESTINIAN ARAB STATE along the 1949 armistice lines. The terms of the proposed resolution remain a closely guarded secret. There still appears to be disagreement between PALESTINIAN ARAB leaders as to its final terms. However notwithstanding such uncertainty Mr. NETANYAHU announced at a press conference with visiting CZECH Prime Minister PETR NEČAS, that he will at the UNITED NATIONS         "Speak the truth to those who want to hear it" There are at least six basic truths that need to be conveyed to the delegates of the 193 member states present who are charged with voting on any proposed resolution: 1.    Mr. NETANYAHU needs to repeat the following statement he made to the UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY on 11 December 1984 :      “Clearly, in EASTERN and WESTERN PALESTINE, there are only two peoples, the ARABS and the JEWS. Just as clearly, there are only two states in that area, JORDAN and ISRAEL. The ARAB STATE of JORDAN, containing some three million ARABS, does not allow a single JEW to live there. It also contains 4/5 of the territory originally allocated by this body’s predecessor, the League of Nations, for the JEWISH NATIONAL Home. The other State, ISRAEL, has a population of over four million, of which one sixth is ARAB. It contains less than 1/5 of the territory originally allocated to the Jews under the Mandate…. It cannot be said, therefore, that the Arabs of PALESTINE are lacking a state of their own. The demand for a second PALESTINIAN ARAB State in WESTERN PALESTINE, and a 22ND ARAB STATE in the world, is merely the latest attempt to push ISRAEL back into the hopelessly vulnerable armistice lines of 1949.” This still remains the strategy behind the current PLO application to the UN. The PALESTINIAN ARABS could have had their State in more than 90% of the territory situated within the 1949 armistice lines had they accepted either of the offers made by ISRAEL in 2001 or 2008. They want 100% to deny ISRAEL the security it needs - as was  recognized by the UN in Resolution 242 This message needs to be repeated - especially for the 34 member States who were not members of the UN when Mr. NETANYAHU made this speech. 2.    The view often expressed in the UN that JEWISH settlements in the WEST BANK are illegal in international law ignores the fact that close settlement by Jews on West Bank land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes was to be encouraged and is legally sanctioned by the Treaty of Sevres, article 6 of the Mandate for PALESTINE and article 80 of the UN Charter. Denying this vested legal right by unilaterally passing a resolution that seeks to negate the exercise of that right breaches article 80 of the UN Charter and is a denial of natural justice. 3.     Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 are the only legally enforceable resolutions of the UNITED NATIONS binding on all parties to the JEWISH- ARAB conflict. These resolutions call for secure and recognized boundaries to be determined by the parties to the conflict. This can only be done in negotiations and not imposed unilaterally by any decision of either the General Assembly or the Security Council unless both Resolutions are repealed or amended. To do otherwise will bring the UNITED NATIONS into disrepute, cause it to lose its authority and render its future rulings and decisions without force or effect. 4.    The 1947 UN Partition Plan called for the establishment of a JEWISH STATE and an ARAB STATE in the balance of the area of the BRITISH MANDATE still controlled by GREAT BRITAIN in 1947 - after 77% of the Mandated territory had been granted independence by GREAT BRITAIN in 1946 as an exclusively ARAB state and was renamed the HASHEMITE KINGDOM of TRANSJORDAN. The ARAB rejection of the UN partition proposal and the failure by the ARABS to create such a State between 1947-1967 must require the General Assembly to stipulate that recognition of any ARAB state in 2011 is conditional upon recognition of ISRAEL as the JEWISH state in the balance of the land contained in the 1947 Partition Plan. 5.    The PLO Charter - article 2  - declares that PALESTINE within the boundaries it had during the BRITISH MANDATE is one indivisible territorial unit.  Until this clause is unequivocally and irrevocably deleted  from the Charter - the UN should not consider any application for recognition made by the PLO. 6,    The MONTEVIDEO CONVENTION 1933 prevents any consideration of the current application - since the proposed state does not fulfill the requirements of the Convention setting out the conditions for a State to possess before it can make a declaration of statehood and then seek to be recognized.  The UN should be seeking to enforce international law not subvert it. The UN has learned from bitter experience in 1947 what can happen when the General Assembly proposes a solution to the JEWISH-ARAB conflict which one party accepts and  the other party rejects. Hopefully history will not be repeated in 2011. This will depend to a great degree on the final wording of any resolution. If it is not acceptable to both parties then violence and bloodshed is sure to follow. The UN really needs to decide whether international law or the law of the jungle is to prevail. Mr. NETANYAHU said in his press conference that the General Assembly is not "the place where Israel generally gets a reasonable hearing," but it was nonetheless important to present ISRAEL'S position. The real question is - will anyone be listening or have they already made up their minds?

Middle East Energy Wars