SnakeArbusto » 99GetSmart

Syria: Things Move Fast

Apr 272013

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel stands with an Egyptian army official as he salutes before laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Wednesday in Cairo, Egypt.
Pool/Getty Images

Isn’t it funny that just a week after the Boston bombings and the announcement that a terrorist plot driven by Iran was foiled in Canada, the word has gone out that what we have feared for so long (or to put it another way, what we have been prepared to accept for so long) has come about: Dr. Assad has stepped over the red line – or is at least standing on it, with one foot ready to come down on the other side (the former is the Republican take, the latter the Democrat)?

In contrast, take a look at this (note the date – March 19th): http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article34344.htm
And look quick, because it might not be there much longer.

Also note how Chuck Hagel said yesterday that the reports were not to be taken seriously, while stopping short of criticizing Israeli intelligence:

“(Reuters) – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Wednesday the U.S. effort to determine whether Syria has used chemical weapons is a “serious business” that cannot be decided in a rush just because several countries believe evidence supports that conclusion.

“Suspicions are one thing, evidence is another,” Hagel told reporters as he wrapped up a visit to Egypt that included talks about Syria and other regional issues.

“I think we have to be very careful here before we make any conclusions (and) draw any conclusions based on real intelligence. That’s not at all questioning other nations’ intelligence. But the United States relies on its own intelligence.” “

But today, 24 hours later, Mr. Hagel… stepped over the line:

“ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — U.S. intelligence has concluded “with some degree of varying confidence,” that the Syrian government has used sarin gas as a weapon in its 2-year-old civil war, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday.

Hagel, speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi, said the White House has informed two senators by letter that, within the past day, “our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin.”

“It violates every convention of warfare,” Hagel said. “

When you’re a new defense secretary, you learn fast…

The French Media Bury Chávez

SnakeArbusto No Responses »

Mar 082013

By SnakeArbusto, 99GetSmart

It was interesting to see how the French media reacted to the announcement of the death of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez. I usually frequent what in the US would be called the “liberal” media. For example, I listen to France-Culture, a public radio station. (Yes, France has public radio, and it’s actually publicly funded and commercial-free.) France-Culture is the only radio station I have ever run across that features a regular program on architecture. It also carries the Sunday morning Mass from Notre-Dame cathedral. But that doesn’t keep it from energetically criticizing the government when it deserves it.

But after the predictable mention of Chávez’s improving his people’s lot thanks to his country’s mineral wealth, France-Culture’s evening news story on Chávez called him a “nationalist.” That term is a heavily loaded one in France. Nationalism is seen as a major cause of the Great War. Hitler and Mussolini were nationalists.

And the use of the term wasn’t even accurate. Chávez was an internationalist, one of whose achievements has been to unite several Latin American countries who are determined to follow a different path from the one proposed for them by the US… a path that has been disastrous for the peoples of Latin America – where, after all, the US is basically the successor of the Spanish and Portuguese colonizers who bled the continent for centuries. Remember the Maine?

Listening further, I noticed a general tendency to focus on Chávez’s personality – admittedly colorful – rather than on his achievements. There seemed to be a fixation on the fact that most of what he achieved – cutting the poverty rate in half, land reform, making education and health care accessible to all, etc. – is owed to his government’s control of Venezuela’s rich oil resources, and the suggestion that all that good had been done for purely electoral motives. As if it weren’t natural for a country’s resources to be used to better the lives of its people…

But it was later, watching the evening news on ARTE TV – another hotbed of the liberal media – that I began to wonder whether the same narrative was informing the coverage in all the media. The reports harped on Chávez’s ties to “dictators” like Saddam Hussein and Muammar Ghaddafi, as if to suggest that this president who went out of his way to legitimize his power through elections was a dictator himself, or as if to conveniently forget that France and the US both supported Saddam and Ghaddafi when it was perceived as being in their interest. The tone of the reports was often one of raillery. They seemed determined to portray Chávez as some kind of comic-opera potentate – again seeming to forget France’s own embarrassment over having a “bling-bling” president whose sartorial model seemed to be John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever. Chávez was sneeringly referred to as the “Little father of the peoples,” again in a clear attempt to tar him with the brush of totalitarianism. He was portrayed as having created and maintained a “personality cult.”

As for Chávez’s economic policies, again the prevailing theme was that he had made himself popular among the masses by buying their favor with oil revenues. At one point we were told that Chávez “used Venezuela’s oil wealth to enrich the poor.” Enrich the poor? By creating a system of markets that put food more within their reach? Were we supposed to imagine indolent peasants sporting Rolex watches and toying with iPhones while drinking champagne on café terraces (as the French are fond of doing)? In the background seemed to be the unchallenged assumption that the purpose of oil – or any of the natural resources in which Latin America, like Africa, abounds – is to enrich someone.

Later, on ARTE’s 28 Minutes commentary/discussion program, a lone representative of orthodoxy found himself outgunned by the other commentators on the panel – all with perfectly legitimate mainstream credentials. The same commonplaces were brought up, only to be deflated by sober, informed comments:

The personality cult: There is a nuance to be made between a personality cult and a leader who is genuinely adored by his people, even if he has gone out of his way to cultivate that love.

The “dictator”-by-association meme: All realistic leaders cultivate alliances that further the interests of their people. (This would have been a good time to flash the picture of Sarkozy and his “brother” Ghaddafi.)

Chávez’s playing fast and loose with the constitutional process: Someone quickly mentioned Jacques Chirac’s dissolution of the French legislature in 1997, and the discussion abruptly ended.

Chávez is a friend of the evil ayatollahs’ regime in Iran: Venezuela and Iran are among the founders of OPEC; would it be realistic to expect him to put an end to such a long-term alliance?

Then another major argument was brought out: Chávez’s “de-industrialization” of Venezuela. Could this be a reference to the IMF’s classifying the country as “slow to recover?” Should Venezuela follow the example of most of the other major Latin American countries and de-populate its countryside, shrink its public sector, privatize all its resources and public services, increase its dependency on foreign debt and on the major powers, allow its wealth to be siphoned off for the benefit of the global elite, and allow its population to serve as a pool of cheap labor for international capital? Perhaps the problem, as the mainstream media see it, is that Hugo Chávez did the opposite. He encouraged his people, and the people of other Latin American nations, to walk a different path, to finally shake off the domination of the powerful, to make the word “development” mean something other than enrichment for the global few and continuing poverty and oppression for their people. He spurred the creation of BancoSur as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. He dared to challenge the dollar as the foundation stone of the world’s economy. Could it be for all those reasons that the mainstream media seem to be hoping that Hugo Chávez is dead? Viva Chávez!

Éric Toussaint: “Greece must unilaterally suspend repayment of its debt.”

Activism, CADTM, Greece, Interviews, SnakeArbusto, Submitted No Responses »

Mar 042013

Interview by Tassos Tsakiroglu, 99GetSmart

Translated by Snake Arbusto - Mike Krolikowski

“In Greece, the ruling class and the government are destroying democracy,” Eric Toussaint, professor of political science and militant, told the Greek Daily of Journalists. According to Eric Toussaint, only a determined government which has the support of the people will be able to find a solution to the debt problem. In his view, SYRIZA must not slide towards more moderate positions.

Éric Toussaint, professor of political science at the University of Liège, is president of the CADTM – the Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt – and a member of the scientific council of ATTAC France. In 2007 he was appointed by Ecuador’s president Rafael Correa to that country’s internal and external public debt audit commission. He is known in Greece, where he has visited several times as part of his efforts toward liberating the countries of the South from the influence of international speculators and credit entities.

Clearly, all of Europe is in a deep crisis. The capitalist class and the European Commission, which operates on their behalf, have launched a terrible attack against Europe’s peoples. Greece is at the center of the crisis, but is also at the center of the resistance to that attack. Countries like Ireland, Portugal, and Spain, but also Romania and Bulgaria, etc. are also victims of that attack.

However, Greece is at the center because Greece represents the start of the new phase of the crisis, with the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding of May 2010, but also because of the resistance of the Greek people. I am aware of the last general strike of 20 February 2013, which was a very large one. Millions of people throughout Europe and on other continents are looking towards the forms the resistance is taking in Greece. We are doing whatever we can to bring about a European-wide cooperation between peoples’ movements in order to build a broad resistance that can turn the situation around. It is very difficult for the citizens of one country to face this attack alone.

- For the moment we are not seeing that kind of cooperation.

That is why we should be concerned. However, many attempts have been made to bring it about. For example, the European Trade Union Confederation is working at it, but that’s not nearly enough. |1| There will be demonstrations throughout Europe on 13 and 14 March, 2013. I hope that they will meet with success, but that is still not enough.

- In Greece, we are in a very precarious political situation, with many possible scenarios. We live under a government that is more and more authoritarian, that has succeeded in several legislative coups d’état, and that systematically resorts to repression of social movements. At the same time, it is possible that SYRIZA could become the leading party in the next elections. What is your view of the situation?

You are facing a major challenge. I agree with you that in Greece the ruling classes and the government are destroying democracy at several levels. They are not respecting the people’s vote; they have imposed Memoranda of Understanding and treaties with no recourse to the democratic process; they are undermining the legislative power; and they are seeking to destroy the ability of the working class to negotiate collectively. So you are facing a major challenge, and SYRIZA’s ability to provide a truly radical response to this attack is crucial. If SYRIZA adopts more moderate policies and proposals, the consequences could be enormous.

- Recently, many have said that SYRIZA is making an effort to adopt more moderate positions.

I hope that SYRIZA will radicalize its positions. If SYRIZA succeeds in becoming the next government, it is very important that they unilaterally suspend repayment of the debt, for example.

- You feel that that is realistic?

I feel that it is absolutely imperative that the balance of power be changed. If the government does not adopt a combative position and contents itself with saying ‘we want to renegotiate,’ it will be very difficult to impose a solution on the creditors that will be in the interest of the masses of the people. If you begin a negotiation without changing the balance of power, you cannot arrive at a really positive solution. That is why, first of all, there has to be a payment default, which will force the creditors to negotiations. And suspension of payments needs the support of the people, as was proven in the cases of Ecuador and Argentina. Only a determined government can do it.

- We are seeing a gradual elimination of common property with the privatization of health, education and most public-sector companies and services. What are the consequences of that?

There is a considerable deterioration of the living conditions of the majority of the population. It is clear that with these attacks, the capitalist class seeks to destroy what was built after the Second World War with the victory over Nazism and Fascism in Europe. This is a historic moment for the capitalist class, who see this crisis as an excellent opportunity to bring about their dream of doing away with all the achievements of the people.

- What is your message to the Greeks?

First, the pan-European social movement must be strengthened. That requires action in cooperation with the Greek people. The issue is not only solidarity with the Greek people. The challenge is to join our struggles together, since other peoples of Europe are also suffering. The circumstances may be different, but they are victims of the same attack. We cannot face this attack unless we unite all the strengths of the continent in order to achieve radical change. So my message is that we need to unite and that all our efforts must converge in that direction.

Control of Perception by the Military-Financial Complex: A Textbook Case

SnakeArbusto 2 Responses »

Mar 012013

By SnakeArbusto, 99GetSmart

Current events have caught up with this post. It started when I bought my son, who was studying for his brevet exams – here in France the brevet is your ticket out of middle school and into high school – a review workbook for his Civics exam. The educational system being highly centralized in France, the curricula are nationwide and schoolbook publishing is a lucrative industry. Which may explain why French capitalists and their friends in politics tend to take an interest in it… But I’m getting ahead of myself.

My son began studying the book and at one point came and showed me the caption on a picture in a section entitled Les menaces pour la paix et la sécurité (“Threats to Peace and Security”). The picture is of a missile being fired, and the caption reads “Un missile à capacité nucléaire iranien” (“A nuclear-capable Iranian missile”). The picture was one of several “documents” that are supposed to serve as a basis for “reflection and discussion by students.” The strong implication is that Iran has a military nuclear program, and even nuclear warheads. This is being presented to my son and his generation of French middle-school kids as a simple fact.

Yet a little reading in the mainstream information media will demonstrate that it is anything but a fact. Iran is a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is in charge of surveillance of compliance with that treaty, has rejected “allegations” (mostly coming from the US and its allies) that Iran is pursuing development of nuclear weapons¹.

The fact is that the United States and its allies, including France, have been exerting pressure on Iran to cease its program of uranium enrichment – to which it is entitled under the terms of the aforementioned treaty –, supposedly as a guarantee of Iran’s intention not to pursue development of a nuclear weapon. In the meantime, the NATO/US military machine has been stepping up its presence in the region, as if it were doing everything in its power to push Iran towards developing a weapon for purposes of deterrence.

So I looked to see who the publisher of the workbook is. The publisher turns out to be Hachette Éducation, the largest publisher of textbooks in France, with 1.052 billion euros in sales in 2007. Hachette Éducation is a division of Hachette Livre, which is part of the Lagardère group. The Lagardère group originates in the takeover of the French press-publishing giant Hachette by arms manufacturer Matra in 1980. The group today has a co-controlling share in EADS, which in 2010 ranked seventh in the list of the top ten weapons merchants, with 12.3 billion euros in sales. “Among EADS’s divisions is Matra BAe Dynamics, formed in 1996 via a merger of the missile business of BAe (BAe Dynamics) and half of the missile business of Matra Défense. (The other half remained as Aerospatiale Matra Missiles).”²

So a textbook writer working for Hachette would probably have little trouble finding stock photos of missiles to fill in a page in a Civics workbook…

According to the Reference for Business Company History Index³, in the controversial 1980 takeover of Hachette by Matra “[then French president] Giscard d’Estaing’s government supported Matra, its principal arms supplier” amid fears that “The publishing industry [was] gradually losing its financial and intellectual independence…” Were those fears justified? Well, today, 70% of the French press is controlled by arms manufacturers Lagardère and Dassault^4.A 2004 article in The Economist⁵ expressed concern over the increasing influence of armaments makers on the French press and publishing industry. Isn’t it disturbing to see that the largest textbook publisher in France is part of an arms manufacturing group? And, given the incestuous relationship between business and government in France, that taxpayers’ money is being used to produce these textbooks?

As I said, current events have caught up with this post. The workbook dates from a couple of years ago, and so was published under the Sarkozy regime. Sarkozy, of course, is alleged to have long-standing ties to the US in general and to the CIA in particular. “Sarkozy the American” was the man who ended France’s tradition of keeping the US and NATO at arm’s length by returning France to NATO’s integrated military structure after a 43-year absence^6,7. Sarkozy also demonstrated a taste for military adventurism when he spearheaded the 2011 attack on Ghaddafi’s Libya.

When a Socialist president was elected last year, the issue of France’s participation in NATO and her military adventurism was very much a part of the campaign, and current president François Hollande, playing on his pacifist political inheritance, had promised “to re-examine the NATO question.” He has been accused by his political opponents of wanting to slash France’s military budget. But today he has shown himself to be as eager as Sarkozy was to “prove his mettle as a leader” and engage his country in war – for purely “humanitarian” motives, of course. And the mainstream press, unsurprisingly, has furthered that narrative.

Taking the train into Paris yesterday, I noticed that the billboard frames that line the tracks – usually devoted to yogurt or cheese or the latest vampire movie – were mostly displaying advertisements for France’s modern army. The billboards depict fit young men and women in camouflage, training in combat techniques or young men in Robocop-like crowd-control gear standing on a railway platform holding assault rifles, “protecting the population.” The French Army is recruiting 10,000 young men and women. Meanwhile, the French auto industry plans to fire 11,000 workers between now and 2015 – with the consent of the unions and the government.

It made me realize that in fact nothing has changed. France is one of the world’s leading armaments producers. And countries whose economies depend heavily on the production of weapons of war need to remain in a constant state of war. That state of war needs to be justified to the population, and the population needs to be provided with an enemy from whom it needs to be protected. Or else the war-waging needs to be sanitized, as is now being done with Syria and Mali, and as was done with Libya and earlier with Serbia/Kosovo, by convincing the population that what is being done with its tax money is “humanitarian intervention.” And that is where the press comes in.

Examples of how the press promotes the enterprise of war can be seen every day. During the preparation for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 they were ubiquitous and egregious. The lesson of the Vietnam war was learned well. No reporter is allowed direct access to a combat area, and the information they have access to is kept under strict control. The mainstream press now supports the official narrative of what is happening wherever the US/NATO intervenes – currently in Syria and Mali. Is that surprising, given the degree of control the warplane makers have over the press?

But it goes farther than that. The culture of war is etched in myriad ways into the official and popular culture of countries where armaments are the lifeblood of the economy. Nick Turse, in The Complex, reveals how the Pentagon provides support for the development of computer shooter games and war movies. The recent film Zero Dark Thirty is reportedly the result of direct collaboration with the Obama administration⁸. What passes for entertainment – some would even call it art – is in fact metaprogramming, designed to ensure that the message Obama sent to the world in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech – that it’s going to be business as usual – is not forgotten: “We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.”

Presumably – in France, at least – violent conflict will be on the menu into our children’s lifetimes, too, and our textbooks need to condition them to accept that. Why? Is it because Obama’s words are, sadly, true? Or is it for another reason? Is it because the publisher of the textbooks is also a merchant of death?

______________________________________________________________

¹https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Alleged_weaponization_studies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Alleged_weaponization_studies

²http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Matra.html

³http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/50/Matra-Hachette-S-A.htm

http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/50/Matra-Hachette-S-A.html

⁴http://www.ifj.org/fr/articles/journalists-challenge-european-commission-over-media-concentration-in-france

⁵http://www.economist.com/node/2560576″ http://www.economist.com/node/2560576

⁶http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sarkozy-s-three-way-nato-bet

⁷http://www.sott.net/article/161965-Sarkozy-Hello-NATO-Goodbye-France

http://www.sott.net/article/161965-Sarkozy-Hello-NATO-Goodbye-France

⁸http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/kathryn-bigelow-bin-laden-movie-mark-boal-white-house-328830