AUSTRIA AND THE RISE OF THE RIGHT

THE RISE OF THE RIGHT IN AUSTRIA COULD BE A POLITICAL TIPPING POINT

On October 2nd, a presidential election in AUSTRIA could mark the tipping point of changing political tides in EUROPE and usher in a cycle of right-wing politics.

Recently, AUSTRIA’S Constitutional Court ruled that the results of May’s presidential runoff election were overturned. The Court referred to irregularities in vote counting, which necessitated a re-run. With immigration quickly becoming one of the most important issues for EUROPEAN states, this election could set the precedent for upcoming elections in EUROPE.

Having previously lost by a mere 0.6 percent, NORBERT HOFER of the far right Freedom Party (FPO) stands a good chance of becoming the first far-right head of state in the EUROPEAN UNION. What to expect from a Western democracy led by a far-right president in the 21st century?

DEMOCRACY ENABLES THE RISE OF THE RIGHT

While the recent BREXIT was a clear example of a right-wing outcome to a democratic election, the upcoming AUSTRIAN election may be the tipping point towards a EUROPEAN rightist era.

Politics run in cycles, and the previous cycle of left-leaning governments in EUROPE and the AMERICAS appear to be coming to an end.

Fears of immigration, underperforming economies, and a growing sense of disillusion with international governmental organizations is taking hold. With national elections scheduled throughout this year and the next, the political scene may begin to portray new priorities among the populaces.

This will not be a top-down hostile take-over by right-wing party leaders. As Brexit showed, the push came from an active voter bloc. The same will hold true for AUSTRIA’S election in October.

The Constitutional Court’s decision to hold a repeat of the presidential election is widely regarded as the right decision from a legal point of view. This type of repeat election is unprecedented in WESTERN democracies, but when the court found that 14 out of 20 of the constituencies under investigation had irregularities in vote-counting, it was clear that the results of the May election were compromised. The fact that the election was decided by 30,863 votes demonstrates that any claim of vote irregularities had to be taken seriously by the court, or risk allowing a failure of democracy.

The Constitutional Court did its duty by calling for a repeat election, even as it assured AUSTRIA another round of contested presidential elections. Democracy, it can be said, was served as the judicial branch of government worked to guarantee a third opportunity for the AUSTRIAN people to be heard.

While many observers worry that this third round will favor Mr. HOFER, it is difficult to say that this advantage was won in an undemocratic manner. As BREXIT shows, while the result may not be what was expected or favored, it is what the voters wanted. The tides are turning in EUROPE, and that is all a supporter of democracy today may ask for.

WILL THE FAR-RIGHT DAMAGE DEMOCRACY?

Serious concerns exist that far-right politicians elected to positions of leadership will damage the democratic institutions, which brought them to power. This would run counter to claims that democracy begets more democracy, but it is not unprecedented.

In EUROPE, a safety net exists in the high level of interconnection among states. There is a general sense that should a government step too far, the EUROPEAN UNION will intercede at some point. This can be seen in POLAND currently, and this is likely to continue should a far-right party come to power in any EUROPEAN state. While by no means a guarantee, it is probable that the election of a far-right leader would not lead to a decrease in democratic freedoms among the populace, due to this safety net.

Domestic politics are increasingly important as globalization brings the world closer together. AUSTRIA’S upcoming election, no matter the outcome, will be projected onto future elections, particularly the US presidential election in November. The growing trend towards right-wing policies may be a temporary blip on the political radar, or it may be the beginning of a new political cycle.

BREXIT REFERENDUM IS NON-BINDING

Photo: Global Research

UK PARLIAMENT NOT VOTERS HAS FINAL SAY

Prime Minister CAMERON has announced his resignation effective in October, a new Conservative Prime minister is to appointed following the Conservative Party conference.

Among the contenders for the Conservative Party leadership are former London Mayor BORIS JOHNSON and Justice Secretary MICHAEL GOVE, both of whom were firm supporters of the BREXIT campaign. Home Secretary THERESA MAY is also a potential contender.

The implementation of BREXIT is in part dependent upon the new leadership of the Conservative Party. There are divisions in both Conservative and opposition parties with regard to BREXIT.

At this stage, there is, however, no assurance that the Brexit proposal will be ratified by Parliament.

Moreover, CAMERON’S decision to resign in October contributes to delaying the process.

EXAGGERATED TURMOIL REGARDING BREXIT

All the fuss and bother about BREXIT largely ignores its non-binding status – parliament, not voters deciding if BRITAIN stays or leaves the EU, the latter extremely unlikely.

Writing in the Financial Times, BRITISH lawyer DAVID ALLEN GREEN explained BREXIT voting is “advisory,” not “mandatory.” Parliament has final say.

MPs can legally disregard the public’s will either way, they alone empowered to decide the path BRITAIN chooses.

What happens ahead is “a matter of politics not law. It will come down to what is politically expedient and practicable,” said GREEN.

Various options exist, including supporting Thursday’s outcome, ignoring it, or “re-negotiating another deal and put (ting) that to another referendum” – repeating the process “until voters eventually vote the ‘right’ way,” what’s best for monied interests, not them.

Invoking Article 50 of the LISBON Treaty is another matter entirely, legally binding, unlike Thursday’s vote. It states as follows:

“1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the EUROPEAN Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the EUROPEAN Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.

That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EUROPEAN UNION. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the EUROPEAN Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the EUROPEAN Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the EUROPEAN Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the EUROPEAN Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EUROPEAN UNION.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.”

POLITICS ALONE WILL DRIVE WHAT HAPPENS AHEAD, NOT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE

GREEN highlighted key points. Member states can choose how to vote on withdrawal – by referendum, parliament or other means.

The withdrawal process begins with formal notification. Once “given, the member state and the EU are stuck with it.”

Member states wishing to withdraw have up to two years maximum to complete the process “unless this period is extended by unanimous agreement.”

Once withdrawal intentions are announced and initiated, there’s no going back. At the same time, what’s “created by international agreement can be undone” the same way.

BRUSSELS could “come up with some muddling fudge which holds off the two year deadline,” or a new treaty amendment could be adopted.

Politics alone will drive what happens ahead, not the will of the people. BRITAIN is no more democratic than AMERICA – nor are any other EU countries.

Special interests decide things. Whatever they want they get. However voting turns out, government policy “is to remain in the EU,” said GREEN.

Leaving would require Prime Minister DAVID CAMERON invoking Article 50, unlikely given his vocal opposition to BREXIT.

By Stephen Lendman via Global Research

THE ARGENTINE ELECTION DILEMMA

ARGENTINA REVISITED –THREE MONTH ON

ARGENTINA – a new dictator is born. Actually no, he has just been elected. – Or, was he? – It appears like the newly elected MAURICIO MACRI is the most fascist and dictatorial President since the VIDELA military era. 

Unlike VIDELA, MACRI hasn’t murdered people (yet); not by traditional weapons, but may do so by economic strangulation – the weapon of choice of neoliberalism.

At a young age, MACRI, now a multi-billionaire has had dealings with DONALD TRUMP, the Republican front runner for the US Presidency. That, of course, doesn’t make him a ‘bad guy’. But it does characterize him as someone who would rather turn favors to the rich than to the needy. That should rather be telling for the ARGENTINIANS, who elected him – or did they?

REPRESSION BACK ON TRACK

Since day one, MAURICIO MACRI has started repressive socio-economic measures – when he let the peso float on the day of his inauguration on 10 December 2015. It devalued by about 50%, then recovered somewhat. The bottom line is, though, the people at large will suffer purchasing power losses, so that dollar investments may flood the country – as he says and hopes – to privatize once more ARGENTINA’S economy to foreign investors. It’s all so reminiscent of the MENEM years. – And the ARGENTINIANS elected him – did they really?

At the time of writing this article at least 12,000 state employees in BUENOS AIRES were dismissed, starting the New Year with unemployment – no individual warnings; the contracts of another 62,000 government employees country-wide since then have been examined – and were since terminated. Many of them may have voted for him — really?

Millions of people took to the streets throughout the plazas of the major cities in ARGENTINA recently, demanding social justice, like freedom of expression and the right of work – and for most the respect for human rights – and defending democracy over the dictatorial rule of a right wing demagogue.

What justice? – Macri by decree decided that Supreme Court judges he appointed did not need the Senate’s approval, as the country’s Constitution prescribes. Within the first 72 hours of MACRI’S ascent to power, he issued 29 Presidential Decrees, so as to impose his program without parliamentary approval. And that’s the way he will rule, at least the first 100 days; a neo-fascist dictator par excellence.

MACRI’S other upsetting controversy was –the removal of the Presidential painting of President KIRCHNER from the walls of the Casa Rosada, the Presidential Mansion.

And why are ARGENTINIANS so upset and even outraged? – After all MACRI told them in advance what he would do when becoming President, things so outrageous, nobody probably believed him. Not unlike most Presidents who forget their campaign promises once elected – MACRI actually carries them through – and he has just started. There is a long list of measures he intends to take – all of them against the well-being of the majority of the people, but in favour of Big Business, in favour of his northern allies in WASHINGTON, those who helped him to power.

THE MEASURES MACRI ‘PROMISED’ HE WOULD CARRY OUT INCLUDE:

Negotiate with the Vulture Funds, as well as renegotiate ARGENTINA’S debt with the IMF. This is reopening a bloody scar, as the KIRCHNER Governments had successfully negotiated and agreed with 97% of the creditors to debt payments on average of about 25 cents to the dollar. Payments are being made on schedule.

Among the 3% who didn’t agree were the Vulture Funds, managed by the vulture fund billionaire PAUL SINGER. SINGER wants it all.

Having bought ARGENTINA’S debt on the cheap – very cheap – he followed ARGENTINA’S last fifteen years of recovery and accumulation of reserves and ‘bought’ a NEW YORK judge to intervene in ARGENTINA’S sovereign affairs, ordering THE SOUTH AMERICAN country to pay Mr. vulture SINGER in full.

This aberration was overruled by last year’s UN General Assembly adopting overwhelmingly a new global framework for sovereign debt restructuring, in favour of nations’ rights to seek protection from minority creditors, such as the US SINGER hedge funds, which refuse to go along with the majority in mutually agreed debt restructurings. Despite this ruling, MACRI intends to renegotiate and possibly give away some of the people’s hard-earned reserves to greedy US vulture funds. – Bravo! – And ARGENTINIANS elected him – hard to believe; did they really?

Substantially increasing gas and electricity tariffs – already started.

Repeal the Memorandum of Agreement with IRAN regarding the investigation and the Truth Commission in the case of AMIA; the car bomb attack on the Asosiacion Mutual Iraelita Argentina which caused the death of 85 people in July 1994. Prosecutor  NIESMAN, in charge of the investigation appeared dead in his apartment a few hours before he was to disclose his findings in an ARGENTINE Court. According to Wikileaks the investigation was directed by WASHINGTON.

Closing down Public TV Stations 6, 7 and 8 which had the tendency to be critical of Government politics.

Removing the Attorney General, whose function according to the Constitution is sustained as long as it is carried out according to the norms of the law – which according to all records it is. MACRI wants to replace her by one of his cronies.

Restructuring the Central Bank – replacing the current President, whom MACRI reproaches of being a KIRCHNERITE – and replacing him with one of his buddies; and this despite the fact that the Charter of the Central Bank allows removal of its President only for serious professional or ethical infractions – none of which is the case with the current President of the Central Bank.

ARGENTINE'S CLASS STRUGGLE

Increasing taxes for the lowest income earners ‘in the name of justice’.

These are just a few of the measures he announced – and people either didn’t listen, or didn’t believe him. ARGENTINIANS voted for MAURICIO MACRI – or did they? – With a slim margin of about 3% over his center-left opponent, DANIEL SCIOLI; a slim margin but enough not to justify a recount. Why would the majority of people vote for a candidate who told them in so many words that he would undo what the previous KIRCHNER Governments have done for them?

ARE ARGENTINES MASOCHISTS?

Then there are the so-called progressive ARGENTINIAN economists who argue about an ardent class struggle between the entrepreneurs who have been short-changed during the KIRCHNER years and the average working citizen. What a baloney! – What class struggle – when 80% of the people benefitted from the KIRCHNERS’ social programs and highly distributive GDP growth? – Would they vote as masochists for the neoliberal, neo-colonial multi-billionaire MAURICIO MACRI – who said he would undo many of these social gains?

ELECTION COUP – TARGET LATIN AMERICA

This would indeed be strange. Just open your eyes and the crimes of WASHINGTON’S secret hand will be revealed; the ‘invisible’ hand which once again – and again – has carried out what ARGENTINA journalist ESTELA CALLONI calls an ‘election coup’.

Comment by Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring :

ARGENTINES elections were won because the largest ARGENTINE Media Conglobate, the CLARIN Group (The group is associated with GOLDMAN SACHS)  in association with the “WASHINGTON CONSENSUS” – Financial Institutions and leading Hedge Funds owner PAUL SINGER   funded MACRI’S presidential campaign in order to push through their eco – political agenda in ARGENTINA.

Background Information:  MACRI’S CONNECTION TO THE CLARIN GROUP

read related articles at: 

CLARIN SPONSORS MACRI

MAIN STREAM MEDIA INFLUENCE INARGENTINA

MAURICIO MACRI AND THE CLARIN GROUP

Not to forget the ones in EASTERN EUROPE and CENTRAL ASIA, called ‘Color Revolutions’, of which the most notorious one, the fascist coup in UKRAINE, has already left tens of thousands dead and denigrated millions into homelessness and hapless refugees – or in the MIDDLE EAST and NORTH AFRICA – the infamous ‘Arab Springs’ – not to forget, IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, LIBYA, SYRIA, SOMALIA, YEMEN – all of them causing millions of deaths and social victims of wars of injustice, so-called ‘refugees’; many of the conflicts turning into endless wars against western-invented and western fabricated and spread ‘terror’.

Only time will tell what’s in store for ARGENTINA and the rest of what we proudly called the ‘free’ LATIN AMERICA – now gradually turning into what it was for most of the 20th Century – WASHINGTON’S Backyard.

Adapted by Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring from the article originally written by Peter Koenig via Information Clearing House