15 Oct 2018

IMF – WB – WTO – Scaremongering Threats on De-Globalization and Tariffs – The Return to Sovereign Nations

Peter Koenig

As key representatives of the three chief villains of international finance and trade, the IMF, World Bank (WB) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) met on the lush resort island of Bali, Indonesia, they warned the world of dire consequences in terms of reduced international investments and decline of economic growth as a result of the ever-widening trade wars initiated and instigated by the Trump Administration. They criticized protectionism that might draw countries into decline of prosperity. The IMF cuts its global economic growth forecast for the current year and for 2019.
This is pure scaremongering based on nothing. In fact, economic growth of the past that claimed of having emanated from increased trade and investments has served a small minority and driven a widening wedge between rich and poor of both developing and industrialized countries. It’s interesting, how nobody ever talks about the internal distribution of GDP growth that these handlers and instruments of empire and liars for the elite are boasting about; nobody ever seems to question the way these growth rates are calculated – or perhaps just drawn out of hot air? Take the case of Peru, a resource-rich country that boasted in the past often an economic growth of 5% to 7%. On average, the distribution of this growth was such that 80% went to 5% of the population and 20% was to be distributed among 95% of the people. This doesn’t even address the fragmentation of the lower and higher tiers of the percentage breakdowns, but it surely creates more poverty, more inequality, more unemployment and more delinquency.
Or just look at the insane and totally unfounded IMF prediction of 1 million percent inflation of the Venezuelan new currency in 2018 and 2019? – What are they talking about? No substantiation whatsoever. The same with the prediction of dire consequences from reduced trade, when trade as we know it, has and is serving almost exclusively the corporate world of rich industrialized countries, leaving poorer developing countries behind with a burden of unfair deals and often a resulting debt trap.
Such manipulations of truth coming out of international financial and trade organizations, especially the IMF and the WB, are so flagrantly and scrupulously wrong that they cannot be backed with a shred of professionalism, yet they get away with it, because of their apparent unfailable reputation, scaremongering government into doing what is against their and their peoples’ best interest, namely caring for their own local, sovereign economy, without any foreign interference.
Time and again it has been proven that countries that need and want to recover from economic fallouts do best by concentrating on and promoting their own internal socioeconomic capacities, with as little as possible outside interference. One of the most prominent cases in point is China. After China emerged on 1 October 1949 from centuries of western colonization and oppression by Chairman Mao’s creation of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Mao and the Chinese Communist party first had to put a devastated ‘house in order’, a country ruined by disease, lack of education, suffering from hopeless famine as a result of shameless exploitation by western colons. In order to do that China remained practically closed to the outside world until about the mid- 1980’s. Only then, when China had overcome the rampant diseases and famine, built a countrywide education system and became a net exporter of grains and other agricultural products, China, by now totally self-sufficient, gradually opened its borders for international investments and trade. – And look where China is today. Only 30 years later, China has not only become the world’s number one economy, but also a world super power that can no longer be overrun by western imperialism.
But you don’t need to look that far. North Dakota saved herself from the 2008 “crisis”, by using public banking addressing the ND State’s economic needs – not the shareholder’s greed – and planning production and service activities that guaranteed basically full employment, while the rest of the country’s unemployment skyrocketed. The State’s economy grew by close to 3% in 2008 and 2009 – and is still today the State with the fastest growth rate in the country and with the lowest unemployment rate. This is mostly due to a state economic development policy that concentrates on local capacities and that banks on public banking. Today, North Dakota has still the only public bank in the country; but other States, like New Jersey, New Mexico, Arizona and others, as well as the city of Los Angeles are at the brink of creating pubic banking. The mainstream media, however, doesn’t propagate such examples, as they are not in the interest of the banking and corporate oligarchs.
Local economy with local investments for the benefit of the local population, is, of course, not what the ultra-capitalist system wants. It doesn’t fit the neoliberal economic doctrine – driving globalization forward, pushing its bitter medicine of austerity down poor governments throats, so to further exploit their people, creating more poverty, milking their social systems and steeling their natural resources.
Enough! Wake up! – Whatever you may think of President Trump – and he is certainly no panacea for world peace and his abject policy of interference in foreign lands and fueling conflicts and wars in the Middle East and around the globe must be condemned – but his protectionist policies, the “tariff wars” are a welcome sword into the belly of globalization – of the very neoliberal doctrine that has for the last thirty years brought more misery to 99.99% of the planet’s population than any other economic doctrine since Adam Smith. Trump may or may not know what he is doing, but certainly his handlers and advisers, hidden or overt, know the purpose of their newly professed turn of international policy.
Its intention is to cut the political cohesion created by globalization, to divide again for the empire to conquer. Yes. The intention is not to promote local economies, per se, but rather to get countries ready for unguarded bilateral negotiations and agreements between Washington and the developing world, under which the latter have no protection, and with their mostly corrupt leaders, they buckle under facing the harsh conditions of the empire. So, the purpose is not to help, say, the Latin American US backyard to become sovereign again, to the contrary, with imposed bilateral deals – see Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia – they are slated to become increasingly vulnerable to and dependent on the US and US-dollar hegemony.
The point is – for self-conscious and alert governments with the desire to return to their sovereign national politics – this is a crucial moment of truth to take advantage of. The ship is turning. It is the moment to jump off the globalized bandwagon, the globalized trade – the open borders for indiscriminate foreign investments; it is time to sit down and reflect – and return to autonomous local policies: local economies, for local markets, with local money and local public banking for the benefit of the local economy. Trade, of course is part of a local economy; but trade should best be kept within the realm of friendly neighbors and nations that have similar interests and similar political convictions. Trade under de-globalized circumstances should and will return equal benefits for partners, a win-win situation for all trading partners – as it should be according to the original interpretation of trade. By contrast, modern trade as we know it, has almost consistently benefitted the rich countries to the detriment of the poorer ones.
A good example for fair and equal trade may be ALBA (Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América) – an association of 11 Latin American and Caribbean countries (Antigua and Barbuda Bolivia, Cuba, Dominica, Grenada, Nicaragua, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent, Surinam, the Grenadines and Venezuela), initiated and created by Venezuela and Cuba. ALBA may be an excellent illustration on how trade should work between countries or groups of countries. Most people have never heard of ALBA, for the simple reason, the international media are typically silent about it, because the neoliberal elite doesn’t want a case of equality to become an example for others to follow. There exist currently other similar, even lesser known cases of fair and equal trade, throughout the world, that are equally silenced by the media.
Promoting fair and equal trade is not an agenda item of WTO, nor of the IMF or the World Bank. Their role is just the contrary, being facilitators for the west to further exploit the people of the South and to further deplete the workers’ accumulated funds of their social safety-net that are still available in many western industrialized countries, especially in the western EU. It’s the bedrock of social safety that can be privatized and sucked empty by the international corporate banking system, along with privatization of social infrastructure, such as water supply and sanitation, electricity, hospitals, airports, railways – and much more. All what has the air of profitability can and must be privatized under neoliberal economic doctrines.
Countries, nations and societies, beware from listening and adhering to and working with these nefarious globalizing organizations – IMF, WTO and WB. They are mere servants of western corporatism and debt enslaving financial systems driven by the US Federal Reserves (FED), as well as Wall Street and their European banking partners.
This is an appeal to all countries that are proud of regaining their political sovereignty and economic autonomy, to ignore scaremongering and fear imposing threats by the IMF, the World Bank and WTO. They are not representing the truth, but their nasty role is to belie reality in favor of manipulative invented statistics that are expected to being believed because they stem from these so-called well-reputed institutions. Again, the best example of the IMF’s nonsensical statements is their repeated denigration of Venezuela, accusing the country of fostering an economy that creates a one million percent inflation in 2018 and even higher, they say, in 2019. – Can you imagine? – That says it all. Be aware – their words, whether spoken in Bali, Washington or Geneva, are nothing more than fear- and threat mongering hot air.

New avenues for visually impaired women

Sheshu Babu

Women are forging ahead in many new sectors which were hitherto considered male bastions. Adding to their achievements, the visually impaired and blind women are being trained in detection of breast cancer. In a unique initiative, the women in Delhi are being trained to detect breast cancer by medical tactile examination. According to a report in Hindustan Times ( Kabir Singh Bhandari, updated October 14, 2018, ), The National Association for the Blind (NAB) Centre for Blind Women and Disability Studies in collaboration with Discovering Hands, Germany, has started training for the women so that they will be able to detect early signs of breast cancer.
The article commemorating world sight day quotes Shalini Khanna, Director of NAB, ” We were contacted by Discovering Hands, Germany in 2015 and they told us about the programme where blind women through a manual check up can detect early signs of breast cancer. Along with Dr. Kanchan Kaur who is associate Director at the Breast Services in Mendata Medicity Gurgaon, I went to Germany to thoroughly check this system since we had our doubts about it. However we realized that the blind women were conducting the examination in the same manner as medical professionals, but with more concentration and focus”.
Explaining the procedure, Khanna says, ” There is a five day assessment period during we check certain skills that are imperative for them to be chosen for the course, and a lot of them do not succeed during this test. Also the women have to be over 18, and their age and maturity is an important criterion. After all, they are looking for a tumour! We coach them so that they’re comfortable about their own bodies and examining others. Breasts are something we don’t really talk about much in India. ”
Procedure
Medical Tactile Examiners ( MTEs) assist doctors in detecting tumours leading to breast cancer. They use tactile strips with Braille markings on breast region that is divided into four parts – breasts, underarm area till rib region, back and neck region. If examination reveals a lump, braille markings can indicate exact points. MTEs jot down the findings on tactile graph for doctor. Manual checks can detect lumps as small as 0.5 cms. Neha Suri is among the first seven member batch of blind women to be trained for the job.(Ambika Pundit, updated Sep 30, 2018, timesofindia,indiatimes.com). She is part of a pilot that seeks to make differently- abled inclusion real. Neha will be working with a team of doctors at Fortis hospital, Vasant Kunj ( Delhi) to encourage women undergo non- invasive preventive check-ups.
Trained MTEs use ‘ optimal sensory touch’ which involves putting just enough pressure and releasing it with fingers that move from one centimeter to the other covering the entire breast region.
Dr . Frank Hoffman, German Gynecologist who was behind ‘ Discovering Hands ‘ project argues that because of their disability, blind possess more accurately developed sense of touch which has proved to be valuable asset in breast examination.( Nick Wade and Joana Krause- Palfner, Blind women help detect breast cancer, updated Jul 30, 2009, cnn.com). A study at the Essen University’s womens ‘s clinic Germany concluded that MTUs found more smaller tumours than doctors in 450 cases.
A new hope for visually disabled women
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in India. Its incidence is about 24 in 100, 000 population. Early detection is key to cure of the dreaded disease.
Shalini Khanna feels that MTEs can fill up the vacuum that currently exists in preventive check – up category.
The initiative to execute this innovative program in hospitals has been taken up by Dr Mandeep Singh Malhotra, Head,Surgical Oncology and his team of doctors at FLT , LT Rajan DhallFortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj. A lot of women come from background where being blind is unbearable to family. The family ignores them. Sweta Verna, one of the MTEs recounts her emotional journey and feels happy as she got work and her family talks to her. ( newsapexs.com). Her message to blind individuals and parents is that they should be given support. There are many centers where the disabled can be enrolled for training and make their parents proud of their work.

The US-Led Genocide and Destruction of Yemen

David William Pear

“Only God can save our children”, say Yemeni fathers and mothers as they can do nothing but watch their children die, try to comfort them in their final agonizing hours, and pray for God to spare them from death. The fathers and mothers watch and pray, as one by another their children die from cholera, dehydration and starvation.

Biqdad, nine, and Mariah, two, are receiving treatment for cholera in the state-run Al-Sabeen hospital in Sanaa, Yemen. (MEE/Mohammed Hamoud)
Where is God? He cannot get through the total US blockade of Yemen to save the children. A cholera epidemic is a man-made disaster. Since 2015 the cholera epidemic has been spread by biological warfare against Yemen. US bombs dropped by Saudi pilots destroyed Yemen’s public water and sewage systems. The parts, chemicals and fuel to operate Yemen’s water purification and sewage plants are blockaded. Potable water, cholera vaccine, and even individual water purification tablets cannot get in.
The sewage from non-working treatment plants overflows into streams that run onto agricultural land, thus contaminating vegetables before they go to market. Sewage flows into the cities, residential areas and the refugee camps. Flies swarm over the sewage and spread cholera everywhere. The International Committee of the Red Cross, the Red Crescent, and Doctors Without Borders; hospitals, clinics and disaster relief organizations, and human rights workers have been deliberately bombed.

[Sanitation problems, as well as a shortage of medicine and supplies have pushed the number of cholera cases in Yemen. Photo by Yahya Arhab/EPA]
The US dominated United Nations adds a fig leaf of legality to the blockade, and a one-sided weapons embargo against Yemen. To ask why there is no UN arms embargo against Saudi Arabia is, of course, a rhetorical question.
The UN wrings its hands about a humanitarian crisis, and the worst cholera epidemic in human history. The UN does nothing to stop the US-led Saudi genocide and destruction of Yemen, and it puts out knowingly phony underreported numbers of the civilian deaths. The UN is not an honest broker.
The former US ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley threw a temper tantrum when the UN dared to even voice mild criticism against the US, when it moved its embassy to Jerusalem. She spoke of the UN “disrespecting” the US, and she threatened financial retaliation against the UN and countries that voted contrary to US wishes.


President Donald Trump cut funding to humanitarian UN agencies, did not try to stop Israel from gunning down thousands of unarmed Palestinians, withdrew the US from the UN Human Rights Council, and thumbed his nose at the UN International Court of Justice. Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton said that the US plans on withdrawing from more treaties that are the foundation of international law.
The US dominated United Nations adds a fig leaf of legality to the blockade, and a one-sided weapons embargo against Yemen. To ask why there is no UN arms embargo against Saudi Arabia is, of course, a rhetorical question.
In other words, Bolton is confirming that the US is a rouge state; it makes a mockery of the United Nations. From the beginning of the Bush-era War on Terror, the US showed contempt for the Geneva Conventions. Obama too violated customary international law with impunity. Obama assassinated US citizens, droned Afghan wedding parties and funerals, and destroyed Libya. He invaded Syria in an illegal war of aggression. Obama was really good at killing. He allegedly said so himself.
Purposely causing a cholera epidemic is biological warfare. Yemen is not an unprecedented case of US use of biological-chemical warfare. During the 1950’s Korean War the US was accused convincingly of biological warfare. In the Vietnam-American War the US sprayed millions of gallons of Agent Orange, which poisoned the soil, rivers and people. Agent Orange, 40 years later is still “causing miscarriages, skin diseases, cancers, birth defects, and congenital malformations”.

The US contaminated Bosnia, Afghanistan, and the Middle East with so-called depleted uranium. Depleted uranium can cause cancer, birth defects, and as yet other unknown health effects. The US knows it. It has put out a health warning to US Iraq war veterans.
In 1995, Madeleine Albright was interview by Lesley Stahl on the TV show “60 Minutes”. That interview should live in infamy in a hall of shame for eternity. Stahl asked Albright if the death of over 500,000 Iraqi children caused by US sanctions was “worth it”. Albright’s answer was, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.” (Whoever the “we” is, Albright did not elaborate.) It is now known that “we” purposely used biological warfare to kill those 500,000 Iraqi children.



How many more children did Albright, the Bill Clinton administration and “we” continue to kill because “we” thought it was “worth it”? Hundreds of thousands, according to a study of the partially declassified Defense Intelligence Agency document “Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities”. The partially declassified document was discovered in 1998 on an official website of the Military Health System. In 2001 the Association of Genocide Scholars released the study referred to above: The Role of “Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities” in Halting One Genocide and Preventing Others.
During the 1991 First Gulf War the US purposely targeted all of the water purification plants and sanitation works in Iraq, which is itself a war crime. The “Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities” document produced by the US Department of Defense and implemented in1991, was continued under President Bill Clinton. Even after Albright’s admission on “60 Minutes” that the US sanctions regime had killed 500,000 Iraqi children, “we” continued the draconian embargo of water purification equipment.
The Department of Defense and Madeleine Albright’s “we” knew that without potable water that the rate of waterborne diseases, such as cholera, would sicken and kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Depriving an entire population of the essentials of life is genocide, and it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Degrading of the water supply to knowinglu cause epidemics, such as cholera, is biological warfare.
Economic sanctions and trade embargos are barbaric siege warfare against civilian populations. There is no way to pretty them up as surgically targeting a regime or being humanitarian. Now think about Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Burma and, Côte d’Ivoire that are suffering under a US embargo today.
The “Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities” document reveals the diabolical intention of a sanctions regime, even when authorized by the UN. It is for these and other reasons that The International Committee of the Red Cross has often raised concerns, including concerns about UN authorized sanctions regimes. Not even the UN has the authority to violate the Geneva Conventions, and the UN oversteps its authority when it does so.
The US has also overstepped the UN’s authority against Yemen, by imposing a total blockade. Hundreds of children are dying every day in Yemen. Tens of thousands of civilians have died from starvation, disease and the lack of medicine. Twenty million human beings are starving to death in a famine caused by the US, and its proxy, the so-called Saudi coalition.
For three years, starting with the Obama administration the US has been passing Saudi Arabia the bombs, ammunition, fuel, and most importantly it is the US military at the command and control center of the war. Other war-profiteering countries, such as the UK, EU countries, and Canada have their hands dripping with the blood and cholera infected feces of Yemeni children, too.

[Photo: Nora Al-Alwaki, an American citizen killed by Navy SEALs when they raided her Yemeni village on January 29, 2017.]

US Special Forces, Seal Team 6, and the CIA carry out night raids and assignations, such as the one that killed 8 year old Nora, pictured above. She was an American citizen who lived with her grandparents in a Yemeni village.
Nora was the daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, who was the first known American citizen to be executed by the US without due process. A week later his 16 year old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was assassinated by a US drone. Barack Obama carried out those killings in 2011. It was also Obama that planned the raid in which Nora was killed by Trump on February 1, 2017.
I don’t believe it was a coincidence. When Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibb was asked why 16 year old Abdurahman was killed, his answer was that his crime was that he “should have had a more responsible father”. Was that Nora’s “crime” too?
The war against Yemen is another dirty war like Iraq was. It is an ‘all but in name only’ a US genocide-scale slaughter of civilians and the destruction of a country. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its so-called coalition are the US proxy that pays for the bombs and drops them. It is the US that picks out the targets, from back at the command and control center.

The complicit mainstream media tries hard to sell the people the idea that the US imperial military is actually engaged in worthwhile missions. Here’s what the moral imbeciles at CBS came up with, the glorification of SEAL teams.
Most of the ground fighting inside Yemen is caused by an invasion of US, Saudi and UAE sponsored Salafists terrorists, mujahideen, al-Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, and Blackwater (rebranded Academi) US, Somalia and South American mercenaries. Saudi-backed terrorists are attacking in the north, while UAE-backed terrorist attack in the south. Saudi-backed terrorists are fighting UAE terrorists. Saudi Arabia has put a blockade on Qatar, in a squabble over Yemen.
The de facto government of Yemen is the leadership of the Houthi Movement, named after its charismatic founder Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi. The Houthi Movement is backed by Yemen’s military units, security forces and a broad base of the Yemeni people, including many Sunnis. That is not to say that Yemenis do not have many differences. They do, but when their common self-interests are at stake, they do come together, despite their differences.
There are some internal groups opposed to the Houthi Movement and they are collaborating with the Saudi and UAE terrorist groups, but this is not a Sunni vs. Shia war. Nor is the war a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, as the corporate mainstream media monopoly would have the US public believe.
The Zaydi Shia that makes up about 42% of Yemen’s population is closer to Sunni Islam than they are to the Shia branch of Islam in Iran. The Zaidi-led Houthi Movement “have not called for restoring the imamate in Yemen, and religious grievances have not been a major factor in the war”, according to Al Jazeera. Rather, the Houthi Movement has been primarily economic, political and regional in nature.
There is a separatist movement in what was once South Yemen, which until 1990 was a separate communist country: The Democratic Republic of Yemen. Before unification North Yemen was the Yemen Arab Republic. In the power struggle that followed unification the south lost power and patronage. The UAE is backing a southern separatist group, the Southern Transitional Council, which also opposes Hadi and Saudi Arabia. As mentioned, Saudi backed terrorists are fighting UAE-backed terrorists.
The US, KSA and the UN try to pass off the “internationally recognized legitimate government of Yemen” as if it were Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi. Hadi was the president of an interim government of Yemen from 2012 to 2014. Hadi fraudulently overstayed his term when it expired in 2014.
Hadi was forcefully removed from office by the Houthi Movement, and a broad base uprising of the Yemeni people. Hadi resigned his office and fled to Saudi Arabia. The US, KSA and the UN use Hadi as a figurehead to add a fig leaf of legality to the illegal US-led war of aggression against Yemen.


There is little if any evidence that Iran is providing the Houthi Movement with weapons, materials or fighters. Look at the map. How would Iran be able to get past the total US blockade, even if it wanted to. Iran has its hands full with its (legal) support of its ally Syria. Iran is struggling with its own economic crisis caused by the illegal US economic sanctions regime, re-imposed by the Trump administration.
When the US was pressed for hard evidence to back up its allegations that Iran was involved in Yemen, the best that the former UN ambassador Nikki Haley could do was come up with a few missile parts. The UN dismissed Haley’s show as having “no evidence as to the identity of the broker or supplier.” Iran has denied involvement in Yemen, and rejected the US’s claims as unfounded, and Iran further added:
“These accusations seek also to cover up for the Saudi war crimes in Yemen, with the US complicity, and divert attention from the stalemate war of aggression against the Yemenis.”
Yemenis, regardless of religion, region or tribe are fiercely nationalistic, and they are nobody’s puppet. They resent attempts by foreign invaders to dominate them. Yemen, like Afghanistan, is a graveyard where empires come to die. The Saudis and the UAE are leaning it the hard way.
The US is like a zombie empire that never dies in an empire graveyard. Instead when faced with humiliation and defeat, the US totally destroys its antagonist from the air, as it did Iraq, Libya and Syria. The US shows no mercy for the civilian population. The US destroys civilian infrastructure, blockades food, water and medicine. It targets the people with cluster bombs and white phosphorus; and the US poisons their water, soil and air with biological, chemical and radioactive weapons.
[Photo: Minn Post, “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with Libyan soldiers upon her departure from Tripoli in Libya on October 18, 2011.]
As with Iraq, Libya, and Syria and with so many other small countries that the US declared to be its enemy, Yemen poses no threat to the US national security. So why does the US destroy small countries, and why is the US destroying Yemen?
In the 1990’s with the collapse of the USSR, the US set out to build an empire to dominate the world, and it made no secret of it. The US plan for world domination has gone by different names, such as the Wolfowitz Doctrine, the Project for a New American Century (PNAC)Full Spectrum Dominance, the Indispensable Nation, American Exceptionalism, New World Order, and more subtly the role of US World Leadership.
Whatever name US world domination goes by, it is all the same. The US considers itself above international law, customary moral behavior and believes it alone has the right to pursue whatever it thinks is in its self-interest politically, militarily and financially. If the US were a person, it would be diagnosed as a psychopath, with no conscience, no empathy, and no remorse; aggressive, narcissistic and a serial mass murderer.
Yemen is often scripted by the corporate-government mainstream media as “the poorest country in the Middle East”, as if it has no wealth that anybody could possibly want. The people of Yemen are poor, but Yemen is rich in oil, pipeline routes, gold, minerals, agriculture, fishing, state owned enterprises, desirable real estate, finance, and its geography gives Yemen great potential for tourism.
Yemen’s 30 million people are both a potential source of cheap labor and a potential market for the products of US global corporations. Yemen is strategically located at the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, through which 1.4 billion barrels of oil pass every day. For millennium Yemen was a center for trade.
The US covets Yemen’s wealth and its strategic location as part of the neoliberal New World Order. The US vision of the New World Order is a world dominated by US global corporations, US financial institutions and wealthy US family dynasties.
US foreign policy is shaped by special interests, monopolies and their political action committees (PACS), such as those of weapons manufacturers, financial institutions, pharmaceutical companies, and agri-business. Foreign countries such as Israel and Saudi Arabia also have powerful lobbies that can manipulate US foreign policy to their advantage. US foreign policy has little to do with the interests of the average US citizen.


Yemen is the southern neighbor to the KSA, and the Saudis want a corrupt, compliant and passive government in Yemen. The KSA has expanded its border to encroach on Yemen’s northern borderlands, which is the birthplace of the Houthi Movement. The Saudi dynasty also fears an independent Yemeni people that might influence the oppressed people of the Saudi Dynasty. The KSA is a powder keg for an uprising of the people, they are ready to explode.
The KSA uses extremist Wahhabi Islam as a political subterfuge to recruit jihadist, terrorists, and to spread Saudi influence throughout West Asia, Africa and beyond. International terrorism has been a joint venture of the US, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states. All the GCC states: KSA, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, and Kuwait are theocratic monarchies. That says volumes about US values for democracy and human rights.
The US has a long history of coveting the wealth of Yemen. In the mid-1980s the Bush family and their Texas oil buddies at Hunt Oil invested in Yemen’s oil-rich Marib Shabwa basin. Bush obtained for Hunt Oil the rights for future exploration. Deviously, the former director of the CIA and then Vice President Bush arranged for Iraq’s Saddam Hussein to finance the Bush-Hunt investments in Yemen. A few years later Bush “repaid” Saddam’s loan with Shock and Awe.
Since 2015 the US has been protecting the Bush family’s investments in Yemen, global corporations, neoliberalism and the vision of a New World Order. The people of Yemen have been starch opponents of neoliberalism and like their old world order. They rebelled against the 33 year rule of Ali Abdullah Saleh for selling out Yemen to neoliberalism, and then the people rebelled against the interim government of Hadi for his fire-sale privatization scheming with the neoliberal empire.
The US beneficiaries of neoliberalism were not happy when their benefactor Hadi was deposed by the Houthi Movement. Nor was Saudi Arabia, which had been trying to exploit Yemen for decades. The vultures of the other GCC countries started circling Yemen in the hope of picking at its corpse too.
The US is providing the GCC with the Shock and Awe to kill the prey, and the US does not care if it kills 22 million people in the process of looting Yemen. It is the US that is providing the bombs. The Saudi-led coalition of the GCC is just the delivery boys.
To summarize, there is no civil war in Yemen. Iran is made the scapegoat for a US-led illegal war of aggression. Saudi Arabia and its coalition of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are headquartered in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The GCC is made up of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates. They are all monarchies. The US hopes to walk off with Yemen’s main prizes, and the KSA, UAE and Qatar are already fighting each other over the crumbs. The lives of 22 million Yemeni people are hanging by a thread, because of a US blockade of food, water and medicine. The US is the cause of the worst cholera epidemic in history. It is biological warfare and genocide.

New Zealand to fine travellers who refuse to unlock electronic devices at border

Tom Peters

A law passed by New Zealand’s Labour Party-led coalition government, which came into effect this month, significantly strengthens the anti-democratic powers of Customs officials to search people entering the country.
The amended Customs and Excise Act allows border agents to fine travellers $NZ5,000 ($US3,300) if they refuse to hand over electronic devices and provide passwords and “other information or assistance,” such as encryption keys, to access private data.
Customs officials do not need to get a warrant or provide any justification to search smartphones, computers and other devices. The law change also allows them to copy and retain data found on such devices.
People entering the United States, Australia, Britain, and many other countries can be subjected to similar invasive searches. US border officials reportedly searched 23,877 electronic devices in 2016.
New Zealand’s amendments, however, go further than other countries in strengthening the power of the state to spy on travellers. A spokesperson for the Customs Service told the New York Times: “We’re not aware of any other country that has legislated for the potential of a penalty to be applied if people do not divulge their passwords.”
The new law further demonstrates the right-wing character of the Labour Party-New Zealand First-Green Party coalition government, which is falsely portrayed in the media as progressive. As it prepares to confront working-class opposition to austerity and war, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government is boosting the police state apparatus put in place over the past two decades by Labour and National Party governments.
Most significantly, the previous National government vastly expanded the powers of the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), the country’s external intelligence agency, to spy on New Zealand citizens. This followed revelations that the agency had illegally spied on several people. The exposures provoked mass protests throughout the country in 2013.
Before the 2014 election, Labour, NZ First and the Greens claimed to oppose the National government’s law change. In office, however, they have maintained all of GCSB’s expanded powers.
Edward Snowden, the US National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower, revealed in 2014 that, as part of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence alliance, the GCSB carries out mass surveillance of New Zealanders’ electronic communications. Further leaks in 2015 revealed that the GCSB spies on China and other countries in Asia such as Bangladesh, and several Pacific Island countries, which New Zealand’s ruling class considers its neo-colonial sphere.
Search and surveillance powers for the police and the Security Intelligence Service, NZ’s domestic-focused spy agency, were also expanded under the Nationals, with Labour’s support.
Customs Minister Kris Faafoi said his agency’s new powers were necessary because “organised crime groups are becoming a lot more sophisticated in the ways they’re trying to get things across the border.”
In fact, the legislative change will target many travellers, including independent journalists and political activists, who are unlikely to be able to afford a $5,000 fine to protect their privacy.
There is widespread opposition to the amendment, which was made with complete disregard for the sentiments of the population. An online poll of 11,800 people by the news website Stuff showed that only 33 percent agreed with Customs’ new powers and 64 percent viewed them as “a gross invasion of privacy.”
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties spokesman Thomas Beagle said in a statement that the law was “a grave invasion of personal privacy,” giving Customs access to “highly sensitive private information including emails, letters, medical records, personal photos.”
The government is expanding state surveillance as part of its preparations to deal with growing working class opposition. This year, for the first time in decades, nurses and teachers have held nationwide strikes against gross underfunding and low wages. Many other workers are looking for ways to fight back against austerity measures imposed since the financial crash of 2008.
The ruling elite is also deeply concerned about rising anti-war sentiment, as New Zealand and Australia become more closely integrated into the US build-up to war against North Korea, China and Russia. Last month, New Zealand extended troop deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan and sent troops to Japan to join the encirclement of North Korea.
In addition to spying on the population, the Labour-led government is recruiting 1,800 more police officers and expanding the military. Since 2012, soldiers have undergone training, in the biennial Southern Katipo exercise, to “restore order” in the event of a popular uprising or civil war in a Pacific island country. Such skills could also be used to suppress unrest in New Zealand.
Internationally, the US and other governments are preparing to defend their economic position through war abroad and class war at home. This cannot be carried out democratically. Free speech is under attack, most notably through the censorship of anti-war, left-wing and socialist websites, including the World Socialist Web Site, by Google and Facebook.
The NZ Customs legislation was undoubtedly drawn up in consultation with Washington. In August, New Zealand ministers attended a Five Eyes meeting in Australia which discussed how the spy agencies could get around encryption software to access private communications. Australia’s government is seeking to pass legislation to force technology companies to provide “back doors” for the state to bypass encryption.
The other Five Eyes members—the US, the UK and Canada—see Australia and New Zealand as a testing ground for measures they intend to deploy against their own populations.
In the New Zealand parliament every party is complicit in the attacks on democratic rights. This includes Labour’s ally, the Green Party, which sometimes presents itself as anti-surveillance.
Green MP Golriz Ghahraman told parliament in March it was “a pleasure to support” the Customs and Excise Act amendments. She stated that concerns about Customs being allowed to “go through your phone and look at your pictures” had been “addressed through the select committee process and through changes to drafting in this bill.” These assurances were a whitewash. Clearly such powers are part of the legislation.
Privacy, free speech and freedom of information are under attack because basic democratic rights are no longer compatible with capitalism, which is plunging the world towards war and economic disaster. The defence of these rights must therefore be taken up by the international working class, mobilised in opposition to the entire political establishment on the basis of a socialist program.

Washington presses Central America to militarize and turn away from China

Andrea Lobo

Last Thursday and Friday, the US Department of Homeland Security hosted the second security conference of the Alliance for Prosperity of the Central American Northern Triangle, which includes El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen and Vice-President Mike Pence were joined by the presidents of Honduras, Guatemala, the Vice-President of El Salvador, the Foreign Secretary of Mexico and representatives of the incoming Mexican administration of president-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
While focusing on reviewing the ongoing build-up of the armed forces in the region, as well as efforts to counter immigration and drug trafficking, the US government used the occasion to warn against falling out of line with Washington’s campaign to counter the growth of China’s influence in the region.
“On behalf of our administration,” Pence declared, “as you build commercial partnerships with other countries, including China, we urge you to focus on, and demand, transparency and look after your—and our—long-term interests.”
After referring to economic challenges in Central America, he added: “Even as countries like China tries [sic] to expand their influence in the region, the best way to solve these problems, we believe, is to strengthen the bonds between the United States and the Northern Triangle and all the nations of our hemisphere to strengthen the economic ties between our nations.”
This warning comes two weeks after Donald Trump’s rant at the UN General Assembly, where he stressed US intentions to enforce the Monroe Doctrine of neo-colonial domination over the hemisphere and warned against “expansionist foreign powers.”
Earlier last month, Washington also temporarily recalled its top diplomatic personnel from El Salvador, the Dominican Republic and Panama in protest over the recent decisions by the governments of these countries to break with Taiwan and establish relations with the Chinese government in Beijing. This dispute also led the Trump administration to cancel a summit with foreign ministers and security chiefs of the Alliance for Prosperity.
Last Friday, moreover, the Pentagon published a report on the status of industrial preparations for war in the United States, in which it interjects specifically that “Chinese investment in developing countries in exchange for an encumbrance on their natural resources and access to their markets, particularly in Africa and Latin America, adds an additional level of consideration for the scope of this threat to American economic and national security.”
While the emphasis on preparing for major geopolitical conflicts and social upheavals is becoming increasingly apparent, the same efforts have been ongoing since the Obama administration created the Plan Alliance for Prosperity in November 2014. While established in immediate response to a surge in the arrival of unaccompanied minors escaping rampant violence and poverty in the Northern Triangle at the time, it was advanced as the first step in a drive to strengthen the US stranglehold over the hemisphere within the framework of “national security” and Obama’s “pivot to Asia” aimed against Chinese influence.
Since then, billions of dollars from the treasuries of these impoverished Central American countries, which have been forced to pick up most of the bill, along with hundreds of millions of dollars from the US government and the Inter-American Development Bank, have been poured into building up the region’s armed forces, as well as significant infrastructure, transport and logistics developments primarily for trade northward, including the US-sponsored creation in 2016 of a Mexico-Central America Interconnection Commission.
So far, the economic effects of the Plan Alliance for Prosperity have not been different from the similar packages of US aid and infrastructure expansion in the early 2000s, which were sold as a means to create jobs for tens of thousands of youth being deported from the US by the Clinton and Bush administrations—many of them because of criminal records and activity in gangs in American inner cities. Most of the benefits from the improved logistics and presence of US corporations went to the local ruling elite and the professional middle class, while unemployment and poverty remained prevalent for the masses and laid the basis for the expansion of the same US gangs re-formed in Central America as the MS-13 and 18th Street maras .
At the same time, these projects have significantly reduced the costs of and streamlined regional trade, and effectively achieved a new level of integration of the supply chains across the continent, and therefore strengthened the objective international links of the working class.
On the other hand, this integration has also been expressed in new inter-army operations and command centers under the supervision of the Pentagon.
This is happening as countries rapidly expand their armed forces. The Mexican president elect announced this week that he intends to add 50,000 new soldiers to the army, a 27 percent increase. Also, since the beginning of the year, the US Embassy has been leading efforts in Guatemala to train and re-deploy the Guatemalan army toward the borders and seas as a “defense force” instead of focusing on police work, while adding 12,000 new police officers and special units.
In May 2017, the US think-tank Atlantic Council published a report laying out the framework for Alliance for Prosperity under the Trump administration. It was co-chaired by the US war criminal and first Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, and presented by then US Homeland Security and now White House Chief of Staff, John Kelly.
One of its emphases was a “public-private supply chain security initiative that focuses on the physical safety of transported goods.” As the WSWS warned at the time, this was “directed not only against gangs, but at securing US access to cheap labor across a more ‘integrated’ region in preparation for war.”
While the recent Pentagon report on production centered on the “manufacturing and defense industrial base” within the United States, the military is ultimately calling to reformulate “resilient supply chains” that will undoubtedly be extended across North, Central and South America.
Undoubtedly, this was one of the considerations behind the unprecedented clause in the new US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), preventing its signatories from signing free trade agreements with “non-market economies,” referring to China.
The Alliance for Prosperity conference this week was chiefly aimed at communicating this order to the Northern Triangle governments. Although in a much broader vein, the US-Central America and the DR (Dominican Republic) Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR) does include the provision in Article 21.2, that states: “no Party will be prevented from applying the measures it considers necessary to fulfill its obligations regarding the preservation or restoration of peace and international security, or to protect its essential interests in security matters.”
As in the US itself, the deployment of military and police forces against immigrants and refugees subject the most vulnerable layers to the initial brunt of repression, but the militarization at the US-Mexico border and the entire region southward is ultimately aimed at suppressing any social challenge by the entire working class to the drive to turn Latin America into a US battlefield and industrial platform to wage war against other “great powers.”

Brexit crisis leaves fate of May government in balance

Robert Stevens

The future of Prime Minister Theresa May’s government is on a knife edge on the eve of this week’s crucial talks on the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union (EU).
The dilemma in ruling circles is over whether the government can reach a deal with the EU, preserving access to the Single European Market, that does not precipitate a rebellion by the Conservatives’ pro-Brexit wing and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which might force a general election bringing a Jeremy Corbyn Labour-led government to power.
EU officials led by Michel Barnier were in last-minute discussions with UK negotiators in Brussels yesterday, called for by Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab. On Tuesday, a meeting of EU ministers will take place, as well as a meeting of May’s cabinet, ahead of a full EU summit Wednesday and Thursday.
Contending pro- and anti-EU factions are insisting that May accede to their demands, or they will reject any deal she reaches. Such is the factional acrimony that it is difficult to estimate the numbers involved or how far they are willing to go to achieve their ends.
The DUP have 10 MPs elected by constituents in Northern Ireland and prop up May’s minority government. It is opposed to every aspect of May’s Chequers Plan for a “soft Brexit” maintaining tariff-free single market access, agreed in cabinet in June. The plan proposed, at the EU’s insistence, that there be a “backstop” in place—after the UK leaves the EU—aligning Northern Ireland in a customs arrangement with the Republic of Ireland, an EU member. This was to ensure there will be no “hard border” between the south and north.
An end date for the backstop had been provisionally set for December 2021, but this time limit is opposed by the EU. BBC’s “Newsnight” reported Friday that May intends to get around this by inserting a “review clause” for the backstop rather than an end-date. This has only inflamed the opposition of the DUP and the Tory Brexiteers.
On Saturday, DUP leader Arlene Foster reiterated that her party would be prepared to vote against the Tories’ upcoming October 29 budget if May’s proposals on the Irish border issue remained in place. Writing in the Belfast Telegraph, she said, “I fully appreciate the risks of a ‘no deal’ (Brexit) but the dangers of a bad deal are worse.
“This backstop arrangement [proposed by May] would not be temporary. It would be the permanent annexation of Northern Ireland away from the rest of the United Kingdom and forever leave us subject to rules made in a place where we have no say.”
The pro-EU Observer reported emails between Foster and Barnier, “leaked from the highest levels of government,” that the DUP was positioning itself for a “no deal Brexit.” One email claimed, “AF [Arlene Foster] said the DUP were ready for a no deal scenario, which she now believed was the likeliest one.”
The weekend witnessed a flurry of articles and comments against May by her former Brexit Secretary David Davis—who called for a Cabinet rebellion against May—former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg, the leader of the anti-EU European Research Group. The Sunday Telegraph led its front page with a report that 63 hard Brexit Tory MPs have written a letter to May attacking her Brexit forecasts.
The pro-Tory Spectator commented, “If the DUP voted against May’s deal, getting it through the Commons would become very difficult. In these circumstances, even if the whips succeeded in reducing the Tory rebellion to 15 or so, which would be an impressive feat of party management, they would still need 25 Labour MPs to back the deal. That would be a stretch.”
Under the UK’s fixed term Parliament legislation, governments now cannot formally make votes an issue of no confidence—and are unable to utilise the calculation that rebel MPs would not vote against a sitting prime minister as this would result in the fall of the government. The Spectator commented that “Mogg and co believe they can vote down her deal but still vote to keep the government in place.” But it suggested a way in which May could call their bluff by raising the stakes to the highest possible level:
“These Tory rebels, though, would face an acute dilemma if May, having lost a first vote, responded by announcing she was holding another one. If the Commons again rejected her plan, she would then go to the palace and advise the Queen to call Jeremy Corbyn and ask him to form a government. While this plan would be a high-risk move, it would put the Tory rebels on the spot.”
The intervention made by former Labour leader Tony Blair into the crisis was extraordinary, in that it was framed openly as a means of avoiding the election of a Labour government. Speaking to Reuters, he described the prospect of a Corbyn government as a “truly damaging and challenging situation.” He urged Labour MPs not to back any deal May came back with as a supposedly better option than a no-deal Brexit, even though voting down a deal would be “really difficult” and create more uncertainty. This would lay the basis for a second referendum on Brexit, with the possibility of reversing the 2016 vote. The Tories, he said, would be “suicidal” to hold a general election on the issue of Brexit, but the majority of Tory MPs could back a second referendum on Brexit.
Blair intervened amid claims being made by May’s aides that 25 to 30 Labour MPs were ready to rebel against a whip imposed by Corbyn and vote with her to pass a “soft-Brexit” deal. Such claims were denied by several leading Blairites who echoed his call for a second referendum. The Labour-supporting New Statesman commented that “a golden rule of any story about rebellions is that the word ‘up to’ is always a synonym for ‘less than’.”
With any Brexit deal on offer and a no deal all threatening major economic dislocation, big business is stepping up its preparations. Later this month, Jaguar Land Rover (JLR), Britain’s biggest carmaker, will temporarily shut down one of its largest UK plants at Solihull, affecting 9,000 workers’ jobs. This follows JLR’s announcement last month that it would impose a three-day working week at its Castle Bromwich factory until Christmas. The company laid off 1,000 agency staff earlier this year.
JLR said its two-week shutdown was in response to a nearly 50 percent slump in Chinese demand for its luxury Range Rover vehicles, an overall year on year 12 percent decline in sales, and the ongoing move against diesel motors in Europe. However, a piece in the Financial Times Sunday revealed the extent to which a hard Brexit scenario is driving their response. It noted, “The company has already spent several million pounds on contingency planning, talking to every port in the UK and installing AI [artificial intelligence] systems that will help it automatically fill out some paperwork.”
The majority of JLR’s production is based in the UK but Hanno Kirner, the company’s strategy director, said a “hard Brexit” leading to tariffs being imposed “would drive us to reconsider our industrial footprint and it would, probably, necessitate building more cars where we sell them. … That would be in Europe, most likely.”

US, European powers threaten Saudi crown prince after Khashoggi murder

Alex Lantier 

Mounting evidence that Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the gruesome October 2 murder of Saudi journalist and Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi has unleashed a political crisis of global proportions.
Over the weekend, Turkish officials again charged that Saudi Arabia sent a 15-man death squad to the Saudi consulate, armed with a bone saw, to murder and dismember Khashoggi and transport his remains out of Turkey. The daily Sabah wrote that Khashoggi’s Apple watch, synced to the iPhone he left with his Turkish fiancée Hatice Cengiz outside the consulate, recorded his murder: “The moments when Khashoggi was interrogated, tortured and murdered were recorded in the Apple Watch’s memory.”
US intelligence officials endorsed the authenticity of these recordings, possibly taken from bugs planted by Turkish intelligence in the consulate. They told the Washington Post: “The voice recording from inside the embassy lays out what happened to Jamal after he entered. You can hear his voice and the voices of men speaking Arabic. You can hear how he was interrogated, tortured and then murdered.”
These charges against America’s closest Middle East ally, also the world’s largest oil exporter at the heart of the global financial system, expose the brazen criminality of the entire financial aristocracy. A profound contradiction underlies the official response to Khashoggi’s murder. US and European businessmen and politicians are deeply tied to the brutal Saudi regime, which underwrites both US war strategy in the Middle East and the capitalist financial system as a whole.
They are flocking to the “Davos in the Desert” conference planned for this month in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. The initial conference last year was attended by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Among those still slated to attend this year’s conference are US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, and BlackRock investment firm CEO Lawrence Fink, whom Barron’s magazine recently crowned the “New Conscience of Wall Street.”
While conference attendees “cringe at lending their names or prestige to Crown Prince Mohammed’s gathering,” the New York Times reported, the murder charges against Riyadh leave “many financiers and technology executives in a deeply awkward position. Some have made multibillion-dollar investments in Saudi Arabia; others are managing billions of dollars of Saudi money. They want to keep the money flowing ...”
At the same time, however, a debate is emerging in the imperialist capitals over whether to use the Khashoggi murder to push for a change in personnel at the top of the Saudi regime. After US senators threatened to invoke the Global Magnitsky Act yesterday, allowing Washington to impose sanctions on top Saudi officials, the Saudi stock exchange plunged 7 percent.
Speaking on CBS television yesterday, Donald Trump pledged “severe punishment” for the “terrible and disgusting” killing, while pledging to continue arming Saudi Arabia to the teeth. The Saudis “are ordering military equipment. Everybody in the world wanted that order,” Trump said, adding: “I tell you what I don’t want to do. Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, all these companies. I don’t want to hurt jobs. I don’t want to lose an order like that. And you know there are other ways of punishing, to use a word that’s a pretty harsh word, but it’s true.”
“There are other things we can do that are very, very powerful, very strong and we’ll do them,” he said, without specifying what this meant.
The UK, German and French foreign ministries issued a joint statement calling for “a credible investigation to establish the truth about what happened, and—if relevant—to identify those bearing responsibility for the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, and ensure that they are held to account. We ... expect the Saudi Government to provide a complete and detailed response.”
The Saudi monarchy responded with an aggressive statement stressing its “total rejection of any threats and attempts to undermine it. … The kingdom also affirms that if it is [targeted by] any action, it will respond with greater action.” With Saudi Arabia providing key oil exports to the world market to make up for supplies lost as Washington re-imposes sanctions on Iran, it warned that Saudi Arabia “plays an effective and vital role in the world economy.”
Turki Aldhakhil, the manager of Saudi Arabia’s Al Arabiya news, penned a piece threatening that Saudi Arabia could form a military alliance with Russia and slash its oil exports, sending oil prices to over $100 a barrel and devastating the already crisis-ridden world economy. He wrote, “The truth is that if Washington imposes sanctions on Riyadh, it will stab its own economy to death, even though it thinks that it is stabbing only Riyadh.”
US and European threats are utterly hypocritical and mark a new stage in their decades-long campaign of bloody imperialist wars, occupations and intrigue in the Middle East, from Iraq and Syria to Afghanistan, that have cost millions of lives and turned tens of millions into refugees.
They did not object as the Saudi regime executed hundreds of people per year and viciously attacked political opposition among working people. This year, Riyadh ruled it would decapitate the 29-year-old female political activist Israa al-Ghomgham, her husband, Moussa al-Hashem, and three others for the crime of organizing peaceful demonstrations against the monarchy. This provoked no observable change in US or European policy toward Saudi Arabia.
Seven years after working-class uprisings toppled US-backed dictatorships in Tunisia and Egypt, the NATO powers are united with the Saudi royal family in their fear of the working class in Saudi Arabia and beyond. One former diplomat bleakly told the Washington Post that Prince “Mohammed knew that if meaningful jobs were not found for Saudi Arabia’s young and highly educated population, and if the oil-dominated economy were not diversified, ‘they were doomed.’”
Current US calls for a change in personnel at the top of the Saudi monarchy aim to strengthen it against opposition at home, whip its foreign policy more closely into alignment with US interests, and in particular to block any move by Riyadh toward closer alignment with Russia or China.
The hypocrisy of attempts to wrapping this bloodstained agenda in the fraudulent banner of human rights was exemplified by former CIA director John Brennan’s column on the Khashoggi murder in the Washington Post, titled “The US should never turn a blind eye to this sort of inhumanity.”
Reports of Khashoggi’s disappearance, Brennan intoned, “have the hallmarks of a professional capture operation or, more ominously, an assassination.” Citing his long professional experience with Saudi officials, Brennan added: “I am certain that if such an operation occurred inside a Saudi diplomatic mission against a high-profile journalist working for a US newspaper, it would have needed the direct authorization of Saudi Arabia’s top leadership—the crown prince.”
Who does Brennan think he is kidding, pretending to be repulsed by the “ominous” signs of an assassination? If he can recognize the hallmarks of state murder, it is because the CIA is the world’s leading expert in torture and killing. Its thousands of drone murders, its network of “black site” prisons and torture centers, and its bloody history of coups and provocations are infamous internationally, as proof that the single most dangerous force in the world is American imperialism.
Based on his selective outrage, Brennan outlined a plan for reacting to Khashoggi’s murder with a campaign against the Saudi regime similar to US threats against Russia.
Ideally, the Saudi regime would punish “those responsible,” Brennan wrote, but if it “doesn’t have the will or the ability, the United States would have to act. That would include immediate sanctions on all Saudis involved; a freeze on US military sales to Saudi Arabia; suspension of all routine intelligence cooperation with Saudi security services; and a US-sponsored UN Security Council resolution condemning the murder. The message would be clear: the United States will never turn a blind eye to such inhuman behavior, even when carried out by friends, because this is a nation that remains faithful to its values.”
The CIA’s grotesque invocation of American “values” as a justification for stepping up US intrigue in the Middle East is absurd on its face.
The task of dealing with the bloodstained Saudi monarchy belongs to the working class and oppressed masses of Saudi Arabia. Intrigues by the CIA and allied intelligence services trying to engineer a change in the Saudi regime’s ruling personnel, it can be safely predicted, will only produce more economic turmoil and bloodshed.