9 May 2015

The Financial Road to Ruin

Ridwan Sheikh

Apologise and carry on, is a ruse played by corporate tax dodgers. And, banks are no exception. The 2007 HSBC scandal, where 106,000 clients from more than 200 countries dodged hundreds of millions of tax dollars has only seen one person prosecuted. With little done, are governments powerless at the financial legal quandary, or is there something we’re not being told?
The whistleblower, Herve Falciani, redefined British understanding of the forces at work. For a bank to assist clients to dodge taxes into secret Swiss banks was unthinkable. But it went further. Falciani also claimed many banks adopt similar tax fraud practices.
It’s a claim familiar to the U.S. In 2012, Bank of America ensured its clients avoided taxes on stock dividends in hedge fund trading by using its subsidiary bank in Europe, all done with government backing.
It saw Bank of America hide $17.2 billion in offshore accounts. An estimated $4.3 billion of federal taxes was evaded. Prior to 2012, the banking giant was bailed out by the Federal Reserve Bank and the Treasury Department of a staggering $1.3 trillion.
It’s the same story with Citigroup, offshoring $42.6 billion resulting in the loss of $11.5 billion in taxes. The bank also received a bailout, to the sum of $2.5 trillion.
This reflects the cosy relationship a State has with banks. It’s rooted in history but has steadily diminished a government’s authority.
Banking took off in the U.S in an event known as the Panic of 1907. The instigators of this public panic were four private bankers, J.D Rockefeller, J.P Morgan, Paul Warburg and Baron Rothschild, which led to the collapse of major banks and trusts.
The bankers decided to combine their wealth to form a private bank, with 100% private shareholding. The bank would create money and lend it to the government under their terms.
The Senate strongly opposed the idea, but in 1910, the four bankers wrote the Federal Reserve Act in secrecy, and the recommendation was pushed through congress by their allies. In 1913, after heavy lobbying and political donations to President Woodrow Wilson, the bill was voted through, and the Federal Reserve Bank was formed.
To make sense of banking irregularities the principle of how money is created needs to be understood.
This was apparent in a landmark Minnesota court case in 1969. In the First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly. The defendant, Jerome Daly, an attorney representing himself, opposed the bank’s foreclosure on his home mortgage loan on the basis the bank had put up no real money for his loan. This was known as no actual consideration, (i.e. the thing exchanged), for the loan. When the bank’s president, Mr Morgan, took the stand, to everyone’s astonishment, he admitted the bank created money, ‘out of thin air’, for its loans, adding this was standard banking practice.
In the end, the court rejected the bank’s claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house. The decision wasn’t enough to reform banking practice. It remains standard practice, but questioning continues of why this exclusive treatment of corporations even exists.
In the U.K, the Bank of England confirmed private banks unchecked economic hold. In its 2014 analysis, entitled: “Money Creation in the Modern Economy”, it stated money creation in education is skewed. It is when banks make loans they create new money.
This is explained by Richard Werner, an economist and professor, in his book, New Paradigm in Macroeconomics. He says: ‘the credit extended by banks do not remove purchasing power or claims on resources form anywhere else in the economy. Strictly speaking it cannot be described as ‘lending’. Banks do not lend, they create it.’
The think tank, Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ) noted that 15 of the Fortune 500 companies paid no federal income tax on $23 billion in profits in 2014 alone, and paid almost no tax on $107 billion in profits over the past five years. Amongst the big hitters of tax breaks were General Electric, the toy makers Mattel, and media giants, Time Warner, and CBS.
Exploiting the loopholes is the reason why corporations get away with paying between 0% and 15% tax, instead of the 35% rate. The FACT (Financial Accountability & Corporate Transparency) coalition reported the U.S treasury loses $150 billion a year in tax revenue, with decade losses of $1.5 trillion.
Lobbying influence also undermines governance. Wells Fargo, for example, spent millions of dollars on lobbying, which influenced laws in 2009, and in 2012, when the legislators were thinking of putting measures on foreclosure practices and reforming property-tax.
A study by Martin Gilens, a Professor at Princeton University, in September 2014, entitled Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens, showed the influential factors involved in determining public policy.
Using data collected from 1981 to 2002, the report looked at the U.S political system from 3 interest groups. The groups were the average citizens, economic elites (affluent Americans), and organized interest groups; mass-based or business-oriented.
After examining nearly 1,800 U.S policies during that period, and comparing them to the groups, the research concluded U.S policy is dominated by its economic elite.
The researchers say, “The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.”
The researchers conclude government policies rarely meet the preferences of majority of Americans, and instead overwhelmingly express the preferences of special interests and lobbying organisations: “When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.”
The Regan era in the 1980’s was seen as the golden age of ‘free’ enterprise capitalism. In truth, this era never really left. Banks are operating beyond their call of duty by seizing public assets, while the government turns a blind eye.
Morgan Stanley imported 4 million barrels of oil and petrol into the U.S in June 2012, Goldman Sachs stored aluminium in warehouses in Detroit, and continues to own and operate airports in many countries, and makes vast profits from toll roads in the U.S, Puerto Rico, India and Australia.
The Colorado toll road is of particular importance. The 50 year contract, covering 18 miles, was approved by the Senate on 20 February 2014. Under the terms of the contract, the Colorado Senators and Representatives were not allowed to read the contract prior to signing, or to amend or vote on the contract. Goldman Sachs is not spending a dime funding the project, instead the $552 million is pocketed from tax payer dollars, while the company will secretly profit from hiked up toll charges.
The challenges are monumental but futile unless there is a political will, to stand against corporations buying their way out of justice. Only then can there be some credibility to the meaning of democracy, a term derived from the Greek language, “Rule by the people”.

The Myth of Peaceful Protest

Allan G. Johnson


It isn’t nice to block the doorway,
It isn’t nice to go to jail,
There are nicer ways to do it,
But the nice ways always fail.
It isn’t nice, it isn’t nice,
You told us once, you told us twice,
But if that is Freedom’s price,
We don’t mind.
— Malvina Reynolds, “It Isn’t Nice”
Whenever peaceful protest turns into something else, when things get out of hand, the chorus of disapproval is loud and clear: Peaceful protest is The American Way, and any kind of disorder or defiance of authority is not only unacceptable, but unnecessary.
It is one of our foundational myths, that, like all such myths, would have us ignore the reality of history. Try to imagine, for example:
The American Revolution, without the revolution.
Abolition, without John Brown, slave revolts, and the Civil War.
Workers’ rights, without strikers being attacked by Pinkertons, police, and troops.
The vote for women, without activists being harassed and arrested and force-fed in jail.
Civil rights legislation, without sit-ins and illegal demonstrations and mass refusals to obey and the violent white response that forced the federal government to act.
Gay rights, without Stonewall.
The American Indian Movement, without the standoffs at Alcatraz and Wounded Knee.
Anti-war movements, without . . . well, here the problem is coming up with an example of any movement—peaceful or otherwise—that ended or prevented a war that the powers-that-be were intent upon, except, perhaps, the Russian Revolution.
As Frederick Douglass noted in the runup to the Civil War, “power concedes nothing without a demand,” which is why peaceful protest has so little effect against oppressive institutional power, whether government or corporations or white privilege. The unspoken rule is that power and privilege will respect the people’s right to peacefully express their grievances, so long as the people respect the right of power and privilege to ignore them and do nothing at all, as with children being allowed to have their say before the grownups tell them how it’s going to be.
But ‘the people’ are not children, and grievances are often born of generations of injustice and oppression and suffering. How, then, are protestors to respond to yet another phalanx of police, enforcers of last resort, armed to the teeth and determined to decide how this will go? Is it any wonder that push will come to shove?
And when it does, what do we call it and how do we explain and why does it matter?
To judge from the news, violence is something that happens spontaneously and all by itself for reasons known only to those who do it—as in, “the peaceful demonstration turned violent” or “violence erupted from the crowd.” The police are presented as just doing their job of keeping ‘it’ from getting out of control, as if ‘it’ has nothing to do with them or the power and privilege they are so heavily armed to protect by keeping things the way they’re supposed to be.
In the aftermath, authorities and the media focus on acts of violence by protestors who can now be written off as criminals who need not be taken seriously beyond cracking heads and hauling them off to jail. But the object of protest—systems of privilege and concentrations of political and economic power—are made invisible, to continue as before.
The demonstrators’ refusal to do as they are told is declared intolerable, but not the patronizing intransigence of power.
Buried deeper still is the reality that the privileged and powerful do not have the burden of having to resort to protest in order to get what they want, to put their lives on the line for justice, or sit quietly while being told to have patience, that change takes time. What they want, they feel entitled and empowered to buy or take, enact or decree, order or direct, lobby or legislate. And when violence is required—invading another country to protect ‘American interests’ or devastating the earth or getting ‘those people’ back in line—they rarely hesitate in the use of force.
Protestors setting things on fire is condemned as violence, but not fracking or poverty or uranium mining on Indian reservations or segregation or mass incarceration. It is the ‘other’ who are supposed to restrain themselves and make the best of it while the privileged and powerful do what they want and chastise protestors who reach their limit and refuse to back down and go home.
When push comes to shove, it is explained as little more than ‘those people’ doing what they are. But things getting out of hand, including violence, like anything in human life, is always in relation to something to which it is a response. This does not make it good or justified, but it does mean that it cannot be explained by itself, cannot be understood only in terms of those who push and shove, but must also account for what people feel compelled to push and shove against, including,*
The suffocation of democracy, with state and federal power increasingly in the hands of the best politicians and government that money can buy, enacting and enforcing laws that serve the interests of the few while ignoring the many.
Soaring levels of inequality along with the disappearance of manufacturing jobs that once provided generations of white immigrants with a path out of poverty.
Rising levels of racial segregation that isolate people of color in urban ghettos without a base for the coalitions that are necessary for political power.
Hundreds of years of demonizing people of color as dangerous, immoral, and criminal, leading to mass incarceration and disenfranchisement enforced by police departments armed for urban warfare.
And, for all the talk of “We, the people,” the long tradition of elites regarding the country as belonging to them, to do with as they see fit, claiming to know what’s best based on the wisdom that supposedly comes with wealth and power; and the rest of the population is either to support the elite or be dismissed as an ignorant mass to be used and ignored, denounced as rabble when they get out of hand, the mob, a threat to social order, to be controlled, if necessary, with violence.
There is no shortage of things to protest in this country, and if demands for change are to remain peaceful, if democracy is to work, there must be a reasonable expectation of a just response, without which patience and restraint become another means of subordination.
Almost fifty years ago, in the aftermath of race riots that make Baltimore look like a picnic, President Johnson formed a commission to study the causes of ‘civil disorder.’ It concluded that the violence was a response to issues of race, racism, and economic inequality that had been ignored for too long.
The report was widely read, selling more than two million copies nationwide.** But thirty years later, a follow-up study concluded that conditions had only gotten worse.
And now, two decades after that, here we are, not again, but still, with peaceful protest against the oppressive use of power having no effect on political and economic elites, or on the white population, much of which is largely oblivious to the reality of race, with a CNN anchor recently expressing amazement that violent protest could still happen in the United States.
Yes, change takes time. We hear that again and again, but almost always in a condescending tone, that we should need to be reminded. But, of course, that isn’t what it means, the real message being that change takes more time, and still more time, as much time, in fact, as those in positions of power and privilege choose to take, because those without power are not to presume to tell them what to do.
Which brings us back to Frederick Douglass. That power does not yield except by demand has two parts, not one, both the power and the demand, and as long as there is the one, there will be the other.
And there is nothing nice about it.

India’s Nuclear Poverty

Brian Cloughley

Voutenay sur Cure, France.
In the week that US President Obama praised India’s Prime Minister Modi for his “ambitious vision to reduce extreme poverty” there were several media reports that placed Mr Modi’s laudable ambition at variance with his expenditure decisions.
First was the announcement on April 10 that India would buy 36 Rafale fighter aircraft from France at a cost of some 4 billion dollars.  The second was six days later when India test fired its nuclear-capable Agni-III ballistic missile with a range of 3,000 km and capable of carrying warheads weighing over a ton..
Nuclear missiles don’t come cheap, and of course we don’t know and will never be told the real cost of any country’s nuclear weapons’ program, but an expert estimate for India in 2011 was five billion dollars a year which is a substantial chunk of the national budget.
Third was the report that “US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter is likely to visit India next month when the two sides are expected to ink the nearly $2.5 billion deal for 22 Apache [attack] and 15 Chinook heavy-lift helicopters.” India’s financial commitment to the purchase of foreign military hardware is increasing day by day and there seems no end to the list of expensive weaponry being acquired.  The billions of dollars are mounting up. There is no apparent ceiling to military expenditure, and neither is there a limit to acquisition of wealth by India’s growing number of mega-rich, as evidenced by the proudly broadcast news that India now has 90 billionaires (total worth $295 billion) and was reported on May 7 as being “home to 56 of the world’s 2,000 largest and most powerful public companies.”
But then there is an interesting description of the other side of the Indian coin by Jean-Pierre Lehman, a visiting professor at a university in Rajasthan, about 70 miles from Delhi, who has no axe to grind but records and evaluates the Indian scene as he sees it at first hand:
Upon reaching the outskirts of Jaipur, the scene switches to hundreds and hundreds of dilapidated makeshift tents beneath which people live – or perhaps more accurately manage more or less to survive. This is far worse than poverty. It is destitution. It is people living in what can only be described as bestial conditions. There is of course no access to sanitation; people cook their meagre repasts on coal furnaces inside the tents — one of the major causes of death in India. The contrast with the swankiness of some of the residential and business districts of Jaipur is of chasm proportions — a vividly desperate illustration of the growing inequality in India. That people, our fellow humans, should live in such conditions in the early 21st century is a terrible indictment of Jaipur, of Rajasthan, of India, and indeed of humanity in general.
It is doubtful that anybody could convince them of a need for jet fighters, nuclear missiles or attack helicopters.
Like all the poor around the world — most notably in India’s neighbors Pakistan and Bangladesh,  but also in America and Britain and almost everywhere else — those at the bottom of the economic pile in India have no voice, no dignity, no hope.  Some politicians do try hard to help them.  Prime Minister Modi is their leader and is certainly not hypocritical in that regard, unlike his enormously rich counterpart in Pakistan, but he won’t be able to alleviate poverty in his country for so long as he permits such massive military expenditure.  India was the world’s largest importer of military material in 2014 and the government authorized over 40 billion dollars in this year’s budget, excluding dozens of new commitments — so the nuclear missiles, fighter jets, and helicopters are only a start.
India’s military equipment order books include 7 frigates, at about ten billion dollars; another 400 helicopters for two billion or so; hundreds of medium artillery guns for at least 3 billion; 6 submarines costing 9 billion; and payment for a galaxy of other equipment whose manufacture will also provide massive employment — but mainly in other countries, and even in India only for the tiny number of those who are trained craftsmen (no women, of course).  India’s poor will benefit from neither profits nor work, because the money will go nowhere near them and they are unqualified for all but the most simple and meanest of jobs.
In his book Being Indian Pavan Varma observes only too accurately that in the Indian upper classes and rich (not by any means the same thing, as elsewhere) “there is a remarkable tolerance of inequity, filth and human suffering” and that “concern for the deprived and the suffering is not a prominent feature of the Indian personality. The rich in India have always lived a life quite oblivious to the ocean of poverty around them”  — from the times of the feudal rulers, the maharajahs and suchlike, whose luxury depended entirely on exploitation  and subjugation of their peasantry.
Most foreigners who have lived in India will have experienced and been aghast at the nonchalance with which the poor are regarded. Indeed they are ignored, even by many decent upright middle-class people, the backbone of the country.
The poor deserve better, as Modi knows very well.  He was not born into privilege or even in moderately secure financial circumstances but was a teenage tea-server in a railway station and has seen at first hand the squalor and despair of the submerged and suffering majority who must be taken out of hopelessness and shown that expectation of a decent, reasonable life is not confined to those born outside poverty.  They should — they must — be given the opportunity to better themselves and rise from destitution and exploitation to a point where they will be able to live as human beings and not as dismal serfs.
It is crucial for progress of humanity that the bodies and brains of human beings develop to the extent at which they can enjoy reasonable health and have the prospect of a variety of avenues of work. This is not happening in India, where over half a billion citizens live in conditions similar to those described by Professor Lehman or — barely believably — in even more dire squalor and misery.
Education is the most important aspect of national development, because it only through education that people can learn about skills they can acquire in order to earn a reasonable wage and live a decent life. Above all, education is vital for people to acquire the rudimentary facts essential for them to understand basic health requirements and improve their standards of hygiene which — as Modi has made a point of highlighting — are  abysmal.
In India over 40 per cent of children suffer from malnutrition.  But “malnutrition” is a fancy word for “verging on starvation.”  It means that countless millions of Indian children are hungry all the time.  In the morning these children wake famished and can’t be given enough food to fill their bellies because their parents can’t afford to feed them.  Most don’t go to school and from a very early age have to find basic menial work ;  if they have a midday mouthful it’s probably a piece of throwaway garbage from the streets.  Back at home in the evening they eat what their parents have managed to scrounge during the day.  They have no clean water or access to hygienic lavatories.  Those who don’t die in childhood will spend their short adult years in casual employment or crime.
Mr Modi is aware of all this.  He lived with it — in it — for many years and, of course, he wants to improve the lot of the starving mega-millions.  But this will take organization and, above all things, money.  And if a country spends vast sums on weapons it will have less to devote to improving infrastructure and education.  We’re not talking about handouts because there is no point at all in that approach, especially in India, where any such funds are systematically plundered by corrupt officials.  No : it’s a matter of devoting funds to innovative job-creation projects.  And it’s not just in India that this applies.  If the leaders of India could manage to sit down with those of Pakistan and China — the nations against whom India’s military policy and posture are directed — and come to agreement about longstanding territorial disputes, then the roads to true prosperity would begin to open in all three countries.
There are faults in the stances of China and Pakistan concerning their disagreements with India on border matters, but India has not helped in any way by being aggressively inflexible concerning mediation and it is time for false pride to be replaced by pragmatism and common sense. Disputes and confrontation over territory are futile and counter-productive and in this case have contributed enormously to these countries’ perceived requirement for masses of vastly expensive nuclear weapons and other military hardware.
Emphasizing national pride is an important political tool, and nuclear weapons are very impressive in an macabre sort of way. Unfortunately in pursuit of both it is always the poor who suffer most. Mr Modi is one of the few world leaders who could move to change this appalling state of affairs, and it must be hoped that he will place the interests of his half-billion poverty stricken citizens to the forefront of national policy.  His “ambitious vision to reduce extreme poverty” must not be allowed to dim.

To Be Russian

Andre Vltchek

Trust between the West and Russia is broken. It has been for quite some time, but now it is broken irreversibly. A good thing, because what kind of trust there could be between fascist imperialism and the forces that are fighting for the freedom of mankind?
It is really easy to trick the Russian people. It takes very little to gain their trust; sometimes only a kind smile, a handful of loving words, a few sincerely sounding pledges and promises. Russians can be easily ‘bought’ with kindness. They are very trusting, vulnerable people.
When approached with tenderness and sympathy, they soon open their hearts, they share their last piece of bread with the hungry, offer their shirts to those who are cold.
Come to a Russian with a pledge of eternal love, devotion even friendship, and chances are that all doors will be opened to you, and defenses let down.
Maybe he or she would one day utter: “Please, never, never betray me.” But no guarantees would be asked for, no written agreements produced, no contracts signed.
Because of this trust and openness, millions, tens of millions of Russians died!
***
Russians gave everything to the world; they fought for humanity. They opened their hearts and their doors. They fed those who were in dire need, often starving.
At the end they were betrayed, again and again…. And again!
In a spineless world based on individualism, profits, and servility, it is easy, all too easy to betray someone who is kind, someone who gives. Tyrants are rarely betrayed, because loyalty towards them is based on fear, self-preservation, or mercantile self-interest. In the corrupt, cowardly world constructed by the West and by its religions, loyalty is upheld only through terror.
Despite horrible betrayals and the savagery directed at the Russian people throughout the history, they never really “learned the lesson”, never perfected Western-style cynicism, and never mastered the art of sacrificing others for their self-interests.
All accords with Russia were broken, whenever it suited invaders. The Scandinavians wiped out countless Russian lives, and so did the Germans, French, Poles, Brits, North Americans and Czechs, to name just a few. Russians never really ‘punished’ anybody, in the Protestant, Anglo-Saxon way. Punishment is mainly puritan rubbish; the Russian way of thinking is too quixotic for that.
The West lied to Lenin, to Stalin, to Khrushchev and finally to Gorbachev. The West has been lying to Putin and about Putin.
Betrayed, Russia would go through unimaginable agony, through fire and devastation, through despair. It would bury millions of its sons and daughters. Perhaps no other nation on earth has gone through a terror of such magnitude.
Then, suddenly, it would rise from its knees, slowly and frighteningly, showing all its might, its size, determination and strength. Injured and deceived, but proud and enormously beautiful in its sacred rage, it would lift up its heavy sword, straighten its back, dry its tears, and walk directly towards the enemy.
Russia always fights open battles, fights them honestly. Oceans of blood are spilled, mostly those of the Russian people.
Unlike the West, Russia does not use carpet-bombing, drones or nuclear weapons to kill millions of civilians, in order to secure the Victory. It is always men against men. It is tens of thousands of tanks as during the Kursk Battle, or millions of soldiers at Stalingrad.
Nobody could or can defeat Russia, because its wrath, as its love, is great and pure. Russia never really lost. Its injured heart was full of love and poetry even as its mailed fists were smashing the despots, usurpers and mass murderers. It is also because almost all wars that Russia ever fought were just wars – wars for the survival of its people, but also for the survival of the entire humanity.
***
70 years since the great Victory! 70 years since Soviet people saved the world by smashing Nazism. 70 years since they, almost immediately, joined yet another fight, against Western imperialism and colonialism.
20 or perhaps 27 million Soviet people, mainly Russians, lost their lives defending our planet against Hitler’s hordes. Then hundreds of millions of others dedicated their lives to building a much better, and egalitarian world.
Without Soviet Union, without the Russian people, there would be no freedom, no independence for Asian, African and the Middle Eastern countries. There would be no revolutions possible in Latin America.
This is why the West hated Soviet Union, and that is why it hates Russian people. It lost its colonies, it lost its propaganda war, and it lost its monopoly on defining everything under the sun.
Only bigots could repeat the most toxic of Western propaganda lies of comparing Nazi Germany with Stalinist Soviet Union. But I will write much more on the topic in the near future. Nazism can be only compared to European and North American imperialism, to colonialism. They are both made from the same stuff, and the Soviet Union smashed, defeated, both! Russia is now holding the old Soviet banner.
The Western chauvinists and xenophobes are now fighting for control over the planet, even for their own survival. Unless they divide Russia, China and Latin America, they are finished. They know it! Unless they smear all that is pure and optimistic about the nations resisting their monstrous regime, their days are numbered.
***
On May 9 1945, the entire world changed. Humanity began moving forward, again. Slowly, unevenly, often making terrible blunders, and detours, but forward nevertheless! Colonial shackles began breaking. People on all continents were dreaming again, about true freedom, equality and the brotherhood of men. That beautiful red flag flying from the roof of the Reichstag in Berlin made these dreams possible.
The Soviet people proved that human dignity and freedom are worth any sacrifice. The Victory Ode was written with their blood, in the most generous way, so it could inspire and shape generations to come!
But the greed and nihilism of the West refused to die. Its obsession with controlling and plundering the world reached an unimaginable peak. All the forces of the Empire were mobilized. Light and hope were confronted by darkness and cynicism. Beautiful and pure dreams were antagonized by corruption. In an orgy of dirty tricks and deceives, the Soviet Union was destroyed.
In one single historical moment, the oppressed of the world lost their most powerful guardian.
What followed was complete horror. The Empire began destabilizing one country after another: in Africa, Asia, in the Middle East and even in the former Eastern block. Millions of people died, exposed, unprotected, totally abandoned.
The Fascist hordes thought that this time they had won. In Moscow, Yeltsin, an alcoholic and lackey of the West, began shooting his own people on the street, and bombing his own Parliament. That was “democracy” the newspapers in Paris, London and New York wrote almost immediately. This was what the West dreamed about: a weak destabilized Russia, on its knees, at mercy of the Empire.
I travelled to Moscow and Siberia. I saw Russian scientists in Novosibirsk selling their libraries in the bitter cold, at metro stations. I saw old war veterans begging, selling their medals. I saw Russian workers starving, their salaries unpaid for months.
Then something happened. Russia refused to stay on its knees. It rapidly detected the lies coming from abroad; it recognized the trap. The Russian people understood that what horrible invasions never achieved, the deceptions and dirty games of the fascist Empire managed to attain in just a few short, dreadful years.
Russia had to raise or die, as always in the history. It rose. Indignant and determined! And as always in the past, when it stood up confronting the evil, it was doing it for its own people, but also for the entire humanity!
Russia regrouped, during the last decade, under the Russian flag. It is not perfect and not as ‘socialist’ as many of us would like it to be, but there is a great Soviet inertia in Russia’s foreign policy, as there is a great pride and determination to improve the world, to protect the weak.
70 years since the Great Victory! This year, Russia is not only celebrating great anniversary. It is rejoicing over its rebirth.
***
I am Russian. I was born in Russia, and my mother is half Russian and half Chinese. But even my Chinese part comes from Kazakhstan, from a former Soviet republic. My grandfather, Hussein, was a top ‘commissar’, equivalent to a cabinet minister, an ethnic Chinese, a linguist, a man who died many decades before I was born.
I grew up in Czechoslovakia. My father, a scientist, comes from Europe. Since early age I lived in New York, but then I hit the road, and never stopped until now. I am an internationalist. But deep inside, I am Russian.
I don’t know whether I qualify to be a Russia. As a kid, I used to have Soviet passport. My happiest moments in life were when I was a child and my mother took me, every summer, to Prague airport, where I was taken to a plane departing for Leningrad. My grandmother was waiting at the other end.
My grandmother, Elena, was not just some ordinary babushka. She was a fighter, a woman who struggled against Nazis, who defended her beloved city, her Leningrad. She dug trenches, confronted German tanks, and was decorated twice. Yet she was the kindest woman I ever met in my life. She thought me how to love poetry and literature. She told me hundreds of stories, some beautiful, some frightening. Thanks to her, I became a writer, a Russian writer, although I write my fiction exclusively in English and most of my latest films were made in Spanish.
Almost my entire Russian family died there, in Leningrad, during the Siege, decades before I was born.
Every year, during two summer months, my grandmother spoilt me silly. Or I thought she did. Now I understand that for her, it was like a cultural combat, an attempt to inject into me all that was great about Russia.
She saved for ten months, and then when I came to visit her, she took me to the opera houses and the theatres, to the museums and the parks surrounding Leningrad. She cooked delicious food for me. She also took me, at least once a year, to Piskarevskoe Cemetery, where the enormous statue of the Motherland spreads her arms in grief. “Nobody is forgotten and nothing is forgotten”, the golden letters are carved into the granite. 1.5 million died during the Siege of Leningrad, and many are buried there, in countless rows of mass graves.
I grew up. I became a writer and a filmmaker; I circled the globe. But wherever I went, these simple words followed me, were engraved into my psyche. My grandmother was always with me, too, and so were the city, the sacrifice, and the Victory!
I don’t know whether it objectively makes me a Russian. But I feel and act as one.
***
To be Russian… By now, ‘Russian’ is not only a nationality; it is a verb. It means: to stand against oppression, against Western imperialism, to be building bridges between the countries that are resisting Western imperialist terror.
And there are many “new Russians” now. Not those from Yeltsin era, not the capitalist buffoon characters! No, the “New Russians” I am talking about are both patriots and internationalists. And some of them have often not a single drop of Russian blood. But they are proudly defending the world, and they are joining forces with Russia, China and Latin America in their determined struggle for better planet.
I know several great new Russians. Some are my comrades, like renowned Canadian international lawyer, poet, novelist and thinker, Christopher Black. Like Peter Koenig, Swiss economist, who left the World Bank in total disgust, then turned around and openly attacked the establishment. Or like my ‘compa’, Patrice Greanville, a New Yorker/ Chilean/ Argentinean chief editor of legendary “The Greanville Post”.
These people are working relentlessly, smashing the lies that the Empire is spreading throughout the world: lies about Russia, lies about the Soviet Union, about the Second World War, and about Western imperialism.
***
For centuries, Russia was stabbed and deceived by outsiders. It was fooled, tricked, ravished.
Many countries that Russia liberated betrayed her in the most vulgar manner. Czechs and Poles desecrated monuments to its soldiers – to those boys who sacrificed their lives for Prague and Warsaw at the end of the Second World War. Eastern Europe opened its doors to NATO and the European Union. Out of pragmatic selfishness, people abandoned beautiful ideals, including Internationalism, and instead joined the oppressors of mankind – the Empire.
The more these countries prostitute themselves, the more bellicosely they are willing to shout Western propaganda slogans, directly insulting and provoking first the Soviet Union, and lately Russia. The pitiful and avaricious lackeys and collaborators with Western imperialism have been, continuously and desperately, searching for at least some moral justification for their betrayal. They have twisted history and invented facts. They unleashed aggression against those who have been defending the usurped and plundered parts of the world.
Recently, the West triggered the conflict in Ukraine, where it helped to overthrow legitimate government in Kiev. Then, immediately, it began fueling hysterical anti-Russian sentiments. But the more obvious the situation became, the louder were the voices of the anti-Russian pact, in both Western and Eastern Europe.
Ukraine, Syria, and Libya – all these conflicts prove that no logic applies anymore. The West wants to destroy the countries that stand in its way to total global control, and it will try to reach its goals, by any and all means. The propaganda apparatus is always ready to justify any terrorist act committed by North America and Europe. No international legal mechanisms are available to protect the victims.
Only great force can prevent the tragedy. Russia is that force. China is another. That is why the Empire is terrified by the rise of those two great nations.
Yes, this time, after all those centuries of pain and suffering, Russia is not alone. It is standing tall, and it can finally count on its friends. Some of the greatest minds on earth are joining forces with it. Forget about Eastern Europe! The mightiest country on our planet – China – repeats again and again: “China and Russia are each other’s most important strategic partners”. It is clear that they will not allow this planed to go down in flames!
The entirety of revolutionary Latin America is with Russia and so are dozens of other independent and proud nations worldwide.
In the Middle East and Africa, in South America and many parts of Asia, Russia is increasingly seen as an enormous moral force. Russia is synonymous with hope. Not for those in North America and Europe, but for those who were, for centuries, suffering under their boot.
Whenever I speak publicly, in Eritrea or South Africa, India, China, even Timor-Leste, people want to hear about Russia. What will Russia do next to prevent attacks against Syria or Iran, against Venezuela?
I always say: “Russia is alive and well! And so are its friends, from China to Venezuela and Cuba!”
I never lose hope. I repeat: I sincerely believe that soon we will defeat colonialism and fascism, and build one beautiful society on this scarred but wonderful planet. And it will be created on the ideals we are now commemorating and celebrating.
“The 70th Anniversary of great Victory! Thank you for saving the world! Congratulations, Russia!”
And then I roll up my sleeves and work, day and night – for Leningrad, for what my grandmother stood for, and for Russia and for the humanity.
Screen Shot 2015-05-07 at 11.36.55 AM
My Revolutionary Grandmother and Grandfather.

Profiting from Gaza Children’s Agony

Vacy Vlazna

The shocking decision  by the government-owned New Zealand Super Fund (NZSF)  to NOT divest from Israel Chemicals Ltd (ICL), manufacturer of white phosphorus, blatantly violates the NZSF Responsibilities:
“ethical investment including policies, standards and procedures for avoiding prejudice to New Zealand’s reputation as a responsible member of the world community”
and Standards for Human Rights:
1. Support and respect human rights 2. No complicity in abuses…set out in the NZSF cautionary but brushed off Responsible Investment Framework.
Moreover, NZSF CEO, Adrian Orr, pragmatically amnesic of Israel’s infinite violations of international law and UN resolutions, assured members that:
In 2013, Israel said it would find alternatives to white phosphorus, following condemnation of its use on civilians during the 2008-09 Gaza conflict.
“We have no evidence that Israel Chemicals’ product – or any white phosphorus – has been used against civilians in the recent Gaza conflict,” Mr Orr said. “Our analysis suggests Israel Chemicals operates within national and international laws, and conventions NZ has signed.” (LOL)
NZSF analysis, if done at all, is fraudulent. NZSF certainly acknowledges that Israel Chemicals is a supplier of white phosphorus to the US Defense Force.
Yet, easily found on Google, are contract awards from the US Army Contracting Command to ICL Performance Products for White Phosphorus, Destination- Pine Bluff Arsenal, Pine Bluff, AR to be “used for the Ctg 155mm M110A2”.
As for Orr’s profit-induced ‘no evidence’:
The M110 / M110A1 White Phosphorus (WP) projectiles are available for 105mm and 155mm howitzers. Used for screening, spotting and signaling purposes, they have an additional incendiary effect on a target and processes casualty producing effects.
The contemptible NZSF’s 16-8-14 decision to continue assisting in the US manufacture of M110A2 was reviewed and reached during Israel’s monstrous war, Operation Protective Edge, against the terrified trapped Gazan population. It shows the NZ fund to be an highly irresponsible member of the world community and a collaborator in Israel’s war crimes.
Synchronistically, on the very same 16-8-14, little Hamza Mus’ab Almandani, 3 ,of Khan Younis, Gaza was in Nasser hospital in excruciating pain suffering from burns, like fire, from artillery shells made in Pine Bluff, USA  that were fired on 25-7-14, discharging white incendiary rain on Gaza in hundreds of phosphorous-impregnated felt wedges as Hamza and his family slept.
It is important that NZSF contributors are aware that White Phosphorous burns at 1500 degrees Fahrenheit or 816 degrees Celsius through skin, muscle and bone and is only contained by blocking off oxygen, but the extreme pain and the horrific tissue damage endures.
In terror, Hamza’s father, Mus’ab, also injured along with his other children Bara and Nada, 5, ran through the tumultuous night carrying Hamza who spent agonising months in hospital. This once happy lively toddler, is now mute from trauma and pain. . . thanks, in part, to NZSF and its members.
NZSF should, at the very least, be paying for this child to have burns treatment in Italy. or Aotearoa New Zealand  for that matter.
Contrary to Adrian Orr’s assurance to the New Zealand public, Hamza’s suffering was DELIBERATELY inflicted in 2014 in blatant defiance of the 2009 Human Rights Watch,  Amnesty and witness Reports and the significant UN Goldstone Report on Israel’s war crimes that condemned its illegal use.
Israel inhumanely defied “Protocol III of the 1980 Convention on Conventional Weapons, which prohibits use of the substance as an incendiary weapon against civilian populations and in air attacks against military forces in civilian areas.”
Significantly, Israel’s illegal blockade on Gaza prevents escape by land, sea and air. The alarming Israeli documentary, The Lab, by Yotam Feldman exposes the 1.6 million mothers, fathers, children, are locked in an Israeli laboratory cage that battle-tests weaponry on Gaza. Billions of international dollars from western defense departments and investors, like NZSF, fuel the demand and sanction Israeli atrocities.
NZSF executives, Chair Gavin Walker, Deputy Chair Catherine Savage and Chief Executive Adrian Orr, on $800,000 plus salaries, sit in their safe and sleek offices making criminally negligent decisions to pour NZ workers’ monies into supporting Israeli companies that are integral to the illegal  colonisation and brutal  military oppression of Palestine’s indigenous people that has spanned 68 long long years. . . thus NZSF cannot plead ignorance particularly if one also considers New Zealand’s own shameful history of violence against the Maori peoples.
Nor are NZSF beneficiaries morally squeaky clean . Since August last year there have been numerous calls in the media  for NZSF divestment from ICL and protests by a few decent people at the NZSF offices… but no mass demands from the members for divestment.
Other Israeli companies in the NZSF portfolio that also have grounds for divestment are Strauss Group Ltd which has close connections to the Israeli military, particularly the notoriously vicious Golani and Givati brigades that participated in war crimes in Gaza in 2008/9, 2011 and 2014.
And TEVA Pharmaceuticals has a plant in Har Hotzvim beyond the Green Like making it a settlement  factory.
To understand the incestuous links between the majority of Israeli companies steeped in Palestinian blood and tears we can look at TEVA’s CEO.
TEVA’s Erez Vigodman was CEO of the Strauss Group for 8 years, then CEO of Makhteshim Agan which had signed a production agreement with U.S. chemical giant Monsanto to develop an herbicide for weeds that had developed resistance to glyphosate, its popular herbicide marketed as Roundup. Israeli companies have a knack for death and destruction.
NZSF must also check if the Israeli oil companies in its portfolio are involved in the theft of Palestinian oil and gas resources and all Israel Banks have labyrithine investments in Israel’s arms and security industries.
NZSF ‘has a passive $900,000 investment in Israel Chemicals Ltd which ethically must be immediately divested along with the majority of its Israel investments.
The NZSF governance its contributors and beneficiaries should, in the manner of all decent people, be absolutely outraged that their monies and blood profits are complicitous in the deaths and inhumane suffering of Palestinian children like little Hamza and divest immediately.

The Inquisition Redux

Robert Hunziker

Throughout history few people gain the recognition to become part of humanity’s everyday lexicon, especially if they commit heresy. Indeed, Galileo, whose name rhymes with grade school learning, suffered ridicule at the hands of the world’s highest authorities in the 17th century. But, nowadays Galileo is a hero.
Arguably, Dr. James Hansen is today’s Galileo. The Inquisition still stands tall.
As of January 2015, Dr. Hansen, the world’s foremost climate scientist, says: “We can anticipate that global warming will continue on decadal time scales, because earth is out of energy balance – more energy coming in than going out—as a result of increased atmospheric greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide,” James Hansen, et al, Global Temperature in 2014 and 2015, January 16, 2015.
As Hansen discovered while in graduate school, Venus experienced a similar atmospheric complexity like Earth but many, many millennia ago. As a result, today Venus is 860 °F with very thick CO2 atmosphere.
In many respects Dr. Hansen is today’s carbon copy of Galileo. Similar to today, four-hundred years ago science was viciously attacked: “We pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo… have rendered yourself vehemently suspected by this Holy Office of heresy, that is, of having believed and held the doctrine (which is false and contrary to the Holy and Divine Scriptures) that the sun is the center of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth does move, and is not the center of the world,” Galileo is Convicted of Heresy, This Day in History: April 12, 1633, History.com.
In 1633, Chief Inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculano da Firenzola, who was appointed by Pope Urban VIII, convicted Galileo of heresy and sentenced to house arrest until he died blind at the age of 78.
Zooming ahead 400 years with television replacing scrolls and on March 17, 2006, Dr. James Hansen, America’s most renowned scientist, is interviewed on television’s 60 Minutes by Scott Pelley, who inquires about government censorship of science.
Hansen: “In my more than three decades in the government I’ve never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public, says Hansen. Restrictions like an e-mail Hansen’s institute received from NASA in 2004. ‘There is a new review process,’ the e-mail read. ‘The White House (is) now reviewing all climate related press releases.”
Heavens to Betsy, not only does the Bush/Cheney administration violate the Cradle of Civilization in the Fertile Crescent with bold-faced lies, leading America into a one-sided slaughter of innocent Iraqis, thereby, making Attila the Hun look like a lightweight, the fearsome twosome also took on all of civilization by reverting back to the tried-and-true methodology of Inquisition, censoring scientists, thereby blocking from public view a thorough, scientific understanding of the threat of global warming.
Four hundred years later, the Inquisition continues, as strong as ever.
Essentially, Bush/Cheney became surrogate “Chief Inquisitors for Pope Urban VIII ” by shutting down the world’s foremost climate scientist Dr. James Hansen, as the nation spins backwards.
Contemplating Bush/Cheney’s schtick, i.e., their awful, monstrous, unseemly raison d’être for pretty much everything they did lends a smidgen of credibility to the perpetual 911 conspiracy crowd “inside job” theories, but who knows for sure?
21st Century Galileo [Hansen] Warns Humanity
Dr. James E. Hansen, head of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City from 1981 to 2013, is likely the top climate scientist in the world, having studied under the tutelage of the notable Dr. James Van Allen at the
University of Iowa, where Dr. Hansen was trained in physics and astronomy, achieving highest distinction honors.
Early on, his depth of research/analyses/papers about Venus, the hottest planet in the solar system, tipped him off that, similar to the Venus wipeout, global warming threatens Earth. Interestingly enough, it’s believed that billions of years ago its atmosphere was similar to Earth with surface water.
Subsequently, runaway global warming turned Venus into a furnace at 860 °F, even hotter than Mercury, which is actually closer to the sun. Today, Venus’s atmosphere is 96% carbon dioxide (CO2). It was Dr. Hansen who directed NASA’s first space probe to Venus, the Pioneer Venus Project.
Meantime, back here on Earth, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is +43% to 400 ppm since the industrial revolution, increasingly becoming civilization’s bête noire.
In 1988 Dr. Hansen famously warned “detection of the greenhouse effect” before a Senate hearing astutely followed by worldwide news networks. The New York Times June 24th, 1988 headline read: “Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate.”
Ever since that Senate hearing, “Dr. James Hansen” has become synonymous with “global warming.”
21st Century Galileo [Hansen] Speaks Out
According to Dr. Hansen’s opening statement in a TEDTalk, Long Beach, California, February 2012: “What do I know that would cause me, a reticent Midwestern scientist, to get myself arrested in front of the White House, protesting, and what would you do, if you knew what I know?”
In 1981 he co-published an article concluding “That earth would likely warm in the 1980s, and warming would exceed the noise level of random weather by the end of the century. We also said that the 21st century would see shifting climate zones, creation of drought-prone regions in North America and Asia, erosion of ice sheets, rising sea levels and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage. All of these impacts have since happened or are well underway” (Hansen).
In 2004 Dr. Hansen gave a talk at the University of Iowa, criticizing the Bush/Cheney administration for supressing science and again in 2005 at the meeting of the American Geophysical Union.
“In a speech before an audience at the University of Iowa, James E. Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the Bush administration is suppressing evidence of global warming. He says that officials routinely dismiss such evidence on grounds that it is not of sufficient interest to the public. However, studies that suggest less alarming interpretations of climate data are treated more favorably, he says. According to Hansen, officials have also edited reports to downplay the potential effects of global warming. Hansen thinks the administration is trying to keep the public uninformed about the issue,” ASSOCIATED PRESS, 10/26/2006.
Those talks led to calls from the White House to NASA headquarters with instructions to restrict Dr. Hansen’s future speeches, who became persona nongrata by forewarning the country of the dangers of fossil fuel usage, like Galileo, telling the truth. History will show that Dr. Hansen is the 21st century’s Galileo. But, back then, Bush/Cheney silenced him, almost.
“I was told that I could not give any talks or speak to the media without prior explicit approval by NASA headquarters. After I informed the NYT about these restrictions, NASA was forced to end the censorship, but there were consequences. I’d been using the first line of the NASA mission statement: ‘To Understand and Protect the Home Planet’ to justify my talks. Soon the first line of the mission statement was deleted. Never to appear again.”
Facts About Energy Imbalance
“Adding CO2 to the atmosphere is like throwing another blanket on the bed. It reduces earth’s heat radiation to space so there is a temporary energy imbalance… the key quantity is earth’s energy imbalance, more is coming in than going out, if so, then more warming is in the pipeline. It will occur without adding any more greenhouse gases,” James Hansen, TEDTalk, February 29, 2012.
In short, once CO2 gets into the atmosphere, it stays, and without adding CO2, temperatures still increase. This is the curse of global warming. Today’s CO2 is tomorrow’s heat, into the distant future. Once triggered, it self-perpetuates. Venus is proof.
Thus, greenhouse gases (GHGs) are like a prodigious immovable object, like a medieval moat, surrounding the planet, preventing solar radiation from bouncing back out into outer space.
Helplessly, Earth’s atmosphere is extraordinarily sensitive to small amounts of fine-tuning caused by relatively small levels of GHGs. Consider this: Dr. Kerry Emanuel, department of Earth Atmospheric & Planetary Science, MIT explains the atmosphere as follows: Earth’s atmosphere is 99% oxygen (O2), nitrogen (N2), and Argon (AR). This 99% is entirely transparent to solar radiation, meaning 99% of the atmosphere does not impact global warming in the slightest because it is transparent to the radiation. (Source: Professor Kerry Emanuel, What we Know About Climate Change, TEDTalk, 2008).
Withal, it’s the trace gases less than 1% of the atmosphere that determines whether we have a habitable, temperate planet. These GHGs like carbon dioxide (CO2) determine whether temperatures on Earth are Below Zero or above 60 °F. Thus, only a tiny sliver of greenhouse gases keeps people alive. But, beware; Venus is a prime example of greenhouse gases gone berserk.
Consider this: Think what happens in the typical home when the thermostat is turned up by 43% from 70 °F to 100 °F, which is the same identical rate of increase of CO2 into our atmosphere from 280 ppm to 400 ppm or +43%, since the industrial revolution. The house gets really, really hot à la Venus.
We can measure earth’s energy imbalance precisely by measuring heat content in earth’s reservoirs. For example, the Upper Ocean is gaining heat at a rapid rate. And, the land to depths of tens of meters is also warming much more so than ever before.
Earth’s total energy imbalance is about 0.06 of a watt per square meter. When added up over the whole world, the total number is absolutely enormous. It is twenty times greater than all of the energy used by humanity (Hansen).
This is truly a major, significant, frightening energy imbalance, similar in amount to thousands of hydrogen bombs exploding every day, something Venus likely experienced, but here on Earth, humans are expediting, speeding up, accelerating the process, whereas on Venus, it naturally took millions upon millions upon millions of years.
The only way to restore the massive energy imbalance is to take CO2 levels in the atmosphere back down to 350 ppm from 400 ppm. Dreadfully, CO2 emission levels are pointing straight up, not down, as emissions from fossil fuels continue to power capitalism’s industry… to the gallows.
“We are on track to do much more than double CO2, maybe 1,000 ppm by 2100” (Emanuel).
Meanwhile, climate change deniers, many of them Republicans, argue that the sun is the main cause of climate change, but the planet’s energy imbalance already occurred during the deepest solar minimum in the record, when the Sun’s energy reaching earth is its least in recorded history. This dissolves the Republican argument against human-caused global warming.
Consider this: It’s a blessing the sun has been at a minimal. Imagine the consequences if it were at its maximum!
Even with the current weak Solar Cycle 24, which started in 2008: “Yet, there is more energy coming in than going out. This shows that the affect of the sun’s variations on climate change is overwhelmed by increasing greenhouse gases, mainly from burning fossil fuel” (Hansen).
Dr. Hansen’s TEDTalk includes a projection for rising sea levels: “What sea level rise can we look forward to? The last time CO2 was 392 ppm, today’s value, sea level was higher by at least 15 meters, 50 feet…. Most estimates are that this century we’ll get at least one meter, or 3.3 feet. I think it will be even more if we continue burning fossil fuels, perhaps 5 meters, or 18 feet.”
Furthermore, unless we stop and reverse CO2, the 21st century will trigger tipping points, a process of out of control self-reinforcing global warming, the end times. Hello Venus.
Fossil Fuel CO2 Guarantees Tipping Points
According to Dr. Hansen, “Instead of placing a rising fee on carbon emissions to make fossil fuels pay their true costs to society, our governments are forcing the public to subsidize fossil fuels by $400 to $500 billion per year worldwide…. This path, if continued, guarantees we will pass tipping points… Imagine a giant asteroid on a direct collision course with Earth. That is what we face now.”
Tipping points like an ice-free Arctic triggering massive release of methane (CH4) with concomitant runaway global warming (Venus) or a sudden frenzy of cascading Antarctic ice shelves, like the Larsen B Ice Shelf (2002) 1,250 square miles of ice, splintering, cascading into the ocean within only a few weeks.
All of which assures that the “Bush/Cheney nexus” wins a loser’s game.
As of today, in line with the “Bush/Cheney nexus,” as in monkey see, monkey do, some states within the United States are calling-out any state employee who even goes so far as to speak the words “climate change.”
Inexplicably, this childish policy makes the Inquisition look good.

Why Germany Should Pay Reparations to Greece

Cesar Chelala

In 1960, the then Federal Republic of Germany paid Greece 115 million Deutschmarks on account of compensation for Nazi crimes. Greek governments stated that this was only a fraction of what is due on account of loss of life, damaged infrastructure, and the repayment of a forced loan the Nazis extracted on Greece in 1942. Recent statements by leading German politicians seem to indicate that reparations are now a possibility. Both the law and fairness suggest payment is the right thing to do
On February 8, 2015, Greece’s Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras appeared in front of the Greek parliament, officially demanding Germany’s payment. Tsipras spoke about Athens’s “historical obligation” to claim reparation from Germany for the death and destruction resulting from Germany’s occupation of Greece. “Greece has a moral obligation to our people, to history, to all European peoples who fought and gave their blood against Nazism,” he added.
Greece’s claims, allegedly amounting to some $303 billion, have been recognized by the Greek and Italian highest courts, as well as by the International Court of Justice at The Hague. Yet, collecting such debt is obstructed by Germany’s immunity of jurisdiction, a principle of international law impeding under most circumstances for a country to sit in judgment for the misdeeds of another.  But it is the historical and political legitimacy of the claim what counts, beyond the plausible legal arguments that support the claim for reparations.
Greece’s demands stand on two different factual grounds. In 1942, the occupying Nazi regime forced the Greek Central Bank to loan Nazi Germany 476 million Reichsmarks at 0% interest. On October 3, 1943 Nazi soldiers murdered 92 people, including 34 children, in the city of Liguiades. In June 1944, Nazi troops slaughtered 281 men, women and the elderly at Diostomo, a small town near Delphi.
The rule that a State’s violation of international humanitarian law is a compensable wrong constitutes a long-standing principle of customary international law, crystallized in the 1907 Hague Convention (IV) and its Additional Protocol I. This long-standing principle has been put into practice in numerous post-conflict settlements, subsequently codified in the Draft Articles on State Responsibility as an international obligation “to compensate for the damage caused…insofar as such damage is not made good by restitution.” Numerous official statements and a good a number of resolutions by the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly have confirmed its binding force.
Germany argues that the 1990 Two-Plus-Four Agreement, a treaty concluded between  both Germanies immediately prior to German reunification and  the former Allied countries (United States, Great Britain,France and Russia) had put a formal end to all WWII claims for reparations against united Germany. Greece disagrees, asking for discussions between Greece and unified Germany. Even if Greece’s total claims are not accepted, Germany should not refuse to engage in further discussions, seeking an acceptable settlement. This is also Germany’s historical obligation, which is also morally owed to the millions of Germans still seeking to close this still inconclusive chapter of their past.
As German President Joachim Gauck stated recently, “We are descendants of those who, during WWII, left a path of destruction, in Greece, among other places. Something that, to our shame, we ignored for a long time.”