Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

*** 30-Jun-17 World View -- Italy begs for help after 12,000 migrants arrive in four days

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• France struggles with hundreds of migrants returning to Calais campground
  
• Italy begs for help after 12,000 migrants arrive in four days
  

****
**** France struggles with hundreds of migrants returning to Calais campground
****


Migrants from Africa arrive in Italy on a rescue ship

In October of last year, France finally demolished the refugee camp
known as "The Jungle." It was populated by about 7,000 migrants, who
came there hoping to reach Britain, where they could apply for asylum.
When the camp was demolished, they were given the choice of either
being deported back to their home countries, or of staying in some 300
temporary refugee centers across France, where they can apply for
asylum.

However, many of them left Calais on their own, and went to the
Grande-Synthe refugee camp in Dunkirk, which became known as "the New
Jungle." The camp had been built by Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors
Without Borders), and included hundreds of wooden huts. The camp
opened in March 2016 as the first camp in France to meet international
humanitarian standards, where migrant families could live in
relatively dignified conditions in heated wooden cabins.

The Dunkirk camp had a capacity of 700, and was severely overcrowded,
eventually housing 1,600. Furthermore, many of the new arrivals from
The Jungle, who were mostly Afghans, didn't get along with the
original migrants, who were mostly Iraqi and Kurdish. There were
multiple fights between groups of migrants of different nationalities,
with some 600 migrants taking part in the fighting. In March of this
year, the Grande-Synthe refugee camp, including all the wooden huts,
burnt to the ground, leaving nothing but ashes. According to French
officials, multiple fires must have been set on purpose.

So now, three months later, it's June, the weather is great, and
hundreds of migrants are flooding back into Calais. Officials are
refusing to build a proposed reception center for asylum-seekers to
Calais, saying that it would only encourage more people to come.

According to France's Interior Minister Gerard Collomb, part of the
government of the new president Emmanuel Macron:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We've seen this before, it starts with a few hundred
> people and ends with several thousand people who we can't manage.
> That's why we don't want a center here."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Humanitarian non-government organizations (NGOs) are trying to feed
the 400-600 migrants currently "living rough" in Calais, but complain
that they are being harassed by Calais police. So 11 NGOs sued the
local authorities, saying that they have "prevented" the distribution
of food to hundreds of migrants.

The court rejected the request to set up a new emergency center to
shelter migrants in Calais, but also ruled that the migrants should be
allowed to receive humanitarian add. Furthermore, judges ordered
officials, within 10 days, to establish several drinking fountains,
toilets and showers for migrants who are "exposed to inhuman and
degrading conditions” in the area. The judge said, "It is not
possible to leave these people, who are in a state of complete
destitution without any aid." AFP (23-June) and France 24 and The Local (France)

b>Related Articles[/b]

• Migrant camp in northern France housing 1,600 people burnt to the ground (12-Apr-2017)
  
  
• Thousands of refugees hide from French police as Calais 'Jungle' refugee camp is demolished (28-Oct-2016)
  
  
• France to demolish 'The Jungle' migrant camp in Calais (22-Oct-2016)
  

****
**** Italy begs for help after 12,000 migrants arrive in four days
****

Italy has threatened to close all of its ports to ships of foreign
NGOs carrying migrants and refugees, after being overwhelmed by the
arrival of 12,000 migrants in four days on 22 ships. The UN Migration
Agency said 8,863 migrants were rescued trying to reach Italy from
Libya, and the EU’s border agency Frontex said its boats had recovered
an additional 2,700 people.

About 76,000 migrants have arrived since January, and some estimates
say that 220,000 people could land in Italy by the end of 2017.

The ships cross the Mediterranean Sea from Libya and mostly contain
African refugees. In one Italian port in Reggio Calabria alone, 1,066
people disembarked from the Save the Children rescue ship Vos Hestia
on Thursday. Among them were 241 unaccompanied minors.

According to a European Council official:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"In recent years people smugglers have launched
> massive numbers at the same time. But this year we are witnessing
> levels never registered before in such short periods of time.
>
> Loss of life and continuing migratory flows of primarily economic
> migrants on the central Mediterranean route is a structural
> challenge and remains an issue of urgent and serious concern.
>
> The EU and its member states must restore control to avoid a
> worsening humanitarian crisis."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Italy agrees that the EU must restore control. Italy says that it is
unable to cope with this year's expected flood of refugees, and is
demanding help from the European Union, or else it will close all its
ports to ships carrying migrants. Since the rescue operations do not
take place in Italian waters, Italy is under no obligation under
international law to take the refugees in, according to some experts.
Analysts say that this would be a humanitarian catastrophe because the
ships would have to be diverted to other countries, for which they
have inadequate provisions.

One of the NGOs operating rescue boats said that it understood the
pressure that Italy was under, but:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"However, we also believe that closing the ports of
> safety to people seeking refuge from war, violence and poverty
> cannot be the solution. We would like to stress again that NGOs
> are not the cause, nor the solution to this humanitarian
> crisis. Without our presence at sea, even more people would
> die."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The kind of help that Italy would like is that refugees arriving in
Italy should be distributed to other European countries, but there
isn't a snowflake's chance in hell that will happen. In 2015, the EU
agreed that 160,000 asylum seekers should be relocated from Greece and
Italy to other member states, in the name of burden-sharing. To date,
only about 22,500 of the 160,000 have actually been transferred.
Several central and eastern European EU members - including large
countries like Hungary and Poland - have absolutely refused to take in
any asylum-seekers.

However, some EU officials are offering Italy financial aid.

Italy's threat may be based in politics, in the wake of of a Sunday
local election rout for the ruling center-left Democratic Party, which
several commentators blamed on public discontent with rising
immigration and government proposals to grant citizenship to children
of foreign residents. The opposition Forza Italia party of former
premier Silvio Berlusconi - seen as one of the winners of the local
elections - said the government had responded to its urgings for a
tougher line on migration. Deutsche-Presse Agentur (dpa) and VOA and Guardian (London)

Related Articles

• Italy struggles with the 'mini-Calais' refugee camp in Ventimiglia (22-Oct-2016)
  
  
• Austria votes to close border with Italy to slow refugees (28-Apr-2016)
  
  
• EU migrant crisis moves to Italy as Austria begins closing border (13-Apr-2016)
  
  
• France, Italy have bitter feud over migrants as quota system collapses (16-Jun-2015)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, France, Calais, The Jungle,
Grande-Synthe, Dunkirk, Emmanuel Macron, Gerard Collomb,
Médecins Sans Frontières, MSF, Doctors without Borders,
Italy, Reggio Calabria, Silvio Berlusconi

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

*** 1-Jul-17 World View -- China repudiates its Hong Kong 'One Country, Two Systems' agreement with Britain

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• China repudiates its Hong Kong 'One Country, Two Systems' agreement with Britain
  
• Hong Kong handover celebration marred by thuggish treatment of dissidents
  

****
**** China repudiates its Hong Kong 'One Country, Two Systems' agreement with Britain
****


China's president Xi Jinping (center) and his wife in Hong Kong on Friday, surrounded by Hong Kong officials (AP)

No one really expected China to fully honor the 1984 Sino-British
Joint Declaration that led to the handover in 1997 of Hong Kong to
China, after 152 years as a British colony.

In the Joint Declaration, China promised to honor the principle of
"One Country, Two Systems." In particular, citizens of Hong Kong were
to have civil liberties and fundamental rights such as political
freedom, free elections, press freedom, freedom of speech, and an
independent judiciary. The people of Hong Kong had enjoyed these
fundamental rights as a British colony, and China committed to
preserving them for at least 50 years following the handover, until
2047.

However, China's Foreign Ministry on Friday repudiated the 1984
agreement once and for all. According to spokesman Lu Kang:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Now that Hong Kong has returned to the embrace of the
> motherland for 20 years, the Sino-British Joint Declaration – as a
> historical document – no longer has any practical significance.
>
> It also does not have any binding power on how the Chinese central
> government administers Hong Kong. Britain has no sovereignty, no
> governing power and no supervising power over Hong Kong. I hope
> the relevant parties will reckon with this reality."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Britain's Foreign Office responded:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The Sino-British Joint Declaration remains as valid
> today as it did when it was signed over thirty years ago ... It is
> a legally binding treaty, registered with the UN and continues to
> be in force. As a co-signatory, the UK government is committed to
> monitoring its implementation closely."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The exchange of views followed a remark by Britain's Foreign Minister
Boris Johnson: "I want to stress that Britain’s commitment to Hong
Kong – enshrined in the Joint Declaration with China – is just as
strong today as it was 20 years ago."

The US State Dept. also chastised China: "[China must uphold] Hong
Kong’s high degree of autonomy and the crucial ideal of ‘One Country,
Two Systems’, as codified in the Basic Law and the legally binding
Sino-British Joint Declaration." Hong Kong Free Press and Reuters and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) and iPolitics (Canada)

Related Articles

• China orders Hong Kong to disqualify anyone not taking 'sincere' loyalty oath to China (08-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Hong Kong legislature in chaos, under threat of intervention by mainland China (03-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Sharply polarized Hong Kong electorate hands Beijing a stinging setback (06-Sep-2016)
  
  
• Hong Kong leader suggests that the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote (22-Oct-2014)
  

****
**** Hong Kong handover celebration marred by thuggish treatment of dissidents
****

With China's president Xi Jinping visiting Hong Kong to celebrate the
20th anniversary of Britain's handover of Hong Kong to China, Hong
Kong police are taking special measures to suppress any sign of
dissidence.

On Wednesday, about 30 young protesters were arrested after staging a
pro-democracy sit-in at the site of the July 1, 1997, handover. In
other actions, Hong Kong police warned journalists to avoid any
actions unrelated to reporting, and said that digital media outlets
will be barred from covering the celebrations.

Locking up peaceful protests could be considered one of the more
benign actions of the thuggish Chinese government. In 2015, five Hong
Kong book publishers mysteriously disappeared after publishing books
critical of China's communist leadership. They resurfaced a year ago
and described being abducted by thugs and kept for months in solitary
confinement in a cramped cell in mainland China. They were tortured
and required to confess to crimes they had not committed.

Other actions could be considered even worse. Chinese nationals
living in the United States and Europe who posted criticisms of
China's communist party have had their families back in China abducted
and jailed.

This is the backdrop to Xi Jinping's speech on arriving in Hong Kong:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"After nine years, I am happy to step on Hong Kong
> land again. In two days, it will be the 20th anniversary of Hong
> Kong’s return to the motherland. This is a big event, a
> celebratory event for the country and Hong Kong.
>
> [I give] my warm congratulations to the great achievements over
> the 20 years since the establishment of the Hong Kong Special
> Administrative Region... [I give my] heartfelt blessing that Hong
> Kong will achieve new success.
>
> For 20 years, the central government has given Hong Kong its
> strong backing. The central government will always support Hong
> Kong’s development and improve livelihoods.
>
> We will review the extraordinary journey of Hong Kong over the
> past 20 years across all sectors, summarize the experience and
> plan for the future, to ensure ‘One Country, Two Systems’ will be
> stable and everlasting."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

This is a politician speaking, and I don't think that even he is so
delusional that he believes that that Hong Kong's form of government
will be stable and everlasting. Like Taiwan, Hong Kong is deeply
divided between those who are completely loyal to the government in
Beijing, and those who are not, wanting anything from Western-style
fundamental rights to full independence.

Xi and other Beijing officials are well aware that time is not on
their side. Younger generation, particularly those who grew up after
the horrific Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, where China's army
massacred perhaps thousands of students who had gathered in Beijing to
protest, are less and less loyal to Beijing and more and more
supported of separation or independence. This trend is continuing in
both Hong Kong and Taiwan, and Beijing officials are desperately
trying to change the trend, either by self-serving speeches by Xi and
others, or by bloody crackdowns by Chinese thugs.

Although China never really supported the "One Country, Two Systems"
philosophy, the worst and bloodiest violence by Hong Kong police thugs
occurred in the summer of 2014, when tens of thousands of Hong Kong
citizens, mostly college age, staged a series of pro-democracy
protests, bring central Hong Kong to a standstill.

The police attacked the protesters with tear gas, and the protesters
defended themselves with umbrellas to protect themselves from the tear
gas. The sight of bright yellow umbrellas became commonplace, and the
protests have become known as the "Umbrella Revolution" or "Umbrella
movement."

What sparked the Umbrella Movement was that Beijing reneged on its
commitment to "one country, two systems," in particular to the
commitment to free elections. For the approaching 2017 elections, the
only candidates who will be permitted to be run have to be approved a
"nominating committee" completely controlled by Beijing. So the
effect is that the so-called "free" elections are rigged to guarantee
that only candidates selected by Beijing can win the elections.

The Umbrella Movement was considered a complete failure by its
participants because nothing has changed. The demands to allow free
elections in 2017 were ignored, and it's clear to everyone, especially
the young people who protested, that peaceful protests will not
succeed in changing anything, and that something else must be tried.
Washington Post and Guardian (London, 17-June-2016) and CS Monitor (29-Mar-2016) and Hong Kong Free Press

Related Articles

• China's 'thuggery' transforms Hong Kong's Umbrella Movement into independence movement (30-Aug-2016)
  
  
• Chinese official slams Hong Kong independence during 'inspection visit' (19-May-2016)
  
  
• Pro-democracy protests bring Hong Kong to a standstill (29-Sep-2014)
  
  
• Hong Kong police clash with protesters, worst violence in weeks (1-Dec-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, Hong Kong, One Country - Two Systems,
Sino-British Joint Declaration, Britain,
Lu Kang, Boris Johnson, Xi Jinping, Taiwan, Tiananmen Square,
Umbrella movement

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

*** 2-Jul-17 World View -- Fed Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen says 'no financial crisis in our lifetimes'

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Fed Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen says 'no financial crisis in our lifetimes'
  
• Examining the stock market bubble
  
• Remembering Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman
  
• Remembering Ben Bernanke as Fed Chairman
  

****
**** Fed Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen says 'no financial crisis in our lifetimes'
****


Fed Chairman Janet Yellen

Janet Yellen, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, the successor
to Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan, held a press conference on Tuesday
of last week, during which she said that she believes that there will
be no new financial crisis "in our lifetimes":

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Would I say there will never, ever be another
> financial crisis?
>
> You know probably that would be going too far but I do think we're
> much safer and I hope that it will not be in our lifetimes and I
> don't believe it will be."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Yellen said that the reason she believes that there won't be a
financial crisis "in our lifetimes" is because the Fed is much more
clever and vigilant now about detecting risks, having learned lessons
from the last financial crisis:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"I think the system is much safer and much sounder.
> We are doing a lot more to try to look for financial stability
> risks that may not be immediately apparent but to look in corners
> of the financial system that are not subject to regulation,
> outside those areas in order to try to detect threats to financial
> stability that may be emerging.
>
> After the financial crisis, those who see the damage in that type
> of thinking have played a major role in ensuring that we have a
> more appropriate system of supervision and regulation, hopefully
> for a good long time."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

This is such a bizarre, naïve statement, that it's hard to know what
to make of it. Yellen is expressing precisely the attitude that's
always been prevalent prior to every financial crisis in world
history. Politicians say "This time it's different," and "We've
learned our lessons," and "It can't happen this time." And it doesn't
happen this time, until it does.

Actually, the lessons from the last financial crisis haven't been
learned at all. The Fed and central banks around the world have been
"printing" hundreds of trillions of dollars, and governments around
the world have been borrowing that money and going into new debt at an
exponentially increasing rate. We've recently been reporting that
it's too late for Illinois and Puerto Rico,
which have gone into so much debt there's literally no hope
of every paying it off.

This is true all around the world. According to a new report by the
Institute of International Finance, global debt has reached $217
trillion in the first quarter of this year, and that's 327% of gross
domestic product for the whole world.

China in particular poses an enormous risk. China's total debt
surpassed 304% of GDP as of May 2017, according to the IIF.

Janet Yellen apparently believes that all this is no problem, that if
a problem does arise, then the Fed or some other central bank can just
print another trillion dollars in free money and use it to patch up
the problem. So we have nothing to worry about.

Reuters and CNBC and CNBC

Related Articles

• Financial crisis becomes critical in Illinois and Puerto Rico (23-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Brilliant Nobel Prize winners in Economics blame credit bubble on 'the news' (27-Apr-2008)
  

****
**** Examining the stock market bubble
****

I started paying attention to the Fed in 2002, after seeing a huge
graph of the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) from 1920 to the
present in the Boston Globe. I took one look at the graph and could
see that it was perfectly obvious that we were in a stock market
bubble. Later, of course, I did the calculations and verified it.

There are many reasons why I believe that mainstream economists are
airheads, and one of them is the belief that you can't detect a bubble
until after it occurs. In the case of the DJIA, it's rather simple.
If you analyze historical values of the DJIA, you find that in the 90-year period from 1904 to 1994 it grew
at an average of 4.5% per year, including inflation. So since the
DJIA started growing much more rapidly than 4.5% per year, starting in
1995, the you know that it's in a growing bubble. Today, the DJIA is
at 258% of its long-term trend value, as determined by the 4.5% growth
rate, so we can be sure that the DJIA is in an enormous bubble. In
fact, it was at 255% of the trend value when the crash began in 1929,
and fell to only 24% of the trend value by 1932, after several years
of crashing.

Another thing that mainstream economists are incapable of grasping is
the concept of "Reversion of the Mean." This means that the average
(or mean) of a value must be the same in the future as it was in the
past.

This is easiest to explain with the S&P 500 Price Earnings ratio (p/e
ratio). The historic average value of the p/e ratio is 14, but since
the 1990s, it's been well above the average, and today it's around 24.

Now, airhead economists use the erroneous phrase "Reversion TO the
Mean," and they say you should be prepared for the p/e ratio to revert
to its mean value of 14. This would be a significant stock market
correction, but it's only a small part of the story.

If the p/e ratio only reverts to 14, then that means for the last 20
years, the average (or mean) value was well above 14. That doesn't
satisfy the requirement that the average before 1995 was 14, and so
after 1995 it also has to be 14. That's why we say "Reversion OF the
Mean," which says that the average value must return to 14, which
means that the p/e ratio would have to fall to around 5 for 20 years,
just as it was well above 14 for the last 20 years. This portends
major stock market crash.

The members of the Federal Reserve are some of the major economists of
our time, each with huge staffs to do research. And yet, Janet Yellen
says that the Fed has everything under control, and there won't be a
financial crisis "in our lifetimes." It's just absolutely bizarre.

Related Articles

• System Dynamics and the Failure of Macroeconomics Theory (25-Oct-2006)
  
• Updating the 'real value' of the stock market (03-Aug-2010)
  

****
**** Remembering Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman
****

The bizarre statement by current Fed Chairman Janet Yellen is inciting
feelings of nostalgia in me to remember the days of her predecessors.
Since I started writing Generational Dynamics analyses in 2003, there
have been two prior Fed chairmen, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke.
Let's start with Greenspan.

Another reason why I consider mainstream economists, or at least
mainstream economics journalists and analysts, to be airheads is
because of how they covered the Alan Greenspan years at the Fed.
Throughout the early 2000s, they would make a "Greenspeak" or "Fed
speak" joke that when Greenspan gave a speech or statement he could
not be understood because he used convoluted language. So the
so-called economics experts would say that they simply couldn't
understand what Greenspan was saying. That whole excuse was totally
ridiculous. I didn't understand what he was saying all the time
either, but then I would go to the Federal Reserve web site and read
the transcript of his speech. After reading it three or four times,
even the convoluted language made sense. So I formed the opinion that
any economics journalist or economist who said that he couldn't
understand Greenspan because of convoluted language was an airhead --
and there were a lot of people like that.

So I was carefully following Greenspan during 2003, 2004, and 2005 to
see what he thought of the growing stock market and housing bubbles.
All my articles are on my web site, but to summarize: Early in 2004,
he said there were no bubbles. In August 2004, he said that there was
a housing bubble, but that it was a good thing, because homeowners
could mortgage their homes, borrowing money on their homes, and have
extra money to spend. In November 2004, he had a front-page interview
with the Wall Street Journal admitting that he had known since 1996
that there was a stock market bubble, but decided to ignore it, and
deal with it when it began to grow. Early in 2005, he completely
reversed himself, and repudiated his earlier reasoning, saying that
the bubble was growing. By the end of 2005, and his tenure as Fed
president, Greenspan was saying that high asset prices were becoming very dangerous, and that " history has not dealt kindly with the
aftermath of protracted periods of low risk premiums."

My web site was pretty much the only place in the world where you
could read this description of Greenspan's change of mind, as it was
going on. You'd think it would be big news when Greenspan repudiated
his own reasoning early in 2005, but there was not a word in the
mainstream media, apparently because the airheads at the Wall Street
Journal and CNBC were too dumb to understand his "convoluted
language."

The other amazing thing is that Greenspan himself is apparently too
embarrassed to admit that he predicted the housing bubble. He clearly
discussed it in his speeches in 2005-5, but never referred to those
speeches later. Apparently he was afraid that if he admitted that he
knew what was going on, then he'd be blamed for it.

To me, Greenspan's story is one of the most amazing of the 2000s
decade.

Related Articles

• Alan Greenspan gives harsh doom and gloom speech (04-Dec-2005)
  
  
• Alan Greenspan blames the housing bubble on the fall of the Berlin Wall (25-Oct-2006)
  
  
• Alan Greenspan calls this a "once in a century" liquidity crisis. (03-Aug-2008)
  

****
**** Remembering Ben Bernanke as Fed Chairman
****

Alan Greenspan was born in 1926, and lived through the Great
Depression, so when he became alarmed in 2005, it must have been
because he recognized all the signs of impending disaster from his
childhood.

Ben S. Bernanke was born in 1953 and grew up during the 1950s, when
America had already defeated the Great Depression and defeated the
Nazis, and no goal was out of reach. He was in college in the 1970s
when high inflation was the major problem, so naturally inflation was
his greatest concern as Fed Chairman.

As I described in my 2005 article, "Ben S. Bernanke: The man without agony", Bernanke was a
complete contrast to Greenspan. Bernanke didn't believe in bubbles.
He believed that the 1930s Great Depression was CAUSED by the Fed --
which could have poured some money into the economy and prevented the
Great Depression completely.

Ben Bernanke's story is not yet completely over. In 2008, during the
financial crisis, his policy was to "print" as much money as he
thought necessary, and pour it into the banking system. He did that,
and central banks around the world followed him and did the same.

That's why global debt has reached $217 trillion in the first quarter
of this year, and that's 327% of gross domestic product for the whole
world. The current Fed chairman Janet Yellen says that the Fed has
this all figured out. If some segment of the world economy starts
crashing, threatening a chain reaction that will cause a catastrophic
global financial crisis, Yellen and the other central bankers will
just print money and stop the chain reaction. So we have nothing to
worry about.

Related Articles

• Ben S. Bernanke: The man without agony (29-Oct-2005)
  
• Ben Bernanke's Great Historic Experiment (18-Aug-2007)
  
  
• WSJ's page one story on Bernanke's Princeton 'Bubble Laboratory' is almost incoherent (18-May-2008)
  
  
• Bernanke's Great Historic Experiment approaches judgment day (24-Jun-2011)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Federal Reserve, Janet Yellen,
Alan Greenspan, Ben S. Bernanke, Greenspeak, Great Depression,
Dow Jones Industrial Average, Reversion of the Mean,
Price/earnings ratio

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

*** 3-Jul-17 World View -- China builds illegal surface-to-air missile sites in South China Sea

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• China builds illegal surface-to-air missile sites in South China Sea
  
• Xi Jinping threatens Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters with 'Red Line'
  

****
**** China builds illegal surface-to-air missile sites in South China Sea
****


Fiery Cross Reef continues is the most advanced of China’s illegal bases, with new missile shelters, radar/communications facilities, and other infrastructure (AMTI)

New satellite images show that China has added reinforced launch sites
for illegal surface-to-air missiles on at least three of China's
illegal artificial islands in the Spratly Islands: Fiery Cross,
Mischief Reef and Subi Reef.

While unarmed launch sites are not, by themselves, a danger to anyone,
they are one step away from armed launch sites. In December, China
moved SA-21 anti-aircraft missile batteries with a 250-mile range to
the island province of Hainan for training. For the time being, they
remain inside China, but could be moved outside China to the illegal
military bases in the South China Sea, where they could be used to
target any aircraft, including American unarmed surveillance flights.

China has claimed the entire South China Sea as its sovereign
territory, and has built artificial islands and military bases.
However, these claims and activities were declared illegal in a ruling
by the United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the
Hague, in a case brought by the Philippines. So all of these
activities by the Chinese are in violation of international law,
although the Chinese don't care about international law except as it
applies to the West.

Furthermore, China promised in 2014 that the artificial islands would
not be used for military purposes. That was obviously a lie, and in
fact any promises that Chinese officials make can be assumed to be
lies, as has been shown this week by the situation in Hong Kong.

On Sunday, an American warship, the USS Stethem, sailed within
12 nautical miles of Triton Island, which is part of the Paracel
Islands in the South China Sea. Triton Island is clearly in
international waters, and the Stethem was performing a
"freedom of navigation operation" (FONOP). These operations have
been going on for years in order to defy China's illegal annexation
of the South China Sea, and to establish that the South China
Sea is international waters through which any ship may pass.

However, China launched a protest, claiming that the Stethem violated
its sovereignty.

According to a statement from China's foreign ministry:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Under the pretext of ‘freedom of navigation,’ the US
> side once again sent a military vessel into China’s territorial
> waters off the Xisha [Paracel] Islands without China’s approval.
>
> The Chinese side strongly urges the US side to immediately stop
> such kind of provocative operations that violate China’s
> sovereignty and threaten China’s security. The Chinese side will
> continue to take all necessary means to defend national
> sovereignty and security.
>
> China dispatched military vessels and fighter planes in response
> to warn off the US vessel. The Chinese side is dissatisfied with,
> and opposed to, the relevant behavior of the US
> side."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

China actually has no sovereignty to be "violated" in that region, as
the United Nations Hague Tribunal has ruled, but Chinese thugs do what
they want irrespective of international law.

As regular Generational Dynamics readers know, China has been
aggressively preparing for full-scale war with the United States for
years. They've developed one nuclear ballistic missile system after
another, and manufactured perhaps hundreds of those missiles, with no
other purpose than to destroy American cities, military bases and
aircraft carriers. In the South China Sea, China has been building
illegal artificial islands and illegal military bases, clearly in
preparation to declare war on its neighbors. Generational Dynamics
predicts that, at a time of its choosing, China will launch a
preemptive war against its neighbors and against the United States.
Fox News and Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative and News.com (Australia)

Related Articles

• China preparing to install long-range missiles in South China Sea (23-Feb-2017)
  
  
• US aircraft carrier renews challenge to China in the South China Sea (20-Feb-2017)
  
  
• China says its South China Sea military buildup is a boon to the world (09-Dec-2016)
  
  
• Philippines humiliates China in harsh Hague Tribunal ruling over South China Sea (13-Jul-2016)
  
  
• China's 'ironclad proof' of South China Sea claims revealed as hoax (22-Jun-2016)
  

****
**** Xi Jinping threatens Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters with 'Red Line'
****

During his speech on Saturday at the 20th anniversary of the handover
of Hong Kong from Britain to China, China's president Xi Jinping made
the claim that the "One Country, Two Systems" was still in effect,
meaning that Hong Kong residents still had freedom of speech free
elections, press freedom, and an independent judiciary.

The claim is laughable, as we reported two days ago.
In 2014, Beijing thugs triggered the
anti-Beijing "Umbrella Movement" by blocking any future free
elections. In 2015, Chinese thugs kidnapped five Hong Kong
booksellers who had published material critical of Beijing's
leadership. And just as Xi Jinping was making his laughable claim
that "One Country, Two Systems" is still in effect, the Beijing
foreign minister announced that it was repudiating the agreement with
Britain that had described the "One China, Two Systems" agreement.

Hong Kong police have been harassing and jailing pro-democracy
demonstrators all week, making sure that no freedom of speech will be
permitted.

At his speech on Saturday, Xi Jinping drew a "Red Line," warning
anyone that any attempts to undermine sovereignty or to challenge
Beijing's power would be severely punished:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Any attempt to endanger national sovereignty and
> security, challenge the power of the central government and the
> authority of the Basic Law of the HKSAR (Hong Kong Special
> Administrative Region) or use Hong Kong to carry out infiltration
> and sabotage activities against the mainland is an act that
> crosses the red line, and is absolutely
> impermissible."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

So Xi Jinping is just one more thug who threatens even peaceful
pro-democracy protesters with severe punishment. Xinhua and LA Times

Related Articles

• China repudiates its Hong Kong 'One Country, Two Systems' agreement with Britain (01-Jul-2017)
  
  
• China's 'thuggery' transforms Hong Kong's Umbrella Movement into independence movement (30-Aug-2016)
  
  
• China orders Hong Kong to disqualify anyone not taking 'sincere' loyalty oath to China (08-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Hong Kong protesters fear more violence by China's 'Triad' gangs (05-Oct-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, Xi Jinping,
South China Sea, Fiery Cross Reef, Mischief Reef, Subi Reef,
SA-21 anti-aircraft missiles,
United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration, PCA,
USS Stethem, Paracel Islands, Triton Island,
Hong Kong, Umbrella Movement

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(06-29-2017, 01:36 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]Today, 25 years later, few people care that Russia annexed
Crimea and China annexed the South China Sea.

Its obvious that even if Both Russia and China gave up their activities in the Ukraine and in the islands of the South China Sea you boomers would not be satisfied. Its obvious that boomers would only be satisfied when there is democratization in both Moscow and Beijing. Xers and Millies unlike boomers are capable of understanding that they must respect other countries systems of government even they are in opposition to their preferences.

*** 4-Jul-17 World View -- Saudi Arabia threatens further sanctions against Qatar if demands are not met

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Saudi Arabia extends sanctions deadline for two days
  
• Saudi Arabia and UAE threaten Qatar with additional sanctions
  
• North Korea launches another ballistic missile
  

****
**** Saudi Arabia extends sanctions deadline for two days
****


Qatar's Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani (L) and Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sheikh Sabah Khaled Al Sabah walk together on an airport tarmac in Kuwait. (AP)

Sunday was the original deadline set by the four countries Saudi
Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain and Egypt for Qatar to
meet the 13 demands that these four countries say must be met in order
for the June 5 land, sea and air blockade of Qatar to be lifted. The
blockade has split the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), a group of Arab
nations (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United
Arab Emirates (UAE)) on the Arabian Gulf.

However, at the request of Kuwait's 88-year-old emir ruler, Sheikh
Sabah Al Sabah, the four countries have agreed to extend the deadline
for two days, until Tuesday. Sabah has been trying to mediate an end
to the crisis, as he did in another dispute in 2014 among the same
parties.

The demands listed by the Saudi-led four-nation bloc
include: sever most ties with Iran; sever all ties
to the Muslim Brotherhood; shut down al-Jazeera; terminate Turkey's
military presence in Qatar; pay reparations and compensation for loss
of life and other, financial losses caused by Qatar’s policies in
recent years.

Saudi Arabia has stated that the 13 demands are non-negotiable. Qatar
has said that the demands are so harsh that they "were meant to be
rejected." Some reports indicate that there's been a slight softening
of positions on both sides, thanks to Kuwait's mediation, but that the
two sides are still very far from agreement.

According to one analyst:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The thirteen demands ... are viewed [by Qatar] as
> crossing all sorts of lines and essentially would see the
> surrender of Qatari sovereignty.
>
> This is not something Qatar is going to adhere to, whether the
> deadline is today, in two days’ time or a week’s time. [The
> extended deadline is] a way in which Saudi Arabia and the United
> Arab Emirates can appear to be not as inflexible as their demands
> make out."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Qatar has particularly said that under no circumstances will
al-Jazeera be shut down. Turkey's deputy prime minister Numan
Kurtulmus ridiculed the list of demands, and said that Turkey has no
intention to shut down its military base in Qatar: "Turkey’s base in
Qatar is not just about Qatar’s security it is about the security of
the region."

However, Mark Wallace of the Washington-based Counter Extremism
Project says that Qatar harbors terrorists and is a funder of
extremist groups: "Qatar has a long history of providing support for
extremism and terrorism, including but not limited to vast financial
and material support to internationally designated terrorist groups
and willing accommodation of internationally designated or wanted
terrorist leaders and financiers." Radio France Internationale and Reuters and AP and Politico

****
**** Saudi Arabia and UAE threaten Qatar with additional sanctions
****

Qatar officials and supporters are claiming that Qatar is handling the
blockade and sanctions fairly effortlessly. Qatar's only land border
is with Saudi Arabia, and that has been closed by the blockade, but
Qatar's stores are well-stocked with food and other consumer items
that have been imported from Iran and Turkey, who have been supporting
Qatar.

Furthermore, Qatar is an extremely wealthy country, with a great deal
of foreign income coming from oil and gas industries. Qataris point
out that the hundreds of billions of dollars in its sovereign wealth
fund would cover more than a decade of imports from Iran, Turkey and
other countries, even though there have been significant prices
increases on groceries and other consumer items.

However, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain and Egypt are planning to meet on
Wednesday to discuss additional steps to take, including new
sanctions. Saudi-based economist Hussein Shobokshi says that the new
sanctions will be a "terrifying tsunami" for Qatar's economy. They
potentially include the following:

• Withdrawing the four countries' deposits from Qatari banks, in
  order to weaken the Qatari currency, the riyal. There has already
  been significant weakening of the riyal, although it's partially
  recovered since Qatar injected billions of dollars from its sovereign
  wealth fund.
  
  
• Revoking licenses of Qatari bank branches in these countries.
  
  
• Halting activities pertinent to retail, telecommunications, and
  real-estate investment.

According to Shobokshi, "Any Qatari funds, direct or indirect, public
or private, are not welcome in these countries."

If the GCC counties pull their deposits out of Qatar banks, it may
trigger a panic on Qatar's riyal currency. In fact, the first signs
of this have already appeared: Several British banks have stopped
dealing in riyal currency at all, for fear that a panic will cause the
riyal to go into free fall, leaving the banks with big losses on their
holdings of the currency. These banks include Barclays, Lloyds Bank,
Royal Bank of Scotland and Halifax Bank. The Peninsula (Qatar) and Asharq Al-Awsat (London) and The Peninsula (Qatar) and The National (UAE) and Reuters

Related Articles

• Al-Jazeera may be at the center of the Gulf crisis with Qatar (25-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Qatar-Arab crisis is unlikely to be resolved soon (13-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations cut ties with Qatar in new Mideast crisis (06-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Gulf Arab states have major split over Egypt and Iran (06-Mar-2014)
  
  
• Arab League holds annual meeting among bitter splits (26-Mar-2014)
  

****
**** North Korea launches another ballistic missile
****

On Tuesday morning local time, as this article is being posted, North
Korea launched what appeared to be a new ballistic missile test.

South Korea's new president Moon Jae-in had hoped to resolve the North
Korea nuclear missile crisis by means of peaceful negotiations, but
Moon's Pollyannaish hopes keep getting disappointed by North Korea's
actions, which make it clear that North Korea is not interested in any
negotiations. Many analysts believe that North Korea will be able to
deliver a nuclear weapon to American mainland soil within a year or
two. Yonhap (Seoul)

Related Articles

• North Korea launches another ballistic missile test, as talk of war increases (29-May-2017)
  
  
• North Korea test-fires another ballistic missile (22-May-2017)
  
  
• North Korea sends a message with a medium range ballistic missile test (15-May-2017)
  
  
• Ancient tensions flare between China and North Korea (08-May-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Saudi Arabia, Qatar,
Turkey, Numan Kurtulmus,
United Arab Emirates, UAE, Kuwait, Oman, Iran, Egypt,
Gulf Cooperation Council, GCC, Bahrain,
al-Jazeera, Israel, Muslim Brotherhood,
Mark Wallace, Counter Extremism Project,
Hussein Shobokshi, Barclays, Lloyds Bank,
Royal Bank of Scotland and Halifax Bank,
North Korea, South Korea, Moon Jae-in

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(07-03-2017, 12:43 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-03-2017, 11:39 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2017, 01:36 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]Today, 25 years later, few people care that Russia annexed
Crimea and China annexed the South China Sea.

Its obvious that even if Both Russia and China gave up their activities in the Ukraine and in the islands of the South China Sea you boomers would not be satisfied. Its obvious that boomers would only be satisfied when there is democratization in both Moscow and Beijing. Xers and Millies unlike boomers are capable of understanding that they must respect other countries systems of government even they are in opposition to their preferences.

So, instead of the Boomer / old school democratization approach, the Drumpf/Putin-loving Dugin symps want to give a rim job to the Kremlin and take it up the rear from the Forbidden City?

It has not been my experience that Gen-Xers are ever satisfied.

(07-03-2017, 12:37 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]While I liked many things Thatcher and Reagan did, the hand over agreement is a bad ugly scar on both of their legacies. Imagine how much easier it would have been to defeat Communist Red China back in the 80s? The arguments given in favor of the agreement went something like the following bullshit:
- If we don't sign the agreement the PRC will try to take HK by force, provoking Great War
- We are confident that over time, the integration of HK combined with Deng Xiao Ping's modernization and liberalization steps will bring Western values and freedom to the PRC.
So, war then vs war in the near future? I would have gladly taken war 30 years ago instead of now or the near future. As for "we will show them our love and gradually make them free".... BWAAAAAAHAAAAAA HAAAAA!!!!

This doesn't accurately represent the situation at the time.  The British lease on Hong Kong was in perpetuity, but the New Territories lease was expiring.  With the New Territories set to return to Chinese control, Hong Kong was no longer going to be a viable independent city, because they didn't have any water sources outside of the New Territories.  The alternative to returning Hong Kong was to evacuate it and keep it as a virtually uninhabited lump of rock.

China did adopt western liberal economic free market values.  I don't think we ever expected them to adopt liberal democracy.  Of the two, free market values are the more important form of freedom.

(07-03-2017, 11:39 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2017, 01:36 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]Today, 25 years later, few people care that Russia annexed
Crimea and China annexed the South China Sea.

Its obvious that even if Both Russia and China gave up their activities in the Ukraine and in the islands of the South China Sea you boomers would not be satisfied. Its obvious that boomers would only be satisfied when there is democratization in both Moscow and Beijing. Xers and Millies unlike boomers are capable of understanding that they must respect other countries systems of government even they are in opposition to their preferences.

I'm pretty sure some of us boomers, including people like Trump and Tillerson, would be more than satisfied.

I believe John has previously mentioned that he doesn't have a full prediction for Europe the way he predicts the result with respect to the other major powers.  I wonder how viewing the EU as a de facto German Empire would affect our views of how the crisis will unfold?

Quote:Thus, on closer scrutiny, there is a strong continuity between the foreign policy of Wilhelm II, Hitler, and Merkel. And this continuity can easily be explained by looking at Germany’s position within Europe. On the one hand, Germany is the strongest and largest country in Europe, but on the other hand it is not strong or large enough to dominate the rest of Europe automatically. In consequence, ever since German unification in 1870, the country has been presented with the choice either to subordinate its wishes to those of the rest of Europe -- which has always appeared rather humiliating -- or to attempt the conquest of Europe, in order to ensure that Germany’s wishes would always prevail. Unsurprisingly, the Germans have consistently chosen the second course, and both World Wars were attempts to permanently bring the rest of Europe under German control.

The most prominent foreign policy decisions of Merkel can also be interpreted as attempts to expand German dominance in Europe. For instance, during the refugee crisis Germany tried to force Eastern European countries to take in refugees, not only because Merkel wanted to ease the burden upon her own country, but also because it was an ideal way to find out to what extent Germany could impose its will upon the new and independent-minded Eastern European members of the EU. Another example of the new German attempt to dictate policies to the rest of Europe is the Greek banking crisis. Whatever the considerable economic blunders successive Greek governments have committed over the years, it is undeniable that the ultimate goal behind Germany’s harsh demands towards the Greeks was the extension of German economic influence over other EU members.

However, the most frightening thing is that the parallels between Merkel’s mentality and that of her authoritarian predecessors go deeper than mere geopolitics. Because the philosophical premises underlying modern German policies are also at least partly similar to those that motivated Germany in both World Wars.

First of all, Merkel’s ideas about both immigration and European integration have a decidedly utopian character, an echo of the old obsession with the construction of a New World Order, which motivated both Hitler and the German leaders in the First World War. Merkel dreams of a society where immigrants and natives will together build some kind of ideal new world, opposed to the selfishness and materialism that has characterized Western societies until now. Also, Merkel’s attitude has a strong emotionalist undertone, which has been a characteristic of German philosophy since Immanuel Kant. Germans often derided the cold rationalism of the French and the money-grubbing of the Americans and British, as opposed to their own emphasis on the inner workings of the soul, love of the fatherland, and so on. Now, the Germans are reprimanding the governments of other countries, especially America, because they do not seem to share the German optimism about mass immigration, and only seem to care about hard facts.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/..._west.html

(07-04-2017, 12:37 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-03-2017, 11:39 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2017, 01:36 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]Today, 25 years later, few people care that Russia annexed
Crimea and China annexed the South China Sea.

Its obvious that even if Both Russia and China gave up their activities in the Ukraine and in the islands of the South China Sea you boomers would not be satisfied. Its obvious that boomers would only be satisfied when there is democratization in both Moscow and Beijing. Xers and Millies unlike boomers are capable of understanding that they must respect other countries systems of government even they are in opposition to their preferences.

I'm pretty sure some of us boomers, including people like Trump and Tillerson, would be more than satisfied.

But not the boomer establishment which John X assumes would be guiding the country through the 4T. Establishment boomers would only be satisfied if the entire planet is democratized. Its ironic that establishment boomers claim to love democracy when they suppress the younger generations and claim that allowing Xers and Millies to rise through the ranks is somehow "against democracy" simply because the young would reject the boomer policies as contrary to our interests or even contrary to self-preservation and they block worldviews that contradict their dogma in the ballot box. The Boomer establishment has an extraordinary sense of entitlement and presumptuousness their attitude toward the american people (especially toward xers and millies) is essentially this: "YOU fight for MY values and MY preferences, you peons".

(07-04-2017, 12:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> China did adopt western liberal economic free market values. I
> don't think we ever expected them to adopt liberal democracy. Of
> the two, free market values are the more important form of freedom
>

There's no doubt in my mind that Xi Jinping and the other CCP thugs
would not hesitate to massacre thousands of Hong Kong residents, the
way that they massacred thousands of students in Tiananmen Square

The reason that they don't dare is because Hong Kong is the portal
through which Western investment money pours into Japan. If the
thugs bloodied Hong Kong, then they'd cut off all that money.

As an example, here's something that's happened in the last 24
hours. China has announced a $9 trillion "Bond Connect" program,
allowing Westerners to purchase bonds issued by Chinese
companies by going through Hong Kong banks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40477355

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongko...9O032?il=0

So the Chinese thugs have to "be nice" and only kidnap and torture
people in the dark of night, rather than shooting them dead in the
streets. Money is the only thing that will stop these criminals.

By the way, it will be much harder, or impossible, for Chinese
investors to purchase bonds issued by Western companies, since that
would allow the investors to leave China and take their money with
them, which is anathema to the CCP. Also, if you buy Chinese bonds,
don't assume that at any time in the future China will let you sell
them and get your money back. You may end up with worthless paper.

To thugs like Xi Jinping, "liberal democracy" or even just "democracy"
are filthy words.

(07-04-2017, 12:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> I believe John has previously mentioned that he doesn't have a
> full prediction for Europe the way he predicts the result with
> respect to the other major powers. I wonder how viewing the EU as
> a de facto German Empire would affect our views of how the crisis
> will unfold?

It's true that I've changed my mind several times about this
subject, but in recent months things have become clearer.

I've written a couple of articles about Macedonia:

** 7-May-17 World View -- European officials worry that Macedonia's chaos could destabilize the Balkans
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e170507

** 29-Apr-17 World View -- Protesters storm Macedonia's parliament fearing calls for 'Greater Albania'
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e170429


The comments on these articles on Breitbart are the most extreme and
vitriolic I've ever seen. These commenters were from Greece,
Macedonia (which the Greeks say shouldn't be allowed to exist),
Albania (which would like to swallow up Macedonia), and Bulgaria. If
these commenters were ever in the same room together, the floor would
be covered with blood.

So my view has become that the European scenario in WW III will start
in the Western Balkans (remembering that the Eastern Balkans already
had their crisis war in the 1990s).

So all we have to do is figure out which European countries will
side with which Western Balkan countries.


http://www.breitbart.com/national-securi...e-balkans/

http://www.breitbart.com/national-securi...r-albania/

(07-04-2017, 02:57 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2017, 12:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   China did adopt western liberal economic free market values.  I
>   don't think we ever expected them to adopt liberal democracy.  Of
>   the two, free market values are the more important form of freedom
>  

There's no doubt in my mind that Xi Jinping and the other CCP thugs
would not hesitate to massacre thousands of Hong Kong residents, the
way that they massacred thousands of students in Tiananmen Square

The reason that they don't dare is because Hong Kong is the portal
through which Western investment money pours into Japan.  If the
thugs bloodied Hong Kong, then they'd cut off all that money.

As an example, here's something that's happened in the last 24
hours.  China has announced a $9 trillion "Bond Connect" program,
allowing Westerners to purchase bonds issued by Chinese
companies by going through Hong Kong banks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40477355

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongko...9O032?il=0

So the Chinese thugs have to "be nice" and only kidnap and torture
people in the dark of night, rather than shooting them dead in the
streets.  Money is the only thing that will stop these criminals.

By the way, it will be much harder, or impossible, for Chinese
investors to purchase bonds issued by Western companies, since that
would allow the investors to leave China and take their money with
them, which is anathema to the CCP.  Also, if you buy Chinese bonds,
don't assume that at any time in the future China will let you sell
them and get your money back.  You may end up with worthless paper.

To thugs like Xi Jinping, "liberal democracy" or even just "democracy"
are filthy words.

Democracy as defined by western boomers has never been popular with chinese elites, But they have adopted a capitalist economy. Your state regarding democracy in china just illustrates my point made earlier: Boomers would never be happy with any Chinese government as long as there is CCP rule over there.

(07-04-2017, 02:59 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2017, 12:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I believe John has previously mentioned that he doesn't have a
>   full prediction for Europe the way he predicts the result with
>   respect to the other major powers.  I wonder how viewing the EU as
>   a de facto German Empire would affect our views of how the crisis
>   will unfold?

It's true that I've changed my mind several times about this
subject, but in recent months things have become clearer.

I've written a couple of articles about Macedonia:

** 7-May-17 World View -- European officials worry that Macedonia's chaos could destabilize the Balkans
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e170507

** 29-Apr-17 World View -- Protesters storm Macedonia's parliament fearing calls for 'Greater Albania'
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e170429


The comments on these articles on Breitbart are the most extreme and
vitriolic I've ever seen.  These commenters were from Greece,
Macedonia (which the Greeks say shouldn't be allowed to exist),
Albania (which would like to swallow up Macedonia), and Bulgaria.  If
these commenters were ever in the same room together, the floor would
be covered with blood.

So my view has become that the European scenario in WW III will start
in the Western Balkans (remembering that the Eastern Balkans already
had their crisis war in the 1990s).

So all we have to do is figure out which European countries will
side with which Western Balkan countries.


http://www.breitbart.com/national-securi...e-balkans/

http://www.breitbart.com/national-securi...r-albania/

John X is it obvious that you are biased in favor of the pro-EU europeans and have a negative opinion of anti-EU european forces and those europeans who emphasizes national identity as opposed to EU and EU values.

(07-04-2017, 03:09 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> Democracy as defined by western boomers has never been popular
> with chinese elites, But they have adopted a capitalist
> economy. Your state regarding democracy in china just illustrates
> my point made earlier: Boomers would never be happy with any
> Chinese government as long as there is CCP rule over there.
>

Yeah, and I assume that you're perfectly happy with places like North
Korea and Venezuela as well. We pathetic Boomers actually care about
millions of people being starved, tortured and killed, and want to see
a better world. That's why we're such an awful generation. Gen-Xers
care about no one but themselves. That's why you're such a wonderful
generation.

(07-04-2017, 03:21 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2017, 03:09 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   Democracy as defined by western boomers has never been popular
>   with chinese elites, But they have adopted a capitalist
>   economy. Your state regarding democracy in china just illustrates
>   my point made earlier: Boomers would never be happy with any
>   Chinese government as long as there is CCP rule over there.
>  

Yeah, and I assume that you're perfectly happy with places like North
Korea and Venezuela as well.  We pathetic Boomers actually care about
millions of people being starved, tortured and killed, and want to see
a better world.  That's why we're such an awful generation.  Gen-Xers
care about no one but themselves.  That's why you're such a wonderful
generation.

I'm not happy with those places, but neither do I think it's our job to fix them.  And of course, it's not Boomer lives that are sacrificed when the US does try to fix things like that.

Me, I'd like to hammer North Korea since they seem intent on having a nuclear weapon that can hit us, but if they gave that up, I'd leave them alone and let their people rebel if they wanted to.

(07-04-2017, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> I'm not happy with those places, but neither do I think it's our
> job to fix them. And of course, it's not Boomer lives that are
> sacrificed when the US does try to fix things like that.

> Me, I'd like to hammer North Korea since they seem intent on
> having a nuclear weapon that can hit us, but if they gave that up,
> I'd leave them alone and let their people rebel if they wanted to.
>

I don't know what you're talking about. What do you mean by "fix"?
We don't like it when millions of people are starved, tortured and
killed, but we don't try to "fix" it except when vital national
interests are at stake.

*** 5-Jul-17 World View -- In dramatic development, US warplanes smash fortified wall in Raqqa, Syria

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• In dramatic development, US warplanes smash fortified wall in Raqqa, Syria
  
• Turkey fears double-cross from US on arms for Syrian Kurds
  
• Concerns grow about Syrian conflict after defeat of ISIS
  

****
**** In dramatic development, US warplanes smash fortified wall in Raqqa, Syria
****


Undated photo showing the fortified wall surrounding Raqqa's Old City

In a dramatic development, US coalition warplanes used "precision air
strikes" to blow holes in two "small portions" of the heavily
fortified wall surrounding the Raqqa's Old City in Syria, to allow
Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) fighter to enter.

According to a US Central Command (Centcom) statement:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Overcoming heavy ISIS [Daesh] resistance, the Syrian
> Democratic Forces breached the Old City of Raqqa, July
> 3. Coalition forces supported the SDF advance into the most
> heavily fortified portion of Raqqah [Raqqa] by opening two small
> gaps in the Rafiqah Wall that surrounds the Old City. ...
>
> Conducting targeted strikes on two small portions of the wall
> allowed Coalition and partner forces to breach the Old City at a
> locations of their choosing, denied ISIS the ability to use
> pre-positioned mines, IED and VBIEDs, protected SDF and civilian
> lives, and preserved the integrity of the greatest portion of the
> wall. ...
>
> Unlike ISIS who deliberately destroyed the ruins of Palmyra and
> the Al-Nuri mosque and uses sites such as the Rafiqa Wall,
> hospitals, schools and mosques as weapons storage facilities and
> fighting positions, Coalition forces are making a great effort to
> protect civilians and preserve these sites for future
> generations,"<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Raqqa is the major stronghold in Syria of the so-called Islamic State
(IS or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh), and has been in the past named by ISIS
as the capital of its caliphate. The SDF have been preparing for
months for this final battle to recapture Raqqa from the 2,500 to
3,000 ISIS fighters that remain in the Old City.

The 2,500 meter wall that surrounds the Old City was constructed
between 771 and 775 AD. The breaching of the wall is being called the
most important development to date in the battle for Raqqa, since it
allowed SDF units to enter the Old City quickly and surprise ISIS
forces, without having to enter at existing cracks in the wall where
ISIS has planted mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

U.N. officials say 50,000 to 100,000 civilians remain in the city amid
"dire" conditions. Estimates of how long the battle of Raqqa will
take range from a few days to a few weeks. AP and Rudaw (Kurdistan) and Long War Journal

Related Articles

• Iran scores strategic victory in Syria with land route from Tehran to Mediterranean (20-Jun-2017)
  
  
• US shoots down Syrian warplane, as Iran launches missiles into Syria (19-Jun-2017)
  
  
• US and Iran headed for military confrontation in Deir az-Zour in eastern Syria (09-Jun-2017)
  
  
• US and Iran-backed troops head for confrontation at al-Tanf on Iraq-Syria border (05-Jun-2017)
  

****
**** Turkey fears double-cross from US on arms for Syrian Kurds
****

The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) leading the fighting in Raqqa are
led by Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG), with mostly Kurdish
fighters and some Arab fighters. The US considers the SDF the best
fighting force in the region to defeat ISIS.

Turkey has never hidden its opposition to using the YPG, which is
linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which is recognized as a
terrorist group by the US and European countries. The PKK have
conducted a 30-year separatist insurgency in Turkey, and in recent
years have conducted some horrific terrorist attacks in Turkish
cities. Turkey would have preferred to use Free Syrian Army (FSA)
forced backed by Turkey for the Raqqa operation, as well as the Mosul
operation in Iraq.

US forces have been supplying advanced weapons to YPG fighters for the
Raqqa battle. Turkey says that the US promised that the US would take
the arms back after the battle ended, so that the weapons could not be
used against Turkey.

Now Turkish officials are furious that the US is apparently reneging
on its promise to retrieve the advanced weapons. Even worse, from
Turkey's point of view, U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has left
open the possibility of the opposite occurring: That the US will
continue to supply the YPG with advanced weapons and equipment, even
after Raqqa has been recaptured from ISIS.

Mattis said that some weapons would be recovered, but when asked about
further arming of the YPG, he said, "Well, we’ll see. It depends what
the next mission is. I mean, it’s not like the fight’s over when
Raqqa’s over."

The criticism by Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been
extremely harsh, complaining that it's a violation of the Nato treaty:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We will be together in NATO, and you will act
> together with terrorist groups. What kind of business is this?
>
> In this case, the NATO treaty should be revised.
>
> Those who think that they can fool Turkey by saying that they will
> get those weapons back will eventually understand the vital
> mistake they made, but it will be too late. We will call to
> account the real owners of those weapons for every drop of blood
> they shed with those weapons."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Turkey points out that there have been a series of US provocations
against Turkey. They claim that US officials have repeatedly lied
about YPG and PKK support in Syria. The US promised to withdraw the
YPG/PKK from the Syrian city of Manbij after ISIS was defeated, but
the US handed control of the city over to them anyway. After that,
according to Turkish news reports, it became clear these promises were
mere diversions.

Turkey is becoming concerned that the YPG/PKK are controlling larger
and larger regions of northern Syria, along the border with Turkey.
Last year, Turkey launched Operation Euphrates Shield, a military
operation by the FSA backed by the Turkish military, to prevent the
Kurds from taking control of the entire northern border of Syria, and
declaring an independent Kurdish state of Rojava.

There have been reports that Turkey is planning further military
action against the Kurds in northern Syria. Reuters and Daily Sabah (Ankara) and Yeni Safak (Ankara)

Related Articles

• Turkey builds a northern Syria 'National Army' from Free Syrian Army militias (31-May-2017)
  
  
• US will 'quickly' arm Kurdish militias in Syria, despite Turkey's opposition (11-May-2017)
  
  
• US military moves to protect Syrian Kurds from Turkey's military (03-May-2017)
  
  
• Investigation reveals depraved new atrocities by Syria's Bashar al-Assad (08-Feb-2017)
  

****
**** Concerns grow about Syrian conflict after defeat of ISIS
****

It's expected that it will be only a matter of days or weeks before
ISIS will be defeated in both of its main strongholds, Raqqa in Syria
and Mosul in Iraq. What will that mean for the Syrian conflict?

It's well to remember how the Syrian war came about. The civil war in
Syria was caused by president Bashar al-Assad when he unleashed his
army and air force against peaceful protesters in 2011. Things really
turned around in August 2011, when al-Assad launched a massive
military assault on a large, peaceful Palestinian refugee camp in
Latakia, filled with tens of thousands of women and children
Palestinians. He dropped barrel bombs laden with metal, chlorine,
ammonia, phosphorous and chemical weapons onto innocent Sunni women
and children, he's targeted bombs on schools and hospitals, and he's
used Sarin gas to kill large groups of people. He considers all Sunni
Muslims to be cockroaches to be exterminated.

Thousands of young Sunni jihadists from 86 countries around the world
traveled to Syria to fight al-Assad, and they formed ISIS. At the
same time, local Syrian Sunni fighters opposed to al-Assad formed the
Free Syrian Army (FSA) and the al-Qaeda linked al-Nusra Front, while
Kurdish fighters joined Arabs and formed the Syrian Democratic Forces
(SDF). Al-Assad has driven millions of Syrians out of their homes,
into Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Europe. Other forces that have
entered the war include Americans, Turks, Russians, Iranians, and
Hezbollah.

All of these groups have very different objectives, but they were
unified by their opposition to ISIS. With the defeat of ISIS, they
have no one left to fight but each other. In particular, the
Syrian people against whom Bashar al-Assad has committed years
of torture and atrocities will never agree to return to the way
things were before 2011.

As regular readers know, Generational Dynamics predicts that the
Mideast is headed for a major regional war, pitting Sunnis versus
Shias, Jews versus Arabs, and various ethnic groups against each
other. Generational Dynamics predicts that in the approaching Clash
of Civilizations world war, the "axis" of China, Pakistan and the
Sunni Muslim countries will be pitted against the "allies," the US,
India, Russia and Iran.

The conflict in Syria is very far from ended. To paraphrase Winston
Churchill, the defeat of ISIS is not the beginning of the end, but it
may be the end of the beginning. Atlantic Council and Straits Times and Hurriyet (Ankara)

Related Articles

• US's Samantha Power makes excoriating attack on Syria's al-Assad, Russia, Iran (14-Dec-2016)
  
  
• US and Turkey headed for collision in Syria (23-Sep-2016)
  
  
• Turkey and Iraq in dispute over Turkish participation in Mosul operation (18-Oct-2016)
  
  
• Turkey's 'Operation Euphrates Shield' turns into full-scale invasion of Syria (26-Aug-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Raqqa, Old City,
Syrian Democratic Forces, SDF,
Kurdish People's Protection Units, YPG, Rojava,
Kurdistan Workers Party, PKK, Turkey, Free Syrian Army, FSA,
Jim Mattis, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Operation Euphrates Shield,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, Winston Churchill

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(07-04-2017, 05:49 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2017, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I'm not happy with those places, but neither do I think it's our
>   job to fix them.  And of course, it's not Boomer lives that are
>   sacrificed when the US does try to fix things like that.

>   Me, I'd like to hammer North Korea since they seem intent on
>   having a nuclear weapon that can hit us, but if they gave that up,
>   I'd leave them alone and let their people rebel if they wanted to.
>  

I don't know what you're talking about.  What do you mean by "fix"?
We don't like it when millions of people are starved, tortured and
killed, but we don't try to "fix" it except when vital national
interests are at stake.

Remind me, if you will, what vital national interests were at stake in Kosovo, over which we nearly went to war with Russia, or in Libya, where we set the precedent that dictator giving up a nuclear weapons program would result in his removal?