theduran--2020-02-10--Coronavirus is becoming a western excuse for sinophobia

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Lucas Leiroz , Research Fellow in International Law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro… Coronavirus is , undoubtedly , one of the greatest epidemic tragedies of our times .
Hundreds of dead people and thousands of ill ones are the proof of it .
For any person with good faith and interested in the well-being of people , it is a reason of preoccupation and compassion towards the victims .
However , this good intention with people does not seem to be observed in some western countries .
The misinformation transmitted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a big confusion , making them think that every Chinese is infected by the mortal virus , which is creating a great wave of hate against everyone and everything that belongs to China .
Clearly , this epidemic is being used by western potencies as a mean of hybrid war .
As while the virus causes more victims , sinophobic sentiments grow up all around the world .
In Asian countries , an anti-Chinese racism is becoming stronger day after day , as we can see in Japan , where the Twitter hashtag @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the top Internet trends .
Also , in Vietnam , Hong Kong – which , remembering , is a part of China – and South Korea , private corporations are sharing anti-China propaganda , saying that Chinese clients are not welcome there .
In Europe – a continent that claims Humans Rights , political correctness and democracy as supreme values – hate against China can also be witnessed , as we see , for example , in France , where journals are spreading lies about China and coronavirus , helping to create the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Also , in Britain , The Herald Sun published an issue with the infamous headline “ Chinese Virus Pand-monium ” , and , in Germany , Der Spiegel published an issue with “ Coronavirus .
Made in China ” as title .
In the American continent , the same anti-China racist sentiments are being fomented by media .
In a Canadian school in Toronto , children who visited China were impeded to go to the school by the students ’ furious families .
In Brazil , a young student who is descendent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an elder woman who confused her with a Chinese .
During the racist criminal attack , the girl was publicly compared with pork in Rio de Janeiro ’ s metro .
Clearly , there is another epidemic problem in Chinese horizon that is the use of fake news and misinformation as instruments to foment hate against China , growing a scenario of racist aggressions towards Chinese people , culture , customs , traditions and politics .
It is also a case of hybrid war , or , in other terms , a living @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used in warfare .
As an example of misinformation being shared irrationally in social networks to attack China , we have messages with pictures and videos that were supposedly took in China , showing some scenarios that seem shocking to non-Chinese people , as the eating of dog , cat , snake and bat meat .
There is a myth circulating in the West that the consumption of these animals is absolutely common in China , being their meat easily found as food anywhere , which is , of course , a big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are also rarely consumed in China .
Dog and cat meat eating is a practice in extinction , being currently restricted to a few rural districts .
Also , these other animals ’ meat sound also exotic to any common Chinese person .
The major part of the pictures and videos shared in Internet were not took in China , but in other Asian countries , where it is possible to find bat , snake and dog or cat meat more easily .
It is necessary to pay attention on the fact that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but a well-organized project .
There are several interests in creating a global atmosphere of hate against China , as well as against every country that fights for a multipolar world .
Xenophobe is , at least in this case , not a personal repulsive sentiment , but a weapon – a very dangerous one .
Above all , we can see how the western potencies act maliciously in sense to cause damage to every country that represents a “ threat ” to US hegemonic plans .
China , becoming the greatest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear to the western axis .
Cowardly , the enemies of China react spreading lies and fomenting hate .
In contrary , China must act against these attacks with the same energy that is being used against coronavirus just because both are real threats and questions of national security .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Lucas Leiroz, Research Fellow in International Law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro…
Coronavirus is, undoubtedly, one of the greatest epidemic tragedies of our times. Hundreds of dead people and thousands of ill ones are the proof of it. For any person with good faith and interested in the well-being of people, it is a reason of preoccupation and compassion towards the victims. However, this good intention with people does not seem to be observed in some western countries.
The misinformation transmitted by western media is causing in common people a big confusion, making them think that every Chinese is infected by the mortal virus, which is creating a great wave of hate against everyone and everything that belongs to China. Clearly, this epidemic is being used by western potencies as a mean of hybrid war.
As while the virus causes more victims, sinophobic sentiments grow up all around the world. In Asian countries, an anti-Chinese racism is becoming stronger day after day, as we can see in Japan, where the Twitter hashtag “#ChineseDontComeToJapan” is one of the top Internet trends. Also, in Vietnam, Hong Kong – which, remembering, is a part of China – and South Korea, private corporations are sharing anti-China propaganda, saying that Chinese clients are not welcome there.
In Europe – a continent that claims Humans Rights, political correctness and democracy as supreme values – hate against China can also be witnessed, as we see, for example, in France, where journals are spreading lies about China and coronavirus, helping to create the myth of a “yellow threat”. Also, in Britain, The Herald Sun published an issue with the infamous headline “Chinese Virus Pand-monium”, and, in Germany, Der Spiegel published an issue with “Coronavirus. Made in China” as title.
In the American continent, the same anti-China racist sentiments are being fomented by media. In a Canadian school in Toronto, children who visited China were impeded to go to the school by the students’ furious families. In Brazil, a young student who is descendent of a Japanese family was insulted by an elder woman who confused her with a Chinese. During the racist criminal attack, the girl was publicly compared with pork in Rio de Janeiro’s metro.
Clearly, there is another epidemic problem in Chinese horizon that is the use of fake news and misinformation as instruments to foment hate against China, growing a scenario of racist aggressions towards Chinese people, culture, customs, traditions and politics. It is also a case of hybrid war, or, in other terms, a living proof that non-military means can also be used in warfare.
As an example of misinformation being shared irrationally in social networks to attack China, we have messages with pictures and videos that were supposedly took in China, showing some scenarios that seem shocking to non-Chinese people, as the eating of dog, cat, snake and bat meat. There is a myth circulating in the West that the consumption of these animals is absolutely common in China, being their meat easily found as food anywhere, which is, of course, a big and malicious lie.
These exotic animals are also rarely consumed in China. Dog and cat meat eating is a practice in extinction, being currently restricted to a few rural districts. Also, these other animals’ meat sound also exotic to any common Chinese person. The major part of the pictures and videos shared in Internet were not took in China, but in other Asian countries, where it is possible to find bat, snake and dog or cat meat more easily.
It is necessary to pay attention on the fact that spreading these lies is no an accident, but a well-organized project. There are several interests in creating a global atmosphere of hate against China, as well as against every country that fights for a multipolar world. Xenophobe is, at least in this case, not a personal repulsive sentiment, but a weapon – a very dangerous one.
Above all, we can see how the western potencies act maliciously in sense to cause damage to every country that represents a “threat” to US hegemonic plans. China, becoming the greatest world potency, is a reason of fear to the western axis. Cowardly, the enemies of China react spreading lies and fomenting hate. In contrary, China must act against these attacks with the same energy that is being used against coronavirus just because both are real threats and questions of national security.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-10--Et tu, Bolton? The White House insider behind impeachment hoax (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss a CNN report that claims the low level DC bureaucrats involved in the Trump impeachment hoax ( who have now had their careers destroyed ) are pointing the finger at neocon John Bolton , as being the man pulling the strings throughout the failed impeachment attempt against US President Donald Trump .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
The diplomats and officials who provided testimony about the Trump administration ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what lies ahead , and angry with John Bolton for what they see as him “ cashing in ” on his knowledge , dangling vital national security information in exchange for a lucrative book deal .
Three former officials contrasted their public testimony to the behavior of officials like former national security adviser John Bolton , “ who has monetized a national crisis , parlaying critical insider knowledge about the President ’ s dealings into a multi-million-dollar book deal even as he avoided testifying publicly , ” reported CNN .
Bolton is “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said one official , “ dangling the fact that he knows details about Trump ’ s actions that have not yet been revealed.
” The former national security advisor wants to have a continued career in the national-security sector after parting ways with the Trump administration , sources say .
Bolton ’ s dance earned him ferocious criticism from officials who put their careers on the line in order to testify before the House , CNN reports .
Despite saying that he would be willing to provide testimony for the Senate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment proceedings .
Through an attorney , he resisted a House subpoena , requesting clarification from the courts .
The House eventually dropped that subpoena , and Bolton is walking away from the impeachment crisis unscathed .
“ Great .
So our lives are ruined , our names dragged through the mud , but [ Bolton ] gets to wash his hands of it , ” said one official .
The witnesses also expressed disappointment in lawmakers , who will be able to return to their respective careers , and partisan corners , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One House impeachment witness summed up their experience by pointing to “ all the carnage for something that doesn ’ t mean very much.
” CNN interviewed about half of the 17 witnesses that testified in the House trial .
Although they ’ ve testified publicly , they requested anonymity due to concerns about their diplomatic careers .
Many described their frustration with a dysfunctional Congress .
“ Republicans think Democrats are a threat to the nation , and the Democrats think the Republicans are a threat to the nation , ” a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Right now , we think the threat that we face is each other.
” Multiple sources voiced their frustration at both sides of the aisle — wishing that the Democrats had developed a stronger case and that Republicans had more seriously looked at the actions Trump had taken .
The officials CNN interviewed said they have so far “ not faced backlash , apart from criticism from Trump , ” and that they have mostly received praise from colleagues .
Officials said they “ have gotten pats on the back in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never met , and notes from former ambassadors commending their integrity , ” according to CNN .
Whether Trump will come after these officials in the future remains to be seen , but so far , he has not .
One official said they don ’ t think Secretary of State Mike Pompeo or others at State “ want to go after us.
” Bolton may end up back in the hot seat sooner than later , as House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler , D-N.Y. , said he expects the House “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security adviser , even after Wednesday ’ s acquittal of Trump in the Senate impeachment trial .
According to reports , Bolton ’ s book manuscript describes how Trump told him he was withholding aid to Ukraine until the Ukrainian government began investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s son , Hunter .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss a CNN report that claims the low level DC bureaucrats involved in the Trump impeachment hoax (who have now had their careers destroyed) are pointing the finger at neocon John Bolton, as being the man pulling the strings throughout the failed impeachment attempt against US President Donald Trump.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via The American Conservative…
The diplomats and officials who provided testimony about the Trump administration’s dealings with Ukraine are anxious about what lies ahead, and angry with John Bolton for what they see as him “cashing in” on his knowledge, dangling vital national security information in exchange for a lucrative book deal.
Three former officials contrasted their public testimony to the behavior of officials like former national security adviser John Bolton, “who has monetized a national crisis, parlaying critical insider knowledge about the President’s dealings into a multi-million-dollar book deal even as he avoided testifying publicly,” reported CNN.
Bolton is “trying to have it both ways,” said one official, “dangling the fact that he knows details about Trump’s actions that have not yet been revealed.”
The former national security advisor wants to have a continued career in the national-security sector after parting ways with the Trump administration, sources say.
Bolton’s dance earned him ferocious criticism from officials who put their careers on the line in order to testify before the House, CNN reports.
Despite saying that he would be willing to provide testimony for the Senate, Bolton did not provide testimony in the impeachment proceedings. Through an attorney, he resisted a House subpoena, requesting clarification from the courts. The House eventually dropped that subpoena, and Bolton is walking away from the impeachment crisis unscathed.
“Great. So our lives are ruined, our names dragged through the mud, but [Bolton] gets to wash his hands of it,” said one official.
The witnesses also expressed disappointment in lawmakers, who will be able to return to their respective careers, and partisan corners, now that the trial is over.
One House impeachment witness summed up their experience by pointing to “all the carnage for something that doesn’t mean very much.”
CNN interviewed about half of the 17 witnesses that testified in the House trial. Although they’ve testified publicly, they requested anonymity due to concerns about their diplomatic careers.
CNN reports:
Many described their frustration with a dysfunctional Congress.
“Republicans think Democrats are a threat to the nation, and the Democrats think the Republicans are a threat to the nation,” a second official who provided testimony explained. “Right now, we think the threat that we face is each other.”
Multiple sources voiced their frustration at both sides of the aisle — wishing that the Democrats had developed a stronger case and that Republicans had more seriously looked at the actions Trump had taken.
The officials CNN interviewed said they have so far “not faced backlash, apart from criticism from Trump,” and that they have mostly received praise from colleagues.
Officials said they “have gotten pats on the back in the State Department elevators from people they had never met, and notes from former ambassadors commending their integrity,” according to CNN.
Whether Trump will come after these officials in the future remains to be seen, but so far, he has not. One official said they don’t think Secretary of State Mike Pompeo or others at State “want to go after us.”
Bolton may end up back in the hot seat sooner than later, as House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said he expects the House “will likely” subpoena the former national security adviser, even after Wednesday’s acquittal of Trump in the Senate impeachment trial. According to reports, Bolton’s book manuscript describes how Trump told him he was withholding aid to Ukraine until the Ukrainian government began investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-10--Brazilian government wants to destroy the culture of native peoples

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Lucas Leiroz , research fellow in International Law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro… Recently , Brazilian government appointed Ricardo Lopes Dias to the position of coordinator of isolated peoples at the National Indian Foundation ( Fundação Nacional do Índio – FUNAI ) .
The act was made possible by a small but substantial change in the Foundation ’ s bylaws , which created the possibility for people who are not career servants to assume commissioned positions of command .
The change came shortly before the appointment , indicating that Ricardo Dias @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reform .
The biggest problem involving Ricardo Dias , however , is another : the new coordinator is a former evangelical missionary , having already worked for more than a decade in the evangelization of indigenous peoples , when he was then a member of the New Tribes of Brazil Mission , an organization born in the USA whose objective is to spread Protestantism among Brazilian indigenous peoples .
Ricardo Dias is an PhD anthropologist and Protestant theologian .
The controversies surrounding his appointment – in addition to the administrative issue – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibility , ignited by his past , of the coordinator to use his position to promote the forced “ evangelization ” of isolated peoples , reviving a policy towards the indigenous peoples that Brazil has sought to abandon for decades .
Since the end of the military dictatorship , Brazil has tried to overcome the notion of “ social integration ” of isolated peoples , aiming to protect them in their traditional customs and respecting their space in the national territory .
Brazil is one of the few countries in the world where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ villages that have never had any contact with modern civilization , or have had it on a small scale .
During the military regime , state policies aimed at these peoples sought precisely to integrate them into modernity and the consumer society .
This is a concept that , after 30 years of democracy , is returning and gaining strength with the new neoliberal wave that marks the Bolsonaro ’ s government .
The organization of which Dias was a member is also the target of the most diverse controversies involving its activities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most controversial case involving the group concerns an epidemic that hit an isolated people in the Amazon Rainforest due to local contact with evangelical missionaries , killing several people .
Although Dias currently denies involvement with the organization , the group congratulated his nomination and celebrated it with enthusiasm .
In fact , there is no problem with the evangelization of the native peoples itself .
However , contact between missionary groups and indigenous ethnicities in the Amazon region has occurred throughout Brazilian history , often in a violent and proselytized way , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another , instead of the voluntary conversion of a people to a new faith .
These isolated peoples , totaling 107 ethnic groups , voluntarily chose their situation of isolation , indicating a desire to preserve their traditions by the absence of contact with the world outside the Amazonic forest .
The Brazilian Constitution safeguards this right , which has been precariously preserved over the past three decades .
However , the advancement of neoliberalism and the power struggle by the evangelicals , the military and the rural entrepreneurs has rekindled the persecution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the number of assassinations and modernizing attacks against these peoples .
The objective then seems clear : it is not the Gospel that neo-Pentecostal missionaries want to take to the indigenous native Brazilian peoples , but money , modernity , poverty , misery , precariousness , capitalism and consumption .
And the National Indian Foundation is adhering to this neoliberal campaign and changing its own internal rules to serve the interests of capitalist elites , in detriment of the peoples it must protect .
Indigenous groups , academics and the Public Defender ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ricardo Dias , but the appointment had already been consummated in an official act .
Now , it is a matter of time before the National Indian Foundation becomes , in practice , a neo-Pentecostal missionary organization under the tutelage of the Brazilian State , which aims to completely destroy the culture of the original peoples , integrating them with capitalism and the American way of life .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Lucas Leiroz, research fellow in International Law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro…
Recently, Brazilian government appointed Ricardo Lopes Dias to the position of coordinator of isolated peoples at the National Indian Foundation (Fundação Nacional do Índio – FUNAI). The act was made possible by a small but substantial change in the Foundation’s bylaws, which created the possibility for people who are not career servants to assume commissioned positions of command. The change came shortly before the appointment, indicating that Ricardo Dias’ specific appointment was the reason for the reform.
The biggest problem involving Ricardo Dias, however, is another: the new coordinator is a former evangelical missionary, having already worked for more than a decade in the evangelization of indigenous peoples, when he was then a member of the New Tribes of Brazil Mission, an organization born in the USA whose objective is to spread Protestantism among Brazilian indigenous peoples.
Ricardo Dias is an PhD anthropologist and Protestant theologian. The controversies surrounding his appointment – in addition to the administrative issue – revolve around a central point: the possibility, ignited by his past, of the coordinator to use his position to promote the forced “evangelization” of isolated peoples, reviving a policy towards the indigenous peoples that Brazil has sought to abandon for decades.
Since the end of the military dictatorship, Brazil has tried to overcome the notion of “social integration” of isolated peoples, aiming to protect them in their traditional customs and respecting their space in the national territory. Brazil is one of the few countries in the world where it is still possible to find entire villages that have never had any contact with modern civilization, or have had it on a small scale. During the military regime, state policies aimed at these peoples sought precisely to integrate them into modernity and the consumer society. This is a concept that, after 30 years of democracy, is returning and gaining strength with the new neoliberal wave that marks the Bolsonaro’s government.
The organization of which Dias was a member is also the target of the most diverse controversies involving its activities in isolated regions of Brazil. The most controversial case involving the group concerns an epidemic that hit an isolated people in the Amazon Rainforest due to local contact with evangelical missionaries, killing several people. Although Dias currently denies involvement with the organization, the group congratulated his nomination and celebrated it with enthusiasm.
In fact, there is no problem with the evangelization of the native peoples itself. However, contact between missionary groups and indigenous ethnicities in the Amazon region has occurred throughout Brazilian history, often in a violent and proselytized way, generating the imposition of one culture on another, instead of the voluntary conversion of a people to a new faith. These isolated peoples, totaling 107 ethnic groups, voluntarily chose their situation of isolation, indicating a desire to preserve their traditions by the absence of contact with the world outside the Amazonic forest. The Brazilian Constitution safeguards this right, which has been precariously preserved over the past three decades. However, the advancement of neoliberalism and the power struggle by the evangelicals, the military and the rural entrepreneurs has rekindled the persecution and exclusion of indigenous people, increasing the number of assassinations and modernizing attacks against these peoples.
The objective then seems clear: it is not the Gospel that neo-Pentecostal missionaries want to take to the indigenous native Brazilian peoples, but money, modernity, poverty, misery, precariousness, capitalism and consumption. And the National Indian Foundation is adhering to this neoliberal campaign and changing its own internal rules to serve the interests of capitalist elites, in detriment of the peoples it must protect.
Indigenous groups, academics and the Public Defender’s Office have already pronounced condemnation against Ricardo Dias, but the appointment had already been consummated in an official act. Now, it is a matter of time before the National Indian Foundation becomes, in practice, a neo-Pentecostal missionary organization under the tutelage of the Brazilian State, which aims to completely destroy the culture of the original peoples, integrating them with capitalism and the American way of life.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-11--The Top Issue for Democratic Voters Is …

Or is it none of those but instead much deeper ?
I shall here argue the latter .
To win is not merely to defeat “ the enemy.
” America now has lots of experience with winning battles , only to lose wars .
And , politically , Democrats in 2008 won the battle against the Republicans by placing Barack Obama into the White House .
And what did he actually do ?
The first thing he did is immediately to terminate his campaigning for a public option as being part of his health-care plan , and the second thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bail out Wall Street and also to virtually terminate prosecuting financial crimes .
Democrats won the battle , but lost the war .
In 2016 , Democrats nominated the neoconservative Hillary Clinton in order to move the Party even farther to the right , only to find themselves winning California by the astronomical margin of 4,269,978 votes more than Trump received , and losing all other 49 states by the still-substantial margin of 1,405,002 votes to Hillary .
She would have become the President of the U.S. who was massively chosen by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rest of the nation .
Democrats think that that would have been ‘ democracy ’ ?
( Democrats predominantly don ’ t understand why the Constitution was written the way it is , and propose that ‘ democracy ’ would mean eliminating the Electoral College and going straight for a single nationwide popular-vote majority to appoint the U.S. President , which would have meant that America would have become ruled for four years by California ’ s choice — the very same state that had chosen the far-right original , Ronald Reagan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so we had President Reagan from 1980 to 1988 .
Partisan thinking tends to make suckers of voters , and conservatism always wins in that way , even if the Democratic Party ’ s version , called “ liberalism ” — the mixture of conservatism and progressivism — to distinguish it against progressivism , is the winner , against progressivism ; against real democracy , which is neither conservative nor liberal , both of which are elitist . )
Right now , the “ win at any cost ” candidates are Bloomberg , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the unapologetic Republicrats in this race to get the Democratic Party ’ s nomination .
Elizabeth Warren is the sometimes-apologetic , sometimes unapologetic , Republicratic candidate .
And Bernie Sanders is the unapologetic progressive in it .
Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders in 2016 will worry “ But will he beat Trump ?
” Regardless of whether they vote for Bloomberg or Buttigieg or Biden or Warren , they will choose to lose the war .
They won ’ t even fight to win it , actually — that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be voting for those candidates , as they did for Hillary in 2016 .
The top issue for Democratic voters is whether they are in this to win the battle , or to win the war ( quoting now contrasting reader-comments at one popular Democratic Party site on February 11th ) : “ In 2016 Bloomberg spent 12 million to help incumbent GOP Senator Pat Toomey .
His opponent was Katie McGinty , who lost by a very narrow margin .
If she had won , Brett Kavanaugh wouldn ’ t be on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Toomey ’ s right-wing policies and weep.
” Alexandro Rocca , at Huffington Post .
But there ’ s also this , from a capitulationist , to win-at-any-cost ( win the battle even though it will greatly increase the likelihood of losing the war ) : “ If Bloomberg can beat Trump , I ’ m all in .
Keeping my eye on the real goal , here .
What good is winning a debate if you lose the election ?
” Gregory Ramos at Huffington Post Here is another way to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Democratic Party voters : The top issue for Democratic voters is actually whether the post-9/11 , post police-state , totalitarian billionaires-controlled U.S. Government , needs to be replaced ( a second American “ revolution , ” now , to restore at least the incomplete democracy that pre-existed 9/11 ) , or , instead , needs to become ‘ more bipartisan ’ ?
Though the phrasing here is different , the choice here is actually the same : either capitulate now ( be ‘ bipartisan ’ in order to ‘ defeat Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we win the war to actually restore democracy to America .
And THAT is The Top Issue for Democratic Voters .
Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 because of the millions of stay-at-home Obama voters and even some Trump-over-Hillary Obama voters who refused to vote for the neocon and blatant Wall-Street-shill Hillary .
It could happen again , and only the personal identity of the neocon and shill would be different .
( As for Democrats who don ’ t understand what a neocon or shill even is , they ’ d do both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by entirely avoiding to vote , at all , and letting the Party ’ s progressives take over the Party , so as to win the war , to restore democracy to America and advance it further in the progressive direction . )
This is a warning to the capitulationist ‘ Democrats ’ , but it doesn ’ t originate from me ; it originates from us ( as that last link shows ) .
Joe Biden ’ s campaign self-destructed on February 11th , in his town hall at New Hampshire ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ moderate Democrats ’ now want to hand their mantle over to a late-comer to the contest such as Michael Bloomberg , who is untested by the prior year ’ s campaigning and now trying to buy his way through to the nomination by fooling enough people to vote against Bernie Sanders , with the help of the obviously corrupt DNC ?
Or maybe the previous Wall Street favorite , Pete Buttigieg ?
Why don ’ t the ‘ moderate Democrats ’ just give up and quit trying to keep BOTH Parties in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they really think that billionaires should control the U.S. Government ?
Or , will that now be The Top Issue , for Democratic Voters ?
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author , most recently , of They ’ re Not Even Close : The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records , 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST ’ S VENTRILOQUISTS : The Event that Created Christianity .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Eric Zuesse
Is it health care?
Is it jobs?
Is it national security?
Is it global warming?
Or is it none of those but instead much deeper?
I shall here argue the latter.
—
To win is not merely to defeat “the enemy.” America now has lots of experience with winning battles, only to lose wars.
And, politically, Democrats in 2008 won the battle against the Republicans by placing Barack Obama into the White House. And what did he actually do? The first thing he did is immediately to terminate his campaigning for a public option as being part of his health-care plan, and the second thing he did was to appoint Wall Streeters to bail out Wall Street and also to virtually terminate prosecuting financial crimes.
Democrats won the battle, but lost the war.
In 2016, Democrats nominated the neoconservative Hillary Clinton in order to move the Party even farther to the right, only to find themselves winning California by the astronomical margin of 4,269,978 votes more than Trump received, and losing all other 49 states by the still-substantial margin of 1,405,002 votes to Hillary. She would have become the President of the U.S. who was massively chosen by Californians, but losing to the entire rest of the nation. Democrats think that that would have been ‘democracy’? (Democrats predominantly don’t understand why the Constitution was written the way it is, and propose that ‘democracy’ would mean eliminating the Electoral College and going straight for a single nationwide popular-vote majority to appoint the U.S. President, which would have meant that America would have become ruled for four years by California’s choice — the very same state that had chosen the far-right original, Ronald Reagan, to lead it during 1967-74, and so we had President Reagan from 1980 to 1988. Partisan thinking tends to make suckers of voters, and conservatism always wins in that way, even if the Democratic Party’s version, called “liberalism” — the mixture of conservatism and progressivism — to distinguish it against progressivism, is the winner, against progressivism; against real democracy, which is neither conservative nor liberal, both of which are elitist.)
Right now, the “win at any cost” candidates are Bloomberg, Buttigieg, and Biden. They are the unapologetic Republicrats in this race to get the Democratic Party’s nomination. Elizabeth Warren is the sometimes-apologetic, sometimes unapologetic, Republicratic candidate. And Bernie Sanders is the unapologetic progressive in it. Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders in 2016 will worry “But will he beat Trump?” Regardless of whether they vote for Bloomberg or Buttigieg or Biden or Warren, they will choose to lose the war. They won’t even fight to win it, actually — that’s the reason why they will be voting for those candidates, as they did for Hillary in 2016.
The top issue for Democratic voters is whether they are in this to win the battle, or to win the war (quoting now contrasting reader-comments at one popular Democratic Party site on February 11th):
“In 2016 Bloomberg spent 12 million to help incumbent GOP Senator Pat Toomey. His opponent was Katie McGinty, who lost by a very narrow margin. If she had won, Brett Kavanaugh wouldn’t be on the Supreme Court. Take a look at Toomey’s right-wing policies and weep.” Alexandro Rocca, at Huffington Post.
But there’s also this, from a capitulationist, to win-at-any-cost (win the battle even though it will greatly increase the likelihood of losing the war):
“If Bloomberg can beat Trump, I’m all in. Keeping my eye on the real goal, here. What good is winning a debate if you lose the election?” Gregory Ramos at Huffington Post
Here is another way to put this same matter, of decision for Democratic Party voters:
The top issue for Democratic voters is actually whether the post-9/11, post police-state, totalitarian billionaires-controlled U.S. Government, needs to be replaced (a second American “revolution,” now, to restore at least the incomplete democracy that pre-existed 9/11), or, instead, needs to become ‘more bipartisan’? Though the phrasing here is different, the choice here is actually the same: either capitulate now (be ‘bipartisan’ in order to ‘defeat Trump’), or never stop fighting until we win the war to actually restore democracy to America.
And THAT is The Top Issue for Democratic Voters.
Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 because of the millions of stay-at-home Obama voters and even some Trump-over-Hillary Obama voters who refused to vote for the neocon and blatant Wall-Street-shill Hillary. It could happen again, and only the personal identity of the neocon and shill would be different. (As for Democrats who don’t understand what a neocon or shill even is, they’d do both the Party and the nation a favor by entirely avoiding to vote, at all, and letting the Party’s progressives take over the Party, so as to win the war, to restore democracy to America and advance it further in the progressive direction.)
This is a warning to the capitulationist ‘Democrats’, but it doesn’t originate from me; it originates from us (as that last link shows).
Joe Biden’s campaign self-destructed on February 11th, in his town hall at New Hampshire’s Mercer University, but do the ‘moderate Democrats’ now want to hand their mantle over to a late-comer to the contest such as Michael Bloomberg, who is untested by the prior year’s campaigning and now trying to buy his way through to the nomination by fooling enough people to vote against Bernie Sanders, with the help of the obviously corrupt DNC? Or maybe the previous Wall Street favorite, Pete Buttigieg? Why don’t the ‘moderate Democrats’ just give up and quit trying to keep BOTH Parties in Wall Street’s grip? Do they really think that billionaires should control the U.S. Government? Or, will that now be The Top Issue, for Democratic Voters?
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-11--Angela Merkel’s successor steps down leaving Germany politics in disarray (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the unexpected resignation of Angela Merkel ’ s handpicked successor Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
Following a series of reports in the German and broader European press claiming her imminent resignation , Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer – better known as AKK – has confirmed that the rumors are indeed true .
She will step down as the leader of Angela Merkel ’ s Christian Democratic Union , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two decades , and won ’ t run as the party ’ s candidate to succeed Merkel during the federal election to pick Germany ’ s next chief executive in 2021 .
AKK reportedly resigned in protest over flirtations by the party ’ s conservative wing to ally with Alternative für Deutschland , or the AfD , to achieve common political aims .
The centrists in the CDU , including Merkel herself , have denounced the AfD as a far-right borderline hate group populated by Nazi sympathizers .
Meanwhile , AfD ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sympathizers and others who might alienate the general German public .
This political fracture was recently exacerbated by CDU members in East Germany , the formerly Communist region where the AfD ’ s popularity is at its highest , who recently allied with AfD members to oust the left-wing premier of Thuringia .
Merkel criticized the decision , which provoked general outrage throughout Germany .
Now , the FT says the race to succeed Merkel has been “ thrown wide open.
” Not that this is that big of a surprise .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strained relationship between AKK and her one-time political mentor for nearly a year , a feud that supposedly inspired Merkel ’ s decision to come out of retirement and once again play a more active role inside the CDU after handing the reins to AKK .
Merkel now reportedly doubts AKK ’ s ability to lead Germany , as well as the CDU .
A series of gaffes and political missteps have also eroded AKK ’ s popularity over the last year .
She has reportedly lost her status as a “ shoo-in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FT. “ Her mistakes just kept piling up , ” said Olav Gutting , a CDU MP who is in the party ’ s governing council .
“ People like her a lot as a person , but the grass roots had growing doubts about her fitness for the highest office.
” Germany ’ s next national election is now expected to be a three-way race between Armin Laschet , prime minister of North Rhine-Westphalia , Germany ’ s most populous state , German Health Minister Jens Spahn and former CDU leader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Merkel , whose reign has been defined by a sense of pragmatic centrism .
Should Merz or Spahn prevail ( both men are considered conservatives ) it would mark a serious moment of transition not only for the CDU , but for Germany ’ s government as a whole .
There are many within Germany who would like the CDU to return to its conservative roots and work more closely with AfD .
For now , at least , those voices appear to be winning out against Germany ’ s established political @ @

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the unexpected resignation of Angela Merkel’s handpicked successor Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via Zerohedge….
Following a series of reports in the German and broader European press claiming her imminent resignation, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer – better known as AKK – has confirmed that the rumors are indeed true. She will step down as the leader of Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, the center-right party that has ruled Germany for two decades, and won’t run as the party’s candidate to succeed Merkel during the federal election to pick Germany’s next chief executive in 2021.
AKK reportedly resigned in protest over flirtations by the party’s conservative wing to ally with Alternative für Deutschland, or the AfD, to achieve common political aims.
The centrists in the CDU, including Merkel herself, have denounced the AfD as a far-right borderline hate group populated by Nazi sympathizers. Meanwhile, AfD’s leaders have taken steps to expel Nazi sympathizers and others who might alienate the general German public.
This political fracture was recently exacerbated by CDU members in East Germany, the formerly Communist region where the AfD’s popularity is at its highest, who recently allied with AfD members to oust the left-wing premier of Thuringia. Merkel criticized the decision, which provoked general outrage throughout Germany.
Now, the FT says the race to succeed Merkel has been “thrown wide open.”
Not that this is that big of a surprise. We’ve been reporting on the increasingly strained relationship between AKK and her one-time political mentor for nearly a year, a feud that supposedly inspired Merkel’s decision to come out of retirement and once again play a more active role inside the CDU after handing the reins to AKK. Merkel now reportedly doubts AKK’s ability to lead Germany, as well as the CDU.
A series of gaffes and political missteps have also eroded AKK’s popularity over the last year. She has reportedly lost her status as a “shoo-in” for the chancellorship, according to the FT.
“Her mistakes just kept piling up,” said Olav Gutting, a CDU MP who is in the party’s governing council. “People like her a lot as a person, but the grass roots had growing doubts about her fitness for the highest office.”
Germany’s next national election is now expected to be a three-way race between Armin Laschet, prime minister of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, German Health Minister Jens Spahn and former CDU leader Friedrich Merz, a longtime conservative rival to Merkel, whose reign has been defined by a sense of pragmatic centrism.
Should Merz or Spahn prevail (both men are considered conservatives) it would mark a serious moment of transition not only for the CDU, but for Germany’s government as a whole. There are many within Germany who would like the CDU to return to its conservative roots and work more closely with AfD.
For now, at least, those voices appear to be winning out against Germany’s established political elite.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-11--Another nail in globalist coffin? Sinn Fein scores big win in Ireland (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the stunning election results in Ireland , where Sinn Fein shocked the EU globalist order with a big win and a promise to deliver social change and economic hope .
Positioning itself as a left , nationalist party , with an international vision and a eurosketpic core , Sinn Fein is a party like no other in Europe , and is sending a message to Brussels , that the neoliberal days of dominance are over .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – Subscribe on iTunes .
Amid the storm that lashed Ireland and Britain yesterday came political winds of change with the potential to transform both countries : Sinn Fein ’ s record-breaking election results .
Seasoned commentators ran out of clichés as the story unfolded from counts across the country : spectacular , unprecedented , unbelievable , unimaginable , incredible .
Their surprise was echoed by the shocked spokespeople for the two parties , Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael , which have dominated Irish politics since it gained independence from Britain a century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the bitter and bloody split in the civil war of 1922-23 , were forced into an uncomfortable alliance following the outcome of the 2016 general election .
Their pact exposed them to the Irish electorate as two sides of the same coin .
There was no discernible difference in their economic views , enabling Sinn Fein ’ s portrayal of them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee to catch the public imagination – particularly the young .
Not that the youth was alone in wondering why their government had done so little to deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obvious from the beggars and rough sleepers lining the streets of Ireland ’ s major towns and cities .
Similarly , why was there no clear policy to redress the distressing state of the health service ?
While the Fine Gael taoiseach , Leo Varadkar , and his deputy , Simon Coveney , spent months concentrating on Brexit negotiations , they appeared to neglect pressing domestic dramas .
Meanwhile , Fianna Fail ’ s leader Micheál Martin , having locked his party into a confidence and supply agreement with Fine Gael , was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and as a result , virtually vanished from the public stage .
Even so , after swapping power for the best part of 90 years , there was a complacency about the parties ’ approach to the election .
Each imagined that they could uncouple their entente uncordiale and then fight the election as if years of stagnant politics had never happened .
They hoped voters wouldn ’ t notice .
As for Sinn Fein , it would be no problem .
All that was necessary was to employ a tactic that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reminding people of its links to the IRA .
Sure , the peace process stretches back more than 20 years , but raising incidents from the Troubles would be guaranteed to trip up its leader , Mary Lou McDonald .
But as the polls illustrated , the young were unworried about Sinn Fein ’ s past misdeeds .
The bombs and bullets were in the past ; the ballot box was the present .
Young Irish people wanted change , and their best hope of achieving it lay with Sinn Fein .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policies .
More than that , they were happy to embrace its overtly leftist politics .
Tax us , as long as you put the money to good use .
Suddenly , there was a viable alternative to the party that had appeared to side with the banks and speculators which precipitated the death of the Celtic Tiger ( Fine Gael ) , and the party that had historically represented the rural petit-bourgeoisie ( Fianna Fail ) .
McDonald made her position clear by calling on the leaders of other left-wing parties to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no doubt that McDonald ’ s own performance over the years , and most definitely throughout the election campaign , made a difference .
She is an accomplished speaker ; an orator in the tradition of Irish political leaders of centuries past .
But she would be the first to point to the political skills of her senior colleagues , such as Pearse Doherty , Eoin O Broin and Louise O ’ Reilly .
It was also noticeable that Sinn Fein ’ s leader in Northern Ireland , Michelle O ’ Neill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very public reminder of the party ’ s central raison d ’ être : to reunite Ireland .
By topping the poll in the Republic and already sharing power in the north , Sinn Fein ’ s ambition is to start the conversation that could lead to referenda on each side of the border .
That ’ s why this Irish election has a British dimension .
Boris Johnson ’ s fudging of Brexit ’ s implications for the Irish border has opened the door to debate about the ramifications for Unionist-controlled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it could tip moderate Unionist opinion towards acceptance of reunification .
However , one of the greatest stumbling blocks to winning a border poll among both Unionists and nationalists is concern about the state of the Republic ’ s health service , and a parallel fear of losing access to the NHS .
There is no surety yet that Sinn Féin will win sufficient power in Dublin to effect real and lasting chance to health care .
But that ’ s the challenge McDonald and her team face once the electoral euphoria @ @

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the stunning election results in Ireland, where Sinn Fein shocked the EU globalist order with a big win and a promise to deliver social change and economic hope.
Positioning itself as a left, nationalist party, with an international vision and a eurosketpic core, Sinn Fein is a party like no other in Europe, and is sending a message to Brussels, that the neoliberal days of dominance are over.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via The Independent UK…
Amid the storm that lashed Ireland and Britain yesterday came political winds of change with the potential to transform both countries: Sinn Fein’s record-breaking election results.
Seasoned commentators ran out of clichés as the story unfolded from counts across the country: spectacular, unprecedented, unbelievable, unimaginable, incredible. Their surprise was echoed by the shocked spokespeople for the two parties, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, which have dominated Irish politics since it gained independence from Britain a century ago.
Those parties, founded out of the bitter and bloody split in the civil war of 1922-23, were forced into an uncomfortable alliance following the outcome of the 2016 general election. Their pact exposed them to the Irish electorate as two sides of the same coin. There was no discernible difference in their economic views, enabling Sinn Fein’s portrayal of them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee to catch the public imagination – particularly the young.
Not that the youth was alone in wondering why their government had done so little to deal with a housing crisis that was starkly obvious from the beggars and rough sleepers lining the streets of Ireland’s major towns and cities. Similarly, why was there no clear policy to redress the distressing state of the health service?
While the Fine Gael taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, and his deputy, Simon Coveney, spent months concentrating on Brexit negotiations, they appeared to neglect pressing domestic dramas.
Meanwhile, Fianna Fail’s leader Micheál Martin, having locked his party into a confidence and supply agreement with Fine Gael, was little more than a political hostage – and as a result, virtually vanished from the public stage.
Even so, after swapping power for the best part of 90 years, there was a complacency about the parties’ approach to the election. Each imagined that they could uncouple their entente uncordiale and then fight the election as if years of stagnant politics had never happened. They hoped voters wouldn’t notice.
As for Sinn Fein, it would be no problem. All that was necessary was to employ a tactic that has worked successfully in the past: keep reminding people of its links to the IRA. Sure, the peace process stretches back more than 20 years, but raising incidents from the Troubles would be guaranteed to trip up its leader, Mary Lou McDonald. But as the polls illustrated, the young were unworried about Sinn Fein’s past misdeeds. The bombs and bullets were in the past; the ballot box was the present.
Young Irish people wanted change, and their best hope of achieving it lay with Sinn Fein. They were impressed with its housing and health policies. More than that, they were happy to embrace its overtly leftist politics. Tax us, as long as you put the money to good use.
Suddenly, there was a viable alternative to the party that had appeared to side with the banks and speculators which precipitated the death of the Celtic Tiger (Fine Gael), and the party that had historically represented the rural petit-bourgeoisie (Fianna Fail). McDonald made her position clear by calling on the leaders of other left-wing parties to form a broad left coalition.
There is no doubt that McDonald’s own performance over the years, and most definitely throughout the election campaign, made a difference. She is an accomplished speaker; an orator in the tradition of Irish political leaders of centuries past. But she would be the first to point to the political skills of her senior colleagues, such as Pearse Doherty, Eoin O Broin and Louise O’Reilly.
It was also noticeable that Sinn Fein’s leader in Northern Ireland, Michelle O’Neill, attended counting centres. It was a very public reminder of the party’s central raison d’être: to reunite Ireland. By topping the poll in the Republic and already sharing power in the north, Sinn Fein’s ambition is to start the conversation that could lead to referenda on each side of the border.
That’s why this Irish election has a British dimension. Boris Johnson’s fudging of Brexit’s implications for the Irish border has opened the door to debate about the ramifications for Unionist-controlled business in the north. McDonald knows that it could tip moderate Unionist opinion towards acceptance of reunification.
However, one of the greatest stumbling blocks to winning a border poll among both Unionists and nationalists is concern about the state of the Republic’s health service, and a parallel fear of losing access to the NHS. There is no surety yet that Sinn Féin will win sufficient power in Dublin to effect real and lasting chance to health care. But that’s the challenge McDonald and her team face once the electoral euphoria passes.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-11--Irish election result is a victory for Nationalism

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Johanna Ross , journalist based in Edinburgh , Scotland… Once upon a time Gerry Adams , the leader of Ireland ’ s nationalist party , Sinn Fein , could not be heard speaking on the BBC .
He was branded a terrorist and his voice was dubbed .
How times have changed .
Now his party , led by Mary Lou McDonald , has stormed to victory in the Irish elections .
Having won the largest percentage of the vote at 24 % , Sinn Fein has ended the decades long domination of Fine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effectively a two-party political system .
McDonald now seeks to form a government with other left-wing Irish parties and although she doesn ’ t expect to form a coalition with Fine Gael or Fianna Fail , she would still participate in talks with representatives of the parties : “ I also have consistently said that I will talk to and listen to everybody , I think that is what grown-ups do and that is what democracy demands.
” Fianna Fail ’ s leader , Michael Martin , said however that there were ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fein .
His party , along with Fine Gael have cited Sinn Fein ’ s previous links to the Irish Republican Army ( IRA ) – the paramilitary group – as a reason for not working with them .
However Mary Lou McDonald has said it is “ not sustainable ” for either party leader to rule out talks with Sinn Fein .
Given the sizeable chunk of the Irish population that voted for her party , you can see she has a fair point .
The Taioseach , Leo Varadkar , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a three-party system .
It may be a marginal win , and one which will force Sinn Fein into a coalition , but it is nevertheless a highly significant turn of events .
Although the party won due to its left-wing domestic agenda and promises to combat poverty and rising homelessness , it can not be ignored that this win is part of a broader , Europe-wide trend .
Nationalism is on the rise across Europe , call it populism if you will , but people are increasingly voting for parties which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ European integration .
Centrist parties are failing to compete with those offering a nationalist , eurosceptic agenda .
People don ’ t like to be dictated to .
The arguably authoritarian decision by state broadcaster RTE not to include Mary Lou Mcdonald in their leaders ’ debate quite possibly only generated more support for her party .
It was reported that prior to the election Sinn Fein sent the broadcaster a legal letter asking it to reverse its decision .
The Irish establishment will now have to catch up with the reality that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the political landscape , and a force to be reckoned with .
The nationalist vibe in the air has now awoken the idea of Irish unity .
A poll conducted earlier in 2019 demonstrated that two thirds of Irish people are now supportive of Irish reunification .
Of 3000 people questioned , 65 % said they were in favour of northern and southern Ireland becoming one nation again .
Brexit , which has brought with it a surge in English nationalism , along with a Westminster government increasingly detached from the reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has encouraged more people north and south of the Irish border to rethink their stance on a topic few dared to broach in the past due to the violent conflict between nationalists and unionists .
Under the Good Friday Agreement , it is indeed possible for Northern Ireland to secede the United Kingdom if a referendum result were to decide this .
Sinn Fein ’ s stance on the EU is not entirely clear-cut , but the win could be interpreted as a victory for Euroscepticism .
The party is against further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No ’ vote in the Irish referendum on joining the European Economic Community in 1972 and criticised the proposal of a European Constitution in 2002 .
Although it did support Britain remaining in the EU in the run-up to the 2016 EU referendum , it has criticised the European Union in the past for its policies of neoliberalism .
When it comes to post-Brexit trade talks with the UK , the new Irish government with Sinn Fein at the helm is likely to take a tougher stance .
In addition , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s leadership , we will see a referendum on Irish unity .
If the outcome is for unification , it will put more pressure on a UK government currently facing a real threat from growing Scottish nationalism .
As Irish and Scottish nationalist movements gain popularity , the United Kingdom can not be taken for granted any longer .
As elections continue to demonstrate , the status quo is under threat and it ’ s becoming increasingly possible that we will see the dissolution of the United Kingdom within our lifetimes .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Johanna Ross, journalist based in Edinburgh, Scotland…
Once upon a time Gerry Adams, the leader of Ireland’s nationalist party, Sinn Fein, could not be heard speaking on the BBC. He was branded a terrorist and his voice was dubbed. How times have changed. Now his party, led by Mary Lou McDonald, has stormed to victory in the Irish elections. Having won the largest percentage of the vote at 24%, Sinn Fein has ended the decades long domination of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail in what was effectively a two-party political system.
McDonald now seeks to form a government with other left-wing Irish parties and although she doesn’t expect to form a coalition with Fine Gael or Fianna Fail, she would still participate in talks with representatives of the parties: “I also have consistently said that I will talk to and listen to everybody, I think that is what grown-ups do and that is what democracy demands.”
Fianna Fail’s leader, Michael Martin, said however that there were ‘significant incompatibilities’ to working with Sinn Fein. His party, along with Fine Gael have cited Sinn Fein’s previous links to the Irish Republican Army (IRA) – the paramilitary group – as a reason for not working with them. However Mary Lou McDonald has said it is “not sustainable” for either party leader to rule out talks with Sinn Fein. Given the sizeable chunk of the Irish population that voted for her party, you can see she has a fair point.
The Taioseach, Leo Varadkar, has now been forced to admit that Ireland has a three-party system. It may be a marginal win, and one which will force Sinn Fein into a coalition, but it is nevertheless a highly significant turn of events. Although the party won due to its left-wing domestic agenda and promises to combat poverty and rising homelessness, it cannot be ignored that this win is part of a broader, Europe-wide trend. Nationalism is on the rise across Europe, call it populism if you will, but people are increasingly voting for parties which put the nation state first over further European integration. Centrist parties are failing to compete with those offering a nationalist, eurosceptic agenda.
People don’t like to be dictated to. The arguably authoritarian decision by state broadcaster RTE not to include Mary Lou Mcdonald in their leaders’ debate quite possibly only generated more support for her party. It was reported that prior to the election Sinn Fein sent the broadcaster a legal letter asking it to reverse its decision. The Irish establishment will now have to catch up with the reality that Sinn Fein is now an equal player in the political landscape, and a force to be reckoned with.
The nationalist vibe in the air has now awoken the idea of Irish unity. A poll conducted earlier in 2019 demonstrated that two thirds of Irish people are now supportive of Irish reunification. Of 3000 people questioned, 65% said they were in favour of northern and southern Ireland becoming one nation again. Brexit, which has brought with it a surge in English nationalism, along with a Westminster government increasingly detached from the reality of the everyday struggles of working people, has encouraged more people north and south of the Irish border to rethink their stance on a topic few dared to broach in the past due to the violent conflict between nationalists and unionists. Under the Good Friday Agreement, it is indeed possible for Northern Ireland to secede the United Kingdom if a referendum result were to decide this.
Sinn Fein’s stance on the EU is not entirely clear-cut, but the win could be interpreted as a victory for Euroscepticism. The party is against further European integration, campaigned for a ‘No’ vote in the Irish referendum on joining the European Economic Community in 1972 and criticised the proposal of a European Constitution in 2002. Although it did support Britain remaining in the EU in the run-up to the 2016 EU referendum, it has criticised the European Union in the past for its policies of neoliberalism. When it comes to post-Brexit trade talks with the UK, the new Irish government with Sinn Fein at the helm is likely to take a tougher stance.
In addition, it’s likely that under Mary Lou McDonald’s leadership, we will see a referendum on Irish unity. If the outcome is for unification, it will put more pressure on a UK government currently facing a real threat from growing Scottish nationalism. As Irish and Scottish nationalist movements gain popularity, the United Kingdom cannot be taken for granted any longer. As elections continue to demonstrate, the status quo is under threat and it’s becoming increasingly possible that we will see the dissolution of the United Kingdom within our lifetimes.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-12--Did World War III actually start on 26 July 1945?

If not , then still the Cold War did .
But was the start of the Cold War intended to be the start of WW III ?
Was it actually intended , even at its start , to be a prelude to , and preparation for , a nuclear war , between the U.S. and Russia ?
Yes , in fact .
Here ’ s that history : A war actually starts at the moment when the aggressive side first settles on its intention to conquer whatever it defines to be its opponent .
I argued , in my 2000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Germany ’ s leader , Adolf Hitler , first settled upon his life ’ s goal during or around September 1919 , of exterminating all Jews in all countries and enslaving all ‘ inferior ’ peoples but especially Slavs — and that , as he saw it , The Thousand-Year Reich wouldn ’ t actually have been established unless and until Germany had done that , which “ victory ” would have required Germany to control all countries , so that the reign of “ the Aryan , ” or pureblooded Christians , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become achieved , by Germany .
( Hitler thought that “ Aryans , ” or pure-blooded descendants of Adam and Eve from Genesis 3 , had become contaminated with ” original sin ” by Jews , who descended instead from the snake there , in Paradise , — thus , he often referred to Jews as “ snakes.
” That imagery was also used in Nazi propaganda .
But only in Hitler ’ s private notes did he link the distinction between “ Aryans ” and “ Jews ” to “ Original sin.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaning of those private notes he made to himself , unless one knows the Bible well , which Hitler certainly did . )
Thus , in Hitler ’ s mind , the “ Thousand-Year Reich ” ( which Judenrein world was inspired by his reading not only of Genesis 3 but of Revelation 20:1-7 and around 100 other passages in the Bible ) never became achieved by Germany — and this is what actually is meant by the phrase “ Germany lost WW II.
” That ( to him ) divine “ Reich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Fuehrer ’ s obsessive objective : global conquest ( so that the “ Thousand-Year Reich ” of an Aryan-controlled Jew-free world would be able to begin ) .
Here , I shall present , and fully document , via links , the case that the Cold War started on 26 July 1945 , when Dwight David Eisenhower , whose opinion U.S. President Truman apparently respected above all others , told the naive new President that if the United States wouldn ’ t defeat the Soviet Union , then the Soviet Union would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that part of the present case here .
Whereas WW II started in Hitler ’ s head in or around September of 1919 , WW III started in Truman ’ s head on that precise date ; and , because his immediate successor , President Eisenhower , had been the person who had created the idea ( actually of America ’ s conquering the entire world — the fundamental idea of neoconservatism ) , this idea ( from General Eisenhower ) became so firmly implanted at the very top of America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the present day .
When the Soviet Union and its communism and its Warsaw Pact formation in response to America ’ s NATO military alliance ( which had been formed by Truman in order to defeat the Soviet Union ) terminated in 1991 , U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush effectively redefined defeat of the Soviet Union and of its communism and of its Warsaw Pact , to mean simply defeat of Russia .
I have argued here that on the night of 24 February 1990 President Bush gave his first instruction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kohl of Germany ) that the Cold War is to continue until Russia itself is defeated .
This instruction was subsequently conveyed by his Administration to all of America ’ s now-vassal-states , including Japan .
If one looks at the actions — instead of the mere words — of each subsequent U.S. President , the U.S. regime has continued in accord with G.H.W .
Bush ’ s instruction , and America ’ s vassals have continued to obey it .
This means that Eisenhower ’ s 26 July 1945 advice to Truman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more precisely defined by the U.S. regime , to constitute not really an ideological communist-versus-capitalist Cold War , such as it had all along been propagandized as being ( and such as what both Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin still thought that it was ) , but instead an actual global-conquest land-area hot war , for ultimate U.S. global control ; or , as Barack Obama repeatedly expressed the U.S. regime ’ s actual intention , “ The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation ” , meaning that every other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that America ’ s control over every other nation is the U.S. regime ’ s actual goal .
The reason why these things are not well-known is not that the documentation of these events has not existed , but instead is that the accounts in the news-reports and in the history-books have paid virtually no attention to these events , which events are the core events of international history in our era , and to what these massively important events mean , for today ’ s world , and for international relations in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has the longest European border with Russia ( 1,625 miles ) and has therefore always been a prime target for the U.S. regime to flip into the anti-Russia column ( so as to become enabled to place U.S. missiles there ) , which flip Obama achieved in February 2014 by a bloody coup there , which destroyed the country and had been in the planning stages ever since at least 23 June 2011 , and which started being implemented inside the American Embassy in Ukraine on 1 March 2013 .
In fact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ June 2013 was actually seeking U.S. contractors to refurbish a building in Crimea so as for it to serve as part of America ’ s planned replacement of Russia ’ s largest naval base , which was there ( and still does exist there ) , so as to become instead yet another U.S. naval base .
However , none of these facts ( the U.S. regime being caught red-handed ) were reported by the news media or historical accounts within the U.S. regime and its satellite states .
( The present news-report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those media for possible publication or republication , since they ’ ve hidden all of this well-documented history , from 1945 till now .
It ’ s being submitted to them so that they will have this opportunity finally to make the documentation accessible to their audience . )
Furthermore : the main reason why the United States is trying to reconquer Iran after having been kicked out there when Iranians in 1979 ousted the dictator Shah that the U.S. regime had installed in a 1953 CIA coup , is that Iran is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is true of China , and of Venezuela , and of Iraq under Saddam Hussein , and of Libya under Muammar Gaddafi , and of Syria under Bashar al-Assad .
( The U.S. uses fascist mercenaries and Sunni jihadists as boots-on-the-ground fighters , its proxies , to overthrow the existing government in most of these countries . )
Yemen — which involves America ’ s war against Russia-friendly Iran — is also part of this .
All of these are “ hot wars ” for the local populations , even though the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia itself has not yet arrived .
Isolating Russia , before killing it , is the regime ’ s top goal , now , as it has been ever since 26 July 1945 .
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author , most recently , of They ’ re Not Even Close : The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records , 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST ’ S VENTRILOQUISTS : The Event that Created Christianity .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
(photo: the Big Three at the Potsdam Conference, July 1945)
Eric Zuesse
If not, then still the Cold War did. But was the start of the Cold War intended to be the start of WW III? Was it actually intended, even at its start, to be a prelude to, and preparation for, a nuclear war, between the U.S. and Russia? Yes, in fact. Here’s that history:
A war actually starts at the moment when the aggressive side first settles on its intention to conquer whatever it defines to be its opponent. I argued, in my 2000 book WHY the Holocaust Happened, that Germany’s leader, Adolf Hitler, first settled upon his life’s goal during or around September 1919, of exterminating all Jews in all countries and enslaving all ‘inferior’ peoples but especially Slavs — and that, as he saw it, The Thousand-Year Reich wouldn’t actually have been established unless and until Germany had done that, which “victory” would have required Germany to control all countries, so that the reign of “the Aryan,” or pureblooded Christians, over the entire planet, would have become achieved, by Germany. (Hitler thought that “Aryans,” or pure-blooded descendants of Adam and Eve from Genesis 3, had become contaminated with ”original sin” by Jews, who descended instead from the snake there, in Paradise, — thus, he often referred to Jews as “snakes.” That imagery was also used in Nazi propaganda. But only in Hitler’s private notes did he link the distinction between “Aryans” and “Jews” to “Original sin.” One can’t understand the meaning of those private notes he made to himself, unless one knows the Bible well, which Hitler certainly did.) Thus, in Hitler’s mind, the “Thousand-Year Reich” (which Judenrein world was inspired by his reading not only of Genesis 3 but of Revelation 20:1-7 and around 100 other passages in the Bible) never became achieved by Germany — and this is what actually is meant by the phrase “Germany lost WW II.” That (to him) divine “Reich” never started. Germany never attained its Fuehrer’s obsessive objective: global conquest (so that the “Thousand-Year Reich” of an Aryan-controlled Jew-free world would be able to begin).
Here, I shall present, and fully document, via links, the case that the Cold War started on 26 July 1945, when Dwight David Eisenhower, whose opinion U.S. President Truman apparently respected above all others, told the naive new President that if the United States wouldn’t defeat the Soviet Union, then the Soviet Union would defeat the United States. I argued that part of the present case here. Whereas WW II started in Hitler’s head in or around September of 1919, WW III started in Truman’s head on that precise date; and, because his immediate successor, President Eisenhower, had been the person who had created the idea (actually of America’s conquering the entire world — the fundamental idea of neoconservatism), this idea (from General Eisenhower) became so firmly implanted at the very top of America’s Government, that it dominates there, to the present day.
When the Soviet Union and its communism and its Warsaw Pact formation in response to America’s NATO military alliance (which had been formed by Truman in order to defeat the Soviet Union) terminated in 1991, U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush effectively redefined defeat of the Soviet Union and of its communism and of its Warsaw Pact, to mean simply defeat of Russia. I have argued here that on the night of 24 February 1990 President Bush gave his first instruction to American vassal-states (specifically to Helmut Kohl of Germany) that the Cold War is to continue until Russia itself is defeated. This instruction was subsequently conveyed by his Administration to all of America’s now-vassal-states, including Japan.
If one looks at the actions — instead of the mere words — of each subsequent U.S. President, the U.S. regime has continued in accord with G.H.W. Bush’s instruction, and America’s vassals have continued to obey it. This means that Eisenhower’s 26 July 1945 advice to Truman was, on 24 February 1990, more precisely defined by the U.S. regime, to constitute not really an ideological communist-versus-capitalist Cold War, such as it had all along been propagandized as being (and such as what both Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin still thought that it was), but instead an actual global-conquest land-area hot war, for ultimate U.S. global control; or, as Barack Obama repeatedly expressed the U.S. regime’s actual intention, “The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation”, meaning that every other nation is “dispensable” — meaning that America’s control over every other nation is the U.S. regime’s actual goal.
The reason why these things are not well-known is not that the documentation of these events has not existed, but instead is that the accounts in the news-reports and in the history-books have paid virtually no attention to these events, which events are the core events of international history in our era, and to what these massively important events mean, for today’s world, and for international relations in our times.
For example: Ukraine has the longest European border with Russia (1,625 miles) and has therefore always been a prime target for the U.S. regime to flip into the anti-Russia column (so as to become enabled to place U.S. missiles there), which flip Obama achieved in February 2014 by a bloody coup there, which destroyed the country and had been in the planning stages ever since at least 23 June 2011, and which started being implemented inside the American Embassy in Ukraine on 1 March 2013. In fact, the U.S. regime by no later than June 2013 was actually seeking U.S. contractors to refurbish a building in Crimea so as for it to serve as part of America’s planned replacement of Russia’s largest naval base, which was there (and still does exist there), so as to become instead yet another U.S. naval base. However, none of these facts (the U.S. regime being caught red-handed) were reported by the news media or historical accounts within the U.S. regime and its satellite states. (The present news-report is therefore being submitted to all of those media for possible publication or republication, since they’ve hidden all of this well-documented history, from 1945 till now. It’s being submitted to them so that they will have this opportunity finally to make the documentation accessible to their audience.)
Furthermore: the main reason why the United States is trying to reconquer Iran after having been kicked out there when Iranians in 1979 ousted the dictator Shah that the U.S. regime had installed in a 1953 CIA coup, is that Iran is friendly toward Russia, and the same is true of China, and of Venezuela, and of Iraq under Saddam Hussein, and of Libya under Muammar Gaddafi, and of Syria under Bashar al-Assad. (The U.S. uses fascist mercenaries and Sunni jihadists as boots-on-the-ground fighters, its proxies, to overthrow the existing government in most of these countries.) Yemen — which involves America’s war against Russia-friendly Iran — is also part of this. All of these are “hot wars” for the local populations, even though the “hot war” between the U.S. and Russia itself has not yet arrived. Isolating Russia, before killing it, is the regime’s top goal, now, as it has been ever since 26 July 1945.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-12--Duterte’s Military Independence from the U.S. Creates New Opportunities for China

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Paul Antonopoulos , Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies… The Philippines officially announced the ending of the National Visiting Forces Agreement ( VFA ) with the United States .
The denial of the U.S. military ’ s presence will give China a chance to expand militarization of the South China Sea and severely weaken the U.S. positioning in Southeast Asia .
The VFA , signed in 1998 , established the legal status for U.S. warships , aircraft and soldiers to be stationed in the Philippines .
Philippine Secretary of State Teddy Locsin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government the same day an affirmation of Manila ’ s official cancellation of the agreement , saying on Twitter : “ The Deputy Chief of Mission of the Embassy of the United States has received the notice of termination of the Visiting Forces Agreement .
As a legal courtesy there will be no further factual announcements following this self-explanatory development.
” According to presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo , the agreement termination will take effect 180 days from today , adding that “ It ’ s time we take care of ourselves .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rely on any other country.
” Since Duterte came to power in 2016 , he has repeatedly referred to severing ties with the U.S. while pursuing closer ties with non-traditional allies like Russia and China .
The leader openly expressed his frustration with Washington when several U.S. officials made comments about his war on drugs .
The discord was heightened when the U.S. Senate passed a resolution intended to punish Filipino officials involved in the drug war .
Washington also was critical of the arrest of Senator Leila De Lima , a human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration , who herself was arrested for drug-related allegations .
Senator Ronald Dela Rosa , who led the police force from 2016 to 2018 , said the U.S. Embassy did not explain why his visa was cancelled but thought it was related to those murdered under his supervision .
Duterte ordered an end to the military treaty after the U.S. cancelled the visas of Dela Rosa , who also took part in leading the war on drugs in the Philippines .
The cancellation of the VFA will benefit China mostly .
The VFA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and militarization of the West Coast Shoal since 2016 .
China urgently prepared to renovate and militarize this area before the decision of the International Court of Arbitration on the South China Sea sovereignty dispute was issued in July 2016 .
It was the VFA that prevented the conversion of Scarborough Shoal into a Chinese artificial island .
The presence of the U.S. military ’ s A-10 Warthogs and F/A-18 fighters caused China to abandon the Scarborough idea .
Despite this , China completed construction structures on seven reefs and the Spratly Islands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give them greater control over the disputed waters in the South China Sea .
The Chinese side took control of Scarborough from the Philippines in a tension between the two ships in 2012 .
Since then , China has maintained a military presence in the shoal with numerous maritime forces and coast guard vessels .
It was China ’ s occupation of Scarborough that prompted the Philippine government to bring the matter to international court .
China asserts that Beijing has sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea , including the continental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sovereignty claims on strategic maritime routes in the South China Sea , despite the Court ’ s ruling .
The 2016 Permanent Arbitration denied and nullified all of China ’ s claims .
After China conducted reclamation in the Spratlys and conducted illegal militarization , the U.S. became clear about the real danger posed by Beijing in the region against other regional states .
The three major Chinese artificial islands are just reef and outposts , almost impossible to attack .
The Philippines ’ loss of the VFA will give China a chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When the VFA is cancelled , China can completely eliminate other countries from the South China Sea militarily if it can deploy troops , build outposts and conduct militarization at all the locations of all these military bases .
Philippine Foreign Minister Teodoro Locsin Jr. earlier also emphasized that the regular presence of U.S. military forces prevented China from taking drastic actions in waters to the west of the Philippines .
Does this now mean that Duterte will continue his path moving closer to China ?
There are still the major issues of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevents a full alliance between Beijing and Manilla despite Duterte ’ s hostility to Washington .
However , Duterte ’ s move has ensured that the Philippines has certainly opened the way for the South China Sea to be redrawn .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Paul Antonopoulos, Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies…
The Philippines officially announced the ending of the National Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) with the United States. The denial of the U.S. military’s presence will give China a chance to expand militarization of the South China Sea and severely weaken the U.S. positioning in Southeast Asia. The VFA, signed in 1998, established the legal status for U.S. warships, aircraft and soldiers to be stationed in the Philippines.
Philippine Secretary of State Teddy Locsin Jr. signed and sent to the US Government the same day an affirmation of Manila’s official cancellation of the agreement, saying on Twitter:
“The Deputy Chief of Mission of the Embassy of the United States has received the notice of termination of the Visiting Forces Agreement. As a legal courtesy there will be no further factual announcements following this self-explanatory development.”
According to presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo, the agreement termination will take effect 180 days from today, adding that “It’s time we take care of ourselves. We will strengthen our defenses ourselves and not rely on any other country.”
Since Duterte came to power in 2016, he has repeatedly referred to severing ties with the U.S. while pursuing closer ties with non-traditional allies like Russia and China. The leader openly expressed his frustration with Washington when several U.S. officials made comments about his war on drugs. The discord was heightened when the U.S. Senate passed a resolution intended to punish Filipino officials involved in the drug war. Washington also was critical of the arrest of Senator Leila De Lima, a human rights activist and critic of the Duterte administration, who herself was arrested for drug-related allegations.
Senator Ronald Dela Rosa, who led the police force from 2016 to 2018, said the U.S. Embassy did not explain why his visa was cancelled but thought it was related to those murdered under his supervision. Duterte ordered an end to the military treaty after the U.S. cancelled the visas of Dela Rosa, who also took part in leading the war on drugs in the Philippines.
The cancellation of the VFA will benefit China mostly. The VFA has helped prevent China from strengthening construction and militarization of the West Coast Shoal since 2016. China urgently prepared to renovate and militarize this area before the decision of the International Court of Arbitration on the South China Sea sovereignty dispute was issued in July 2016. It was the VFA that prevented the conversion of Scarborough Shoal into a Chinese artificial island. The presence of the U.S. military’s A-10 Warthogs and F/A-18 fighters caused China to abandon the Scarborough idea.
Despite this, China completed construction structures on seven reefs and the Spratly Islands. The acquisition of Scarborough Shoal will give them greater control over the disputed waters in the South China Sea. The Chinese side took control of Scarborough from the Philippines in a tension between the two ships in 2012. Since then, China has maintained a military presence in the shoal with numerous maritime forces and coast guard vessels. It was China’s occupation of Scarborough that prompted the Philippine government to bring the matter to international court.
China asserts that Beijing has sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, including the continental shelves of countries that share the same sovereignty claims on strategic maritime routes in the South China Sea, despite the Court’s ruling. The 2016 Permanent Arbitration denied and nullified all of China’s claims. After China conducted reclamation in the Spratlys and conducted illegal militarization, the U.S. became clear about the real danger posed by Beijing in the region against other regional states.
The three major Chinese artificial islands are just reef and outposts, almost impossible to attack.
The Philippines’ loss of the VFA will give China a chance to carry out its long-term goal. When the VFA is cancelled, China can completely eliminate other countries from the South China Sea militarily if it can deploy troops, build outposts and conduct militarization at all the locations of all these military bases.
Philippine Foreign Minister Teodoro Locsin Jr. earlier also emphasized that the regular presence of U.S. military forces prevented China from taking drastic actions in waters to the west of the Philippines. Does this now mean that Duterte will continue his path moving closer to China? There are still the major issues of dividing the South China Sea equitably that prevents a full alliance between Beijing and Manilla despite Duterte’s hostility to Washington. However, Duterte’s move has ensured that the Philippines has certainly opened the way for the South China Sea to be redrawn.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report