On BARD, there's a new book, Sand and Blood by John Carlos Frey. He's been on
Democracy Now. He reports on what is happening on the border and this is an
excellent and upsetting book.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10:27 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: PATRICK LAWRENCE: The Establishment is Changing
its Tune on Russia
Designated Enemy!
It is kind of silly. But the answer is just as silly. Our Great Leaders are
so contemptuous of the average American, that they feel we can only handle one
threat at a time. Notice how Climate Change has been dropped? It certainly is
not because we've solved our mad rush toward total pollution of the planet, and
ensuing impact on our ability to survive. No, our "Wise Leaders" believe we're
far too simple minded to be frightened over more than one threat at a time.
So here we are, building walls, and huge weapon warehouses in order to protect
our precious borders. Never mind that every technically aware nation can
simply trot into our living rooms through our internet.
Carl Jarvis
On 9/10/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Problem is, the motivation is to substitute China as the most
important enemy. Why must we have a designated enemy?
Miriam
PATRICK LAWRENCE: The Establishment is Changing its Tune on Russia
September 9, 2019
Russophobic rhetoric persists in Washington, but a counter-argument is
emerging.
G7 leaders gather for a "family" photo, Aug. 25, 2019, Biarritz, France.
(White House/Shealah Craighead)
By Patrick Lawrence
Special to Consortium News
Are Western democracies, the U.S. and France in the lead, rethinking
the hostility toward Russia they conjured out of nothing since Moscow
responded to the coup Washington cultivated in Ukraine five years ago?
Will Trump eventually succeed in putting ties with Russia on a more
productive path - triumphing over the hawks hovering around him? Have
the Europeans at last grown weary of following the U.S. lead on Russia
even as it is against their interests to do so?
In desultory fashion over the past month or so, we have had
indications that the policy cliques in Washington are indeed
reconsidering the Cold War II they set in motion during the Obama
administration's final years. And President Donald Trump, persistent
in his effort to reconstruct relations with Russia, now finds an
unlikely ally in Emmanuel Macron. This suggests a nascent momentum in
a new direction.
"Pushing Russia away from Europe is a profound strategic mistake,"
the French president asserted in a stunning series of remarks to
European diplomats immediately after the Group of 7 summit in Biarritz
late last month.
This alone is a bold if implicit attack on the hawkish Russophobes
Trump now battles in Washington. Macron then outdid himself: "We are
living the end of Western hegemony," he told the assembled envoys.
It is difficult to recall when a Western leader last spoke so
truthfully and insightfully of our 21stcentury realities, chief among
them the inevitable rise of non-Western nations to positions of parity
with the Atlantic world.
You have nonetheless read no word of this occasion in our corporate media:
Macron's startling observations run entirely counter to the frayed
triumphalism and nostalgia that grip Washington as its era of
preeminence fades.
President Donald J. Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron in
joint press conference in Biarritz, France, site of the G7 Summit, Aug. 26,
2019.
(White House/ Andrea Hanks)
There is much to indicate that the West's aggressively hostile posture
toward Russia remains unchanged. The Russophobic rhetoric emanating
from Washington and featured daily in our corporate television
broadcasts continues unabated. Last month Washington formally
abandoned the bilateral treaty limiting deployment of
intermediate-range ballistic missiles, signed with Moscow in 1987. As
anyone could have predicted, NATO now suggests it will upgrade its
missile defense systems in Poland and Romania. This amounts to an
engraved invitation to the Russian Federation to begin a new arms
race.
But a counter-argument favoring a constructive relationship with
Russia is now evident. This is not unlike the abrupt volte-face in
Washington's thinking on North Korea: It is now broadly accepted that
the Korean crisis can be resolved only at the negotiating table.
The Times Are Changing
The New York Times seems to be on board with this this sharp turn in
foreign policy. It reported the new consensus on North Korea in a news
analysis on July 11. Ten days later it published another arguing that
it's time to put down the spear and make amends with Moscow. Here is
the astonishing pith of the piece: "China, not Russia, represents by
far the greater challenge to American objectives over the long term.
That means President Trump is correct to try to establish a sounder
relationship with Russia and peel it away from China."
It is encouraging that the Times has at last discovered the
well-elaborated alliance between Moscow and Beijing. It took the
one-time newspaper of record long enough. But there is another feature
of this article that is important to note: It was published as a lead
editorial. This is not insignificant.
It is essential, when reading the Times, to understand the close - not
to say corrupt - relations it has maintained with political power in
Washington over many generations. This is well-documented in histories
of the paper and of institutions such as the CIA. An editorial
advancing a policy shift of this magnitude almost certainly reflects
the paper's close consultations, at senior levels of management, with
policy-setting officials at the National Security Council, the State
Department, or at the Pentagon. The editorial is wholly in keeping
with Washington's pronounced new campaign to designate China as
America's most dangerous threat.
It is impossible to say whether Trump is emboldened by an inchoate
shift of opinion on Russia, but he flew his banner high at the
Biarritz G-7. Prior to his departure for the summit in southwest
France he asserted that Russia should be readmitted to the group when
it convenes in the U.S. next year.
Russia was excluded in 2014, following its annexation of Crimea in
response to the coup in Kiev.
Trump repeated the thought in Biarritz, claiming there was support
among other members for the restoration of the G-8. "I think it's a
work in progress," he said. "We have a number of people that would
like to see Russia back."
Macron is plainly one of those people. It was just after Trump sounded
his theme amid Biarritz's faded grandeur - and what an excellent
choice for a convention of the Western powers - that the French
president made his own plea for repairing ties with Russia and for
Europe to escape its fate as "a theater for strategic struggle between the
U.S. and Russia."
Biarritz from the Pointe Saint-Martin, 1999. (Wikimedia Commons)
"The European continent will never be stable, will never be secure, if
we don't pacify and clarify our relations with Russia," Macron said in
his address to Western diplomats. Then came his flourish on the
imminent end of the Atlantic world's preeminence.
"The world order is being shaken like never before. It's being shaken
because of errors made by the West in certain crises, but also by the
choices made by the United States in the past few years- and not just
by the current administration."
Macron is an opportunistic main-chancer in European politics, and it
is not at all certain how far he can or will attempt to advance his
new vision of either the West or Europe in the Continent's councils of
state. But as evidence of a new current in Western thinking about
Russia, the non-West in general, and Europe's long-nursed desire for
greater independence from Washington, the importance of his comments is
beyond dispute.
The question now is whether or how soon better ties with Moscow will
translate into practical realities. At present, Trump and Macron share
a good idea without much substance to it.
Better US-Russia Ties May Be in Pipeline
But Trump may have taken a step in the right direction. Within days of
his return from Biarritz, he put a hold on the Ukraine Security
Assistance Initiative, a military aid program that was to provide Kiev
with $250 million in assistance during the 2019 fiscal year, which
begins Oct. 1 and runs to Sept. 30, 2020. The funds are designated for
weaponry, training and intelligence support.
Trump has asked his national security advisers to review the commitment.
The
delay, coming hard on his proposal to readmit Russia to a
reconstituted G-8, cannot possibly be read as a coincidence.
There will be other things to watch for in months to come. High among
these is Trump's policy toward the Nord Stream 2 pipeline linking
Russian gas fields to terminals in Western Europe, thereby cutting
Ukraine out of the loop. Trump, his desire to improve ties with Moscow
notwithstanding, has vigorously opposed this project. The Treasury
Department has threatened sanctions against European contractors
working on it. If Trump is serious about bringing Russia back into the
fold, this policy will have to go. This may mean going up against the
energy lobby in Washington and Ukraine's many advocates on Capitol Hill.
To date, U.S. threats to retaliate against construction of Nord Stream
2 have done nothing but irritate Europeans, who have ignored them,
while furthering the Continent's desire to escape Washington's
suffocating embrace. This is precisely the kind of contradiction
Macron addressed when he protested that Europeans need to begin acting
in their own interests rather than acquiesce as Washington
force-marches them on a never-ending anti-Russia crusade.
Macron may prove a pushover, or a would-be Gaullist who fails to make
the grade. Or he may have just announced a long-awaited inflection
point in trans-Atlantic ties. Either way, he has put highly
significant questions on the table. It will be interesting to see what
responses they may elicit, not least from the Trump White House.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for
the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, author and
lecturer.
His most recent book is "Time No Longer: Americans After the American
Century" (Yale). Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist. His web site is
Patrick Lawrence. Support his work via his Patreon site.
