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

*** 23-Jul-17 World View -- Kuwait expels Iran's diplomats as Saudi Arabia softens Qatar demands

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Kuwait expels Iran's diplomats after 'Abdali terror cell' ruling
  
• Iran says that it's open to 'dialog' with Saudi Arabia over Qatar crisis
  
• Saudi-led coalition replaces its 13 demands with 6 principles
  

****
**** Kuwait expels Iran's diplomats after 'Abdali terror cell' ruling
****


Iran's president Hassan Rouhani and Kuwait’s Emir Shaikh Jaber Al Ahmad Al Sabah at a meeting in February of this year

Kuwait on Thursday expelled 15 Iranian diplomats and ordered the
closure of several Iranian embassy missions. It's unclear whether
Iran's ambassador, Alireza Enayati, was included in the expulsions.

The expulsions will further complicate the growing Arab crisis,
where Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain and
Egypt are enforcing a land, sea and air blockade of Qatar,
because of Qatar's alleged close relations with Iran. Kuwait
has been trying to mediate among the parties and resolve the
crisis, but that will presumably be more difficult now that Kuwait
has expelled Iran's diplomats.

The expulsion stems from the discovery in August, 2015, of a large
cache of weapons in a farm house in the village of al-Abdali, and the
arrest of the three owners of the house. The three men were accused
of being members Iran's puppet terror regime Hezbollah, and of being
part of what has been nicknamed the "Abdali terror cell."

The cache of weapons was quite large, and included a total of 19,000
kg of ammunition, 144 kg of explosives, 68 weapons, and 204 grenades.
The farm house is near the border with Iraq, and Kuwait said that
Hezbollah and Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) smuggled
the weapons across the border from Iraq to be used in terror attacks
against the Sunni Muslim government of Kuwait.

About 20 members of the Abdali terror cell were convicted on January
12, 2016, of working for Hezbollah and the IRGC, and of smuggling
explosives from Iran. However, the an appeals court reversed the
conviction later in the year.

Finally, last month, on June 18, Kuwait's supreme court, whose rulings
are final, reversed the appeals court decision. The cell mastermind
was sentenced to life in prison, while 20 other members of the cell,
all Shia Muslims, were sentenced to between 5 and 15 years in prison.

Kuwait's information minister said on Friday,

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Following the supreme court ruling on the case
> ... the government of Kuwait has decided to take measures, in
> accordance with diplomatic norms and the Vienna Convention,
> towards its relations with the Islamic Republic of
> Iran."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Iran's foreign ministry reacted angrily, saying that the accusations
that it was behind a terrorist cell were baseless, and threatened
revenge:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Iran’s strong objection has been communicated to
> Kuwait’s chargé d’affaires. It was reiterated that Iran reserves
> the right to a reciprocal measure. ...
>
> It is regrettable that the Kuwaiti officials, are acting based on
> provocations raised by adventurist regional sides and are leveling
> accusations against Iran in the current sensitive conditions,
> instead of doing their best to reduce tensions."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

However, not all of the convicts are in custody. A Kuwaiti newspaper
on Monday reported that in the hours just after the Kuwait's Supreme
Court handed down its decision, 14 of the convicts fled to Iran. They
used small speedboats to leave Qatar and reach international waters,
where an Iranian vessel was waiting to pick them up. Al Jazeera (14-Aug-2015) and AFP and Ahlul Bayt (Iran) and Gulf News

Related Articles

• Iran says Tehran terror attack was by Iranian nationals in ISIS (08-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Saudi Arabia makes a dangerous accusation - that Iranians are 'not Muslims' (09-Sep-2016)
  
  
• Pakistan tries to mediate between Saudi Arabia and Iran (18-Jan-2016)
  
  
• Increasingly hostile Iran-Saudi relations affect this year's Hajj (27-May-2016)
  

****
**** Iran says that it's open to 'dialog' with Saudi Arabia over Qatar crisis
****

Kamal Kharrazi, the head of Iran's Strategic Council on Foreign
Relations said on Friday that Iran was open to “dialogue” with Saudi
Arabia despite escalating tensions. Kharrazi said:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We know they (the Saudis) have made many mistakes in
> Yemen, Bahrain, Iraq and Syria, but we are still for
> dialogue."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

A laughable statement like that shows why a resolution to
the Qatar blockade crisis is still very far away.

On June 5, four Arab countries -- Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates
(UAE), Bahrain and Egypt -- imposed a land, sea and air blockade on
Qatar. The reasons given were Qatar's support for Iran, Qatar's
support for the Muslim Brotherhood, which the four countries consider
to be a terrorist group, and Qatar's aggressive use of al-Jazeera to
broadcast incitement to overthrow their governments.

The four countries listed 13 specific demands
that would be necessary to resolve the crisis. The demands
included: 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. France 24

****
**** Saudi-led coalition replaces its 13 demands with 6 principles
****

In a televised address on Friday, Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad
Al Thani referred the four Arab countries enforcing the blockade as
"perpetrators":

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The perpetrators have undermined our sovereignty and
> independence by fabricating false statements to mislead
> international public opinion. ...
>
> We are open to dialogue to resolve the outstanding problems [so
> long as Qatar's] sovereignty is respected."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Saudi Arabia has always said that its 13 demands were non-negotiable,
but last week the Saudi-led coalition did appear to be softening its
demands for resolving the crisis, when it announced that it was
replacing the 13 specific demands with six broad principles.
According to a Saudi analyst, "I don't see this as a softening of the
quartet's position on Qatar per se, as much as a measure taken to
restart the negotiation process. ... These six principles are best
viewed as an effort to set the foundation for meaningful negotiation
process."

The six principles are:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"1. Commitment to combat extremism and terrorism in
> all its forms and to prevent their financing or the provision of
> safe havens.
>
> 2. Prohibiting all acts of incitement and all forms of expression
> which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred and violence.
>
> 3. Full commitment to Riyadh Agreement 2013 and the supplementary
> agreement and its executive mechanism for 2014 within the
> framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) for Arab States.
>
> 4. Commitment to all the outcomes of the Arab-Islamic-US Summit
> held in Riyadh in May 2017.
>
> 5. To refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of States
> and from supporting illegal entities.
>
> 6. The responsibility of all States of international community to
> confront all forms of extremism and terrorism as a threat to
> international peace and security."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

These extremely vague do provide a possible basis for compromise, but
it's hard to see how anything will change in the long run. Qatar is
going to continue to broadcast al-Jazeera, which is going to continue
to air speakers from the Muslim Brotherhood, which Qatar supports, but
which the four boycotting nations consider to be terrorists --
terrorists who are on al-Jazeera advocating the overthrow of their
governments. This is a core difference between Qatar and the four
nations, and it won't be resolved. And if it's papered over, it will
become an issue again soon. Al Jazeera (Qatar) and The National (UAE) and BBC

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)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Kuwait, Iran, Qatar, Muslim Brotherhood,
Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, UAE, Bahrain, Egypt,
Iraq, al-Abdali, Abdali terror cell, Alireza Enayati,
Lebanon, Hezbollah, Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, IRGC,
Kamal Kharrazi, Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani

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

*** 24-Jul-17 World View -- DR Congo's Joseph Kabila brings the art of power and corruption to new heights

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• DR Congo's Joseph Kabila brings the art of power and corruption to new heights
  
• Global Witness report finds most DRC mining revenue is wasted in corruption
  

****
**** DR Congo's Joseph Kabila brings the art of power and corruption to new heights
****


Joseph Kabila, billionaire president of Democratic Republic of Congo

The norm in country after country in Africa is that country leaders
refuse to step down when their mandates end. They demand money from
Western nations for to end poverty or help with climate change or
whatever, and then they put the money they receive into their own
foreign bank accounts, or they use it to build mansions for
themselves, or they use it buy weapons to kill their opposition.
That's why, in 30-40 years of massive aid payments to African
countries, most people are no better off than they were decades ago.

Joseph Kabila, the president of the Democratic Republic of Congo
(DRC), appears to have brought this combination of raw exercise of
power and raw corruption to new heights. A new analysis by the Congo
Research Group at New York University and the Pulitzer Center shows
that by channeling public money to himself and his family, he's made
the Kabila family into billionaires

Joseph Kabila, the president of the Democratic Republic of the Congo,
and his family own, either partially or wholly, more than 80 companies
and businesses in the country and abroad. He and his children own
more than 71,000 hectares (175,444) of farmland. His family owns
diamond mines, a part of the country's largest mobile phone network,
companies that mine mineral deposits, gold and limestone, a luxury
hotel, stakes in an airline, a share of the country's banks, and a
fast-food franchise.

With tentacles reaching into so many businesses, it's not surprising
that Kabila is willing to use any method -- massacres, atrocities,
jailings, torture -- to stay in power. His mandate ran out on
December 19 of last year, at which time he was supposed to step down.
Instead, he pulled a breathtaking stunt late last year by doing
everything possible to prevent new elections from taking place, and
then claimed that he couldn't step down because there hadn't been any
elections to select a president to replace him.

In December there was a threat of civil war in DRC, but the Catholic
Church intervened and brokered an agreement: Elections would be held
in December of 2017 to choose Kabila's successor, and this time Kabila
would really step down. However, the agreement was a farce: It was
signed by members of Kabila's government, but it wasn't even signed by
Kabila himself. Since then, it's been pretty clear that Kabila has no
intention of stepping down.

Poverty and Kabila's massive corruption are being blamed for the
increase in violence in DRC, especially in the central province of
Kasai, where than 3,000 people have been killed and 1.4 million
displaced in escalating violence blamed on a government-sponsored
militia. The UN has identified more than 80 mass graves and said it
had found toddlers with limbs chopped off and pregnant women with
their bellies sliced open, their unborn babies mutilated.

Unfortunately, this is the norm in many countries in Africa, and the
reason why many international agencies and businesses are no longer
willing to invest in Africa, as the money just goes to waste.
Furthermore, many people are concerned that Kabila's refusal to step
down is resulting in violence that is destabilizing the whole region.
NY University and Guardian (London) and Bloomberg

****
**** Global Witness report finds most DRC mining revenue is wasted in corruption
****


Mining operation in DRC

A different report, this time by Global Witness, has found that more
than $750 million in mining revenue that was supposed to go into DRC's
national treasury has instead gone into the pockets of corrupt
government officials. Canadian mining companies, such as
Vancouver-based Ivanhoe Mines Ltd. and Toronto-based Banro Corp., have
been some of the biggest foreign investors in DRC mines, and have
given millions of dollars in payments to official agencies and state
enterprises in the country. They are now learning that the money was
siphoned off by politically connected insiders, with some of the funds
distributed among corrupt networks linked to President Joseph Kabila’s
regime.

The Democratic Republic of Congo is Africa's biggest producer of
copper and the world's largest supplier of cobalt used in batteries
for electric cars. It is also rich in gold, diamonds and coltan, used
in mobile phones, but its people remain among the poorest in the
world.

A key culprit in this diversion of funds is the main state-owned
mining company, Gécamines, a close ally of President Joseph Kabila. It
receives more than a hundred million dollars annually from private
companies in Congo’s mining sector, but appears to pass on just a tiny
percentage of that to the state coffers. Gécamines’ most important and
lucrative business relationships are with major international mining
companies, which often have Western investors and pensions tied up in
their profits and risks.

The Global Witness report, "The Regime Cash Machine," blames a toxic
combination of corruption and mismanagement in DRC's revenues agencies
and state mining companies. Instead of going to the regime, the money
should have gone to basic services such as schools, hospitals and
roads. Global Witness and Globe and Mail (Canada) and Bloomberg

Related Articles

• Massive government atrocities in DR Congo's Kasai threaten regional stability (21-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Congo's president Joseph Kabila refuses to step down after losing election (07-Jan-2017)
  
  
• United Nations celebrates M23 rebel militia defeat in Congo (01-Nov-2013)
  
  
• African nations furious over possible collapse of climate change agreement (17-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Copper's crashing prices cause devastating economic ripples around the world (30-Sep-2015)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Democratic Republic of Congo, DRC,
Joseph Kabila, Kasai, Global Witness,
Ivanhoe Mines Ltd., Banro Corp., Gécamines

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

*** 25-Jul-17 World View -- Massive Kabul bombing on Monday leaves US Afghan policy in tatters

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Massive car bombing in Kabul, Afghanistan, targets Hazaras, kills 36
  
• Brief recent generational history of Afghanistan
  
• Kabul bombing puts America's Afghanistan policy into further confusion
  

****
**** Massive car bombing in Kabul, Afghanistan, targets Hazaras, kills 36
****


Men look at the remains of their properties at the site of the car bombing Monday in Kabul (AP)

A massive early morning car bombing in Kabul, the capital city of
Afghanistan, killed at least 36, wounded dozens more, and damaged 15
shops.

The blast occurred in a part of the city where the ethnic Hazara
community live, near the house of the deputy government Chief
Executive Mohammad Mohaqiq, also a Hazara. The Hazaras are Shia
Muslims, and have often been targeted by Taliban groups in both
Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The same area has been the scene of several attacks, including the
suicide attack that killed prominent Shia Muslim cleric Ramazan
Hussainzada on June 15. Hussainzada was also a senior leader of
Afghanistan’s Hazara community.

Monday's massive attack occurred exactly one year after another massive Taliban attack on Hazaras in Kabul.
At least 80 people were killed in what was considered the
worst terror attack in Kabul since 2001.

The attack on Hazaras last year on July 24 energized the "Hazara
Enlightenment Movement," an activist movement demanding an end to
discrimination against Hazaras by the Pashtun government. There was a
big march planned for Monday to commemorate last year's attack, but
Afghan president Ashraf Ghani convinced the movement leaders to cancel
the march, for reasons related to security. The march was cancelled,
and then several hours later Monday's massive car explosion took
place.

In the future, we can expect to hear more from the Hazara
Enlightenment Movement. Tolo News (Kabul) and Reuters and Khaama Press (Kabul)

Related Articles

• ISIS claims responsibility for attack on Shia Hazaras in Kabul Afghanistan (24-Jul-2016)
  
  
• Crisis in Afghanistan grows with three new suicide bombers in Kabul (04-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Massive terror explosion in Kabul, Afghanistan, as US considers sending more troops (01-Jun-2017)
  

****
**** Brief recent generational history of Afghanistan
****

There is a fantasy at large among politicians, generals, journalists
and analysts in various nations around the world that the Taliban in
Afghanistan can be convinced to enter peace negotiations, or that they
can be defeated on the battlefield, or that they'll get tired of
fighting. This is the sort of fatuous nonsense that politicians and
generals tend to claim, when they're fighting the last war.

Afghanistan's last generational crisis war was the extremely bloody
civil war fought between 1991 and 1996, filled with enormous
atrocities, massacres, rapes, torture, and so forth. The war was
fought mainly between the Pashtuns in southern Afghanistan versus the
Northern Alliance of Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks in northern
Afghanistan.

The Pashtuns won that war. Radicalized Pashtuns called themselves the
Taliban, and ruled Afghanistan brutally and viciously after the war.
They also permitted their good pal Osama bin Laden to use Afghanistan
as a home base from which to launch international terror attacks.
After 9/11/2001, the US-based coalition invaded Afghanistan and backed
the Northern Alliance in quickly defeating the Taliban. Thus, the
Pashtun victory in the civil war was snatched away and turned into
defeat for the Pashtuns and victory for the Northern Alliance.

The reason that the Taliban lost the 2001 war so quickly was that
everyone was traumatized and war-weary from the civil war in the
previous decade, and had little will to fight another war. That's
what always happens to the generations that survive a generational
crisis war. They're traumatized by the atrocities the other side
committed, but they're even more traumatized by the atrocities that
they and others on their own side committed.

Today, 16 years later, a new, younger generation is coming of age,
with no personal memory of the 1990s civil war. These young Pashtuns
have not been told of the atrocities that their parents committed.
They've only been told of the atrocities that the other side committed
-- the Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks in the Northern Alliance. They want
revenge for those atrocities, so they do things like set off car bombs
in crowds of Hazaras in Kabul.

So those who are looking for a way to bring peace to Afghanistan are
dreaming. There is no solution to this problem. And when I say "no
solution," I don't mean that the politicians and generals simply
haven't been clever enough to figure out the solution. What I mean is
that no solution exists. Taliban is strongest today as it has been
since 2001, and will continue to get stronger, as young post-war
generations continue to grow and come of age.

Related Articles

• Kabul bombing brings back memories of bloody 1990s Afghan civil war (03-Jun-2017)
  

****
**** Kabul bombing puts America's Afghanistan policy into further confusion
****

Monday's bombing makes clear that America, the World's Policeman, has
a stark choice in Afghanistan: walk away and let the Taliban take over
completely, or try a military solution with more American troops.

President Barack Obama, who never had a clue what was going on in the
world, decided to go for a 30,000 troop surge. In December 2009,
Obama gave a West Point speech where he announced the surge:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"As cadets, you volunteered for service during this
> time of danger. Some of you fought in Afghanistan. Some of you
> will deploy there. As your Commander-in-Chief, I owe you a
> mission that is clearly defined, and worthy of your service. And
> that's why, after the Afghan voting was completed, I insisted on a
> thorough review of our strategy. Now, let me be clear: There has
> never been an option before me that called for troop deployments
> before 2010, so there has been no delay or denial of resources
> necessary for the conduct of the war during this review period.
> Instead, the review has allowed me to ask the hard questions, and
> to explore all the different options, along with my national
> security team, our military and civilian leadership in
> Afghanistan, and our key partners. And given the stakes involved,
> I owed the American people -- and our troops -- no less.
>
> This review is now complete. And as Commander-in-Chief, I have
> determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an
> additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months,
> our troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that
> we need to seize the initiative, while building the Afghan
> capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces
> out of Afghanistan."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Obama was heavily criticized for announcing an 18-month end date,
which he had to extend several times. Obama announced the Afghan
troop surge in the hope of duplicating the success of President Bush's
troop surge in Iraq in 2007. I wrote a detailed comparison of the
Afghanistan versus Iraq wars in mid-2009 in "American army general warns of imminent defeat in Afghanistan war,"
, showing that the Iraq "surge" strategy
could not work in Afghanistan. This comparison was based on a
Generational Dynamics analysis, and it turned out to be completely
correct. In the end, the troop surge accomplished nothing. In
interviews last year, all three of Obama's former secretaries of
defense confirmed that the Obama administration ignored military
advice, and made military decisions based on inexperience and
ideology.

Now President Donald Trump is faced with the same decision. One
difference is that his close adviser, Steve Bannon, knows very well
what is going on in the world. As I've described in the past,
I've worked with Steve Bannon off and
on for several years in the past, both on his movie "Generation Zero"
and when I was cross-posting articles on the Breitbart National
Security site. So I know that Steve Bannon is an expert on military
history and world history, and he's also has an expert understanding
of Generational Dynamics and generational theory.

So Steve Bannon understands very well the generational analysis that
concludes that there is no solution to the problem in Afghanistan, and
has undoubtedly conveyed this conclusion to Trump. And this has
thrown the administration's Afghan policy into confusion, with policy
differences between those who are still fighting the last war and
those who don't want to repeat Obama's mistakes.

What should a politician do when you have to solve a problem for which
there's no solution in existence?

One interesting example to look at is Greece's financial crisis, when
it became clear in 2009 that Greece had lied about its financials for
years and was overwhelmingly and unsustainably in debt.
The Greek crisis lurched from one
last-minute fix to the next, with some sort of compromise often
reached on Sunday night, before the Asian markets opened.

As I wrote many times, the Greek financial crisis had no solution. By
that, I didn't mean the EU politicians and economists haven't been
clever enough to figure out the solution. I meant there was no
solution in existence. Indeed today, Greece is still overwhelmingly
and unsustainably in debt.

So what happened? The EU politicians "kicked the can down the road."
The European Commission, the European Central Bank and the
International Monetary Fund loaned enough money to Greece to make all
their bond payments for a few months, and then the crisis would rise
again. These compromises did nothing to resolve the problem -- in
fact, they usually made the problem worse by increasing Greece's debt.
But "kicking the can down the road" allowed them to ignore the problem
for a few months. Interestingly enough, they're still kicking the can
down the road, but they've done it so often that it doesn't make news
any more.

So presumably what the Trump administration needs to do in Afghanistan
is to find a way to "kick the can down the road." In fact, there are
reports that the Trump administration is considering send 20,000 more
troops to Afghanistan. Those troops would be no more effective than
the 30,000 troops that the Obama administration sent, but they would
"kick the can down the road" for possibly as much as a year or two, or
at least until some military disaster occurs in Afghanistan. Daily Caller and Washington Post and Politico

Related Articles

• Taliban victories in Helmand put Obama's Afghan withdrawal policy in doubt (21-Dec-2015)
  
  
• Donald Trump's speech in Warsaw Poland evokes the Clash of Civilizations (07-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Trump considers new troop surge and strategy change in Afghanistan war (10-May-2017)
  
  
• Obama's Nobel Prize speech defends a 'just war' in Afghanistan (12-Dec-2009)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Kabul, Afghanistan,
Ashraf Ghani, Taliban, Pashtuns, Osama bin Laden,
Northern Alliance, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, Hazara Enlightenment Movement,
Mohammad Mohaqiq, Ramazan Hussainzada

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

Yeah, Cut and run. Betray the thousands of american troops who gave their lives in the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Globalists hate prosecuting the war on terror because it symbolizes direct american national interests because it became an american interest on 9/11/2001. The Ukraine and South China Sea represent globalist boomer interests and their selfish desires to impose world government. Globalists don't care about the troops; in the globalists eyes, the troops are little more than tools to be discarded when they are no longer useful. The Globalist establishment doesn't really care about America and the American people or their values and traditions; to globalists America is nothing more than a vehicle to use to establish their disgusting world government and a vehicle that can be discarded later on with the world government being achieved.

*** 26-Jul-17 World View -- China escalates its military threats over its border dispute with India at Doklam Plateau

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• China escalates its military threats over its border dispute with India at Doklam Plateau
  
• India says that it will remain 'firm and resolute' but 'reasonable'
  

****
**** China escalates its military threats over its border dispute with India at Doklam Plateau
****


A military post on China - India border (India Today)

The border dispute involving China, India and Bhutan over the Doklam
Plateau is becoming increasingly dangerous. China is saying that it's
running out of patience, and China's state-run media is escalating the
military threats to India over the Doklam issue, to the point of
threatening war.

We've been reporting
a standoff
between India's army and China's army on Doklam plateau in the tiny
country of Bhutan. China is attempting to annex the region, and on
June 16 sent Chinese troops and construction workers to begin road
construction. Bhutan troops tried to prevent the Chinese troop
incursion, but they were overrun. India sent in its own troops,
saying that it did so when Bhutan invoked a treaty with India and
asked for help. The result is a standoff, though no bullets have been
fired yet.

An editorial in China's state-run Global Times began:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The public's patience is running short with India's
> Doklam transgression. Nothing can stand in the way of China's and
> Chinese people's dignity. No government in the world can stand
> still doing nothing while its borders are being
> violated."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Right away we run into a problem, because China is violating borders
and international law in the South China Sea, creating illegal
artificial islands and turning them into huge military bases, and
constantly lying about what they're doing. China was proven to be an
international criminal by the 2016 ruling of the United Nations
Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague. That ruling
completely eviscerated China's so-called 'Nine-Dash Line' claims to
the South China Sea.

Because China has repeatedly lied about the South China Sea, it's
impossible to believe anything they say about anything else.
("Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus.")

Still, the above statement is extremely dangerous because it refers to
"the public's patience," invoking nationalism and xenophobia by the
Chinese people, and seeking to incite it. The editorial
continues:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"As India continues down this intransigent path,
> perhaps it is time that it be taught a second lesson. Their troops
> in Doklam could either withdraw voluntarily, be captured or may be
> killed when border disputes escalate, [according to] Liu Youfa,
> China's former consul general in Mumbai."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

This is pretty much a direct threat of war.

The phrase "second lesson" alludes to the 1962 Sino-Indian war, a
brief but bloody war between the two countries over the Indian state
of Arunachal Pradesh in the eastern Himalayas. China is viewed as
having won that war.

India's defense minister Arun Jaitley was recently asked about the
1962 war, and he responded: "If they are trying to remind us, the
situation in 1962 was different and India of 2017 is different."

The editorial also threatens a Chinese invasion of India-controlled
Kashmir:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"No matter what vassalage relationship India maintains
> with Bhutan, it baffles this author that India has the courage to
> transgress another country on its behalf. And in this case, Indian
> troops even entered into Doklam from the China-Sikkim
> border. Well, if this kind of logic holds, a third country can
> certainly enter into Kashmir, including India-controlled Kashmir,
> upon Pakistan's invitation. (This is not a far-fetched
> idea.)"<END QUOTE>[/indent]

On Tuesday, China's Foreign Ministry issued a statement:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"On July 24, 2017 local time, when giving an interview
> to the press in Bangkok on China-India standoff incident, Foreign
> Minister Wang Yi noted that it is very clear who is right and who
> is wrong regarding this issue, and that even Indian senior
> officials have publicly said that Chinese troops have not intruded
> into Indian territory, which means that India admitted that it has
> entered into Chinese territory. The solution to this issue is
> simple, which is that the Indian troops back out
> honestly."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

This statement is weasel-worded, in that Doklam Plateau is Bhutan's
territory, not India's territory. If China is so sure of its claim,
perhaps it should ask the United Nations Permanent Court of
Arbitration (PCA) to decide the matter.

So China is demanding that India withdraw its troops, and permit the
Chinese army to annex Bhutan's Doklam Plateau unopposed. China says
that it is running out of patience, and threatens to invade before
long. Global Times (Beijing) and China's Foreign Ministry

****
**** India says that it will remain 'firm and resolute' but 'reasonable'
****

India is responding to China's threats by saying that it will remain
"firm and resolute" militarily, according to Indian media, and will
thwart any attempt by China to “bully” Bhutan, while being
“reasonable” at the politico-diplomatic level to resolve the ongoing
troop stand-off with the People’s Liberation Army in the Doklam area
in Bhutanese territory.

According to India's Army vice-chief Lt-General Sarath Chand on
Tuesday"

> [indent]<QUOTE>"On the North, we have China which has a large
> landmass, huge resources and a large standing Army ... Despite
> having the Himalayas between us, China is bound to be a threat for
> us in years ahead."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Indian media says that it is reinforcing its military in the region:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Much like the Line of Control with Pakistan, Indian
> soldiers are prepared for the long haul near the tri-junction with
> China as well. Apart from the already present 63 and 112 Brigades
> (over 3,000 troops each) in east and north-east Sikkim, the Army
> has moved up another 2,500 soldiers from the 164 Brigade to Zuluk
> and Nathang Valley in the state to further reinforce its military
> stance, as was first reported by TOIon July 11."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Both China and India are hardening their positions, both with words
and with military reinforcements. The Chinese media are making it
clear that if India does not withdraw soon, then China will invade.
China believes that it will easily win, and India believes that "this
time it's different." The situation is extremely dangerous, and could
lead to war very quickly, either intentionally or through
miscalculation. Times of India

Related Articles

• China threatens military intervention in Kashmir on the side of Pakistan (12-Jul-2017)
  
  
• China and India have military confrontation over Bhutan's Doklam plateau (08-Jul-2017)
  
  
• As Narendra Modi visits Washington, China threatens India after border clash (28-Jun-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, India, Bhutan, Doklam Plateau,
Arun Jaitley, 1962 Sino-Indian war, Lia Youfa,
United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration, PCA,
Nine-dash line

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

*** 27-Jul-17 World View -- Israel braces for new 'day of rage' at al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on Friday

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Israel braces for new 'day of rage' at al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on Friday
  
• Palestinian leaders incite protests and violence in Jerusalem and West Bank
  

****
**** Israel braces for new 'day of rage' at al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on Friday
****


Muslim worshippers chant slogans outside the al-Aqsa mosque (Times of Israel)

What's becoming increasingly clear is that the large Palestinian
protests at the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem have gone way beyond the
issues that initially provoked the protests.

On Tuesday, Israel's security forces met the demands of the
Palestinian protesters at the al-Aqsa Mosque / Temple Mount in
Jerusalem by removing the metal detectors and cameras that had been
installed following the deadly gun attack by three gunmen in the
mosque on Friday morning, July 14, that resulted in the deaths of two
Druze policemen.

Removing the metal detectors and cameras was supposed to solve the
problem, returning everything to the status quo ante. Instead,
the removal seems to have energized the young protesters, declaring a
major victory against "occupiers," and vowing to continue the
protests.

One Palestinian is quoted as saying:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Today is a joyful day, full of celebration and sorrow
> at the same time - sorrow for the people who lost their lives and
> were injured.
>
> We are under occupation and the al-Aqsa Mosque is a red-line to
> everyone in Jerusalem - actually, to everyone in Palestine, and
> all over the Muslim world - but much more for the people of
> [Jerusalem]. It's dearer than their own lives."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

To a large extent, the Palestinian leadership is increasingly seen as
irrelevant to the "Oslo generation" that grew up after the 1993 Oslo
accords that were supposed to bring peace to the Mideast. Instead,
the Oslo accords are perceived as having accomplished nothing, and
that perception is completely correct. The Oslo generation see the
so-called "Mideast peace process" as nothing more than a failed series
of humiliations for Palestinians, and proof that Hamas leaders and
Palestinian Authority leaders are worthless.

The desire for revenge against Palestinian leaders and Israelis is
palpable, and is now being expressed by means of protests at the
al-Aqsa mosque / Temple Mount. The National (UAE) and Al Jazeera (Qatar) and Times of Israel

Related Articles

• Mahmoud Abbas, 81, reelected leader of Fatah/Palestinian Authority (30-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Palestinian 'Oslo Generation' relationship with Israel extremely toxic and explosive (18-Oct-2015)
  
  
• Palestinians accuse Israel of 'declaration of war' as tensions mount in Jerusalem (31-Oct-2014)
  

****
**** Palestinian leaders incite protests and violence in Jerusalem and West Bank
****

The al-Aqsa Palestinian protests are "organic," in the sense that
they're coming from the people, mainly from the Oslo generation, and
not because they're being directed by Palestinian leaders.
Palestinian leaders are encouraging them, but it's increasingly clear
that the leaders are following the people, rather than vice-versa, in
the sense that this encouragement is for something that is going to
happen anyway.

The Palestinian leaders can "see the way the wind is blowing," and are
hoping to increase their own credibility and popularity by encouraging
the protests and inciting violence.

Palestinian activist Mustafa Barghouti said:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We are on the threshold of a big shift. What is going
> on today is not random or transient. It could be the beginning of
> a third intifada that is different from the others. What is unique
> about this is that it’s not individual actions, but a popular
> movement capable of attracting huge numbers of people. This
> popular momentum could recharge the Palestinian people. It may
> take time but we are on the way. It will override the PA. They
> don't even know it exists. This will bring about a change in
> leadership."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Some 2,000 members of Hamas marched in the Gaza strip on Wednesday,
declaring "victory" and calling for a new "day of rage" on Friday, not
only in Jerusalem but throughout the West Bank.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called on Muslims to
"intensify the popular struggle," and added:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We support you and are proud of you and of everything
> you have done. You are caring for and guarding the Al-Aqsa
> compound, and guarding your lands and your dignity and your
> religion and the holy sites. This is the appropriate reaction to
> anybody hurting our holy sites. Jerusalem is our capital and is
> our sovereignty, and what you did was the right thing. You stood
> as one man and we support you and support everything you
> do."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Abbas has also called on his Tanzim militia for an escalation of the
struggle and for large-scale demonstrations against Israel. The
Tanzim faction has been known for violence against Israeli forces in
the past.

There's also a larger subtext going on. As we've been reporting for
weeks, there has been a major split in Arab world with Saudi Arabia
and Qatar leading the two factions. Turkey is allied with Qatar,
while Egypt is allied with Saudi Arabia.

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has fantasies of restoring the
ancient Ottoman Empire, and perhaps sees the al-Aqsa crisis as a way
of gaining influence. On Tuesday, he urged all Muslims to visit
Jerusalem to protect the holy places:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Anyone who has the opportunity should visit
> Jerusalem, Al-Aqsa mosque. Come, let’s all protect
> Jerusalem."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

At one level, this is an incitement to protests and violence, as he's
encouraging all Muslims to travel to Jerusalem.

At another level, Erdogan's incitement is a lot more ambitious. The
country Jordan is in a partnership with Israel to administer the
al-Aqsa mosque. Jordan is allied with the Saudis in the Saudi-Qatar
crisis. Turkey is allied with Qatar and Hamas. So Erdogan's
incitement can be seen as a call for Turkey to replace Jordan as
guardians of the al-Aqsa mosque. Middle East Eye and Times of Israel and Times of Israel

Related Articles

• Tensions at Jerusalem's al-Aqsa Mosque / Temple Mount surge again (17-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Palestinian 'day of rage' in Jerusalem results in six deaths, hundreds injured (22-Jul-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Israel, Jerusalem,
al-Aqsa Mosque, Temple Mount, Jordan,
Hamas, Gaza, Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas,
Oslo generation, Mustafa Barghouti, Tanzim militia,
Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Ottoman Empire,
Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan

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

*** 28-Jul-17 World View -- UK to send warships to South China Sea, as China's neighbors militarize

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• UK to send warships to South China Sea, as China's neighbors militarize
  
• South China Sea countries build larger navies, preparing for war with China
  

****
**** UK to send warships to South China Sea, as China's neighbors militarize
****


Britain's 'colossal' new aircraft carrier, the HMS Queen Elizabeth (Guardian)

Britain's Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson says that the first mission
of the UK's two brand new aircraft carriers will be to conduct freedom
of navigation operations in the South China Sea, something that will
infuriate the Chinese. Speaking to an Australian audience, Johnson
said:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"One of the first things we will do with the two new
> colossal aircraft carriers that we have just built is send them on
> a freedom of navigation operation to this area, to vindicate our
> belief in the rules-based international system and in the freedom
> of navigation through those waterways which are absolutely vital
> for world trade."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The UK’s newest aircraft carrier, the HMS Queen Elizabeth, is the
largest ship ever built for the Royal Navy. It is undergoing its
maiden sea trials off the coast of Scotland and is expected to be
accepted by the navy towards the end of the year. The second ship in
the class, the HMS Prince of Wales, is being fitted out in the Rosyth
dock and will be officially named in September.

Australia's Foreign Minister Julie Bishop responded to Johnson by
reaffirming the close relationship between Britain and Australia:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"In a volatile and unpredictable world it is more
> important than ever to nurture the friendships that we know best
> and that matter to us the most and with people we trust the
> most. ...
>
> We had a long discussion about the Pacific and the opportunities
> for deeper British engagement in our part of the world. ... We
> also see the United Kingdom as being a natural partner with us in
> the development and security of the Pacific."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Boris Johnson's announcement comes at a particularly bad time for
China's president Xi Jinping, because he's trying to strengthen his
political position in the bloody back-stabbing leadership of the
Chinese Communist Party ahead of the Party Congress that begins in
October. Thus, Xi may feel pressured to take some kind of action or
make some kind of threat in response to the UK announcement. Guardian (London) and Vice News


****
**** South China Sea countries build larger navies, preparing for war with China
****

China's has always been following a "salami-slicing strategy" of lying
about its intentions while building up a vast military naval power in
the South China Sea, consisting of artificial islands and military
bases that were originally claimed to be "environmental research
projects." The 2016 ruling by the United Nations Permanent Court of
Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague completely eviscerated China's
so-called 'Nine-Dash Line' claims to the South China Sea, and
essentially made China an international criminal.

Each step in the salami-slicing strategy was supposed to be small
enough not to raise alarms, but in fact it has raised alarms in all of
China's neighbors. The result is that the entire region is
militarizing, in preparation for war with China.

• Vietnam has recently acquired six Russian Kilo-class
  submarines, specialized for missions in shallow waters and for defense
  against enemy ships and submarines. Vietnam has recently procured six
  Metal Shark patrol boats and a Hamilton-class cutter from the United
  States.
  
  
• The BRP Gregorio del Pilar is the flagship of the Philippine Navy.
  It was a former US Coast Guard cutter acquired by the Philippines in
  2012, and it's already been in a confrontation with China in
  Scarborough Shoal.
  
  
• Singapore has put six Formidable-class stealth ships into service,
  all built in France.
  
  
• Indonesia is buying new ships from the Netherlands, while Germany
  is supplying warships to Malaysia and Brunei.

Vietnam in particular has been going on a weapons shopping spree from
Russia. Vietnam recently placed a huge order for 64 T-90 Main Battle
Tanks, four S-400 Triumf Surface-to-Air missiles and new fighter jets,
likely MIG-35s, to replace their now-retired MiG-21s.

At the same time, there have been recent reports that the Trump
administration has changed America's South China Sea strategy to one
that's more assertive than the one that the Obama administration
pursued. President Obama vetoed many "freedom of navigation
operations" (FONOPS) in the South China Sea, for fear of angering the
Chinese. But President Trump will approve frequent FONOPS, so that
they'll be pursued on a frequent basis. The result is that there have
already recently been three such operations in the South China Sea,
starting with one on May 24.

Hitler tried a salami-slicing strategy in Europe in 1939, first
annexing Austria and then Czechoslovakia. Those victories emboldened
Hitler, who thought he could get away with anything. But then when
Hitler invaded Poland, WW II began.

China's salami-slicing step by step Anschluss of the South China Sea
has been very successful so far, but these successes have emboldened
China, whose leaders think they can get away with anything. China is
a highly militarized international criminal state, but at some point
they'll go one step to far, and bring an enormous catastrophe on
themselves and the world. Deutsche Welle (Berlin) and Raddington Report and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) and Times of India

Related Articles

• Indonesia defies China and renames part of the South China Sea (18-Jul-2017)
  
  
• China says its South China Sea military buildup is a boon to the world (09-Dec-2016)
  
  
• India deploying 'submarine killer' planes to counter China's submarines (27-Jan-2016)
  
  
• China, Russia, Syria: The 'Salami Slicing Strategy' (19-Feb-2015)
  
  
• China's military strength and poor civilian control alarm neighbors (24-Nov-2014)
  
  
• Vietnam, Philippines unite to confront China in South China Sea (26-Mar-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Britain, Boris Johnson, South China Sea,
HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Prince of Wales, Australia, Julie Bishop,
China, Xi Jinping, Salami-slicing strategy, nine-dash line
United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration, PCA,
Vietnam, Philippines, Singapore, Indonesia

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

*** 29-Jul-17 World View -- France's Emmanuel Macron nationalizes shipyard to keep Italy out

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• France's Emmanuel Macron nationalizes shipyard to keep Italy out
  
• France-Italy tensions grow over Libya and refugees
  
• France bypasses Italy in a deal with Libya
  
• North Korea launches another ballistic missile
  

****
**** France's Emmanuel Macron nationalizes shipyard to keep Italy out
****


Emmanuel Macron visits STX shipyard in May during election campaign (Reuters)

France's nationalization of the STX shipyard to prevent Italy from
taking ownership, when combined with sharp disagreement between the
two governments over refugees and Libya, seems to indicate a rising
hostility by Frances new president Emmanuel Macron towards Italy's
prime minister Paolo Gentiloni.

The South Korean company STX, who owned 66% of Les Chantiers de
l'Atlantique shipyard site in Saint-Nazaire, France, has collapsed,
and the assets are up for sale. The shipyard is famous for having
built giant ocean liners like the Queen Mary 2, but also can build
warships.

Only one bidder came forward to buy the 66% share: Italian shipbuilder
Fincantieri, for $92.6 million. The deal was accepted by France's
previous president François Hollande, but with a modification that
gave Fincantieri only a 51% share of the shipyard.

Macron took office in June after winning the presidential election on
a pro-business platform, promising to liberalize much of the economy.
However, over 7,000 jobs depend on the shipyard, and French
politicians and labor unions have been complaining that if Italy has
majority control, then French jobs would be the first to go, and
Italian jobs would be protected. French politicians are also
concerned about a shipyard site of such strategic and defense
importance coming under the control of Italy’s state-owned
Fincantieri.

Some politicians even complained that Fincantieri would transfer
French technology and know-how to its partner in China. France's
economy minister Bruno Le Maire said "We want to have all the
guarantees that this know-how will not one day go to another big
global economic power, a non-European one, to be precise."

Thus, pro-business and pro-EU Macron has now taken an anti-business
and anti-EU position by demanding a further modification of the
acquisition deal so that France and Italy would each have half
ownership, and threatening nationalization otherwise. This demand
infuriated the Italians, who don't see why a Korean company was
allowed to own 66% of the shipyard, but Italy cannot even own 51%.

So Macron has decided that France will nationalize the shipyard, with
the French government taking 100% control. According to Italy's
media:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"It remains to be understood how the nationalization
> of STX to block Fincantieri will merge with the common framework
> of effort to favor greater European integration. The ministers are
> insisting on two points: agreements already taken with President
> Francois Hollande are being cancelled retroactively and it was
> France itself which asked Fincantieri to show interest. Rules
> should be respected, not changed along the way.
>
> Then there is the question of political dignity, which the
> government does not intend to to sell off to close the industrial
> deal at any price, which without shareholder control and control
> in the board could have more pitfalls than advantages, considering
> the high level of union conflict in the French shipyards. The à la
> carte protectionism of Macron, who speaks of Europe when it is
> necessary to protect oneself from unfaithful Chinese investments,
> does not convince."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Macron claims that this nationalization is "temporary," but no one
really believes that the labor unions will permit the shipyard to go
private once the nationalization is completed. France 24 and Guardian (London) and Italy 24 and EU Observer

****
**** France-Italy tensions grow over Libya and refugees
****

One analysis claims that relations between France and Italy haven't
been this bad since the 2006 World Cup final, when France's soccer
captain Zinedine Zidane headbutted an opponent on Italy's team in the
last minutes of the game.

Most of the tension is related to the flood of refugees from Libya
that are pouring into Italy. Almost 100,000 refugees have crossed the
Mediterranean and reached Italy so far this year. The way it works
now is that human traffickers launch rubber dinghies filled with
dozens of refugees from the Libyan coast, charging each of the
refugees thousands of dollars. The dinghies are flimsy, and usually
have just enough fuel to leave Libyan waters. The human traffickers
tell the refugees that once they're out of Libyan waters, they should
call a specific phone number in Italy, and Italy will dispatch a boat
to save them from the rubber dinghy.

After saving the refugees from the rubber dinghies and collecting
them, the government and NGO boats always then sail to an Italian port
to deliver the refugees. Italy has been begging France and other
countries to take some of the refugees and they've all taken refused,
taking a kind of "screw you" attitude toward Italy.

Furthermore, there's an Italian border town of Ventimiglia where
refugees go in the hope of crossing the border into France. those
from Francophone countries like Mali and Chad often seek asylum and
France. Others, like those from Eritrea, try to reach Britain.

In WW II Ventimiglia was the starting point for Jews escaping the
Fascists to cross the mountains into France along the "Pass of Death."
In WW II, if a Jew survived the hazardous trip along the Pass of Death
and reached France, then he was safe. Today, if a refugee survives
the trip along the Pass of Death, he's captured by the French
border police and deported back to Italy.

All of these things infuriate the Italians, who believe that the
French and other Europeans do not respect the Italians. Bloomberg and Guardian (London, 22-July) and Al Jazeera

Related Articles

• EU countries refuse to help Italy deal with massive refugee crisis (16-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Italy begs for help after 12,000 migrants arrive in four days (30-Jun-2017)
  
  
• 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)
  
  
• France, Italy have bitter feud over migrants as quota system collapses (16-Jun-2015)
  

****
**** France bypasses Italy in a deal with Libya
****

The latest insult occurred in the last couple of weeks, when Macron
concluded a deal with Libya's two governments to set up "hot spots" in
Libya where refugees can go rather than crossing the Mediterranean.
Once again, Italy is furious, since they were not part of the deal.
Libya was once an Italian colony, and Italian businesses and families
still have many close connections in Libya. So for France to bypass
Italy in Libya is just one more in a series of insults that Italy has
had to deal with. VOA and AP and Human Rights Watch

Related Articles

• With Libya in chaos, migrant deal with Italy collapses (16-Jan-2017)
  

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


Child dictator Kim Jong-un beams with delight over Saturdays ballistic missile test

During the night on Saturday morning, North Korea launched a new
ballistic missile test. Data from the test is still be analyzed, but
initial estimates are that the missile may have a range of 10,400 km,
which puts New York City in range of a path over the North Pole.

Leaders from South Korea, Japan, and the United States made the usual
statements expressing outrage and calling the test "unacceptable." US
and South Korean forces immediately conducted live fire exercises in
response. BBC and 38 North

Related Articles

• North Korea launches another ballistic missile (04-Jul-2017)
  
  
• North Korea sends a message with a medium range ballistic missile test (15-May-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, France, Emmanuel Macron,
Italy, Paolo Gentiloni, Fincantieri, South Korea, STX,
Les Chantiers de l'Atlantique shipyard, Saint-Nazaire,
Bruno Le Maire, 2006 World Cup final, Zinedine Zidane,
Ventimiglia, Pass of Death, Libya, North Korea

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

*** 30-Jul-17 World View -- South Korea approves new THAAD deployment after North Korean missile test

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• North Korea tests a ballistic missile capable of reaching US mainland
  
• South Korea's president Moon approves new THAAD development
  
• What could trigger another world war?
  
• War between Russia and China
  

****
**** North Korea tests a ballistic missile capable of reaching US mainland
****


People in Pyongyang, North Korea's capital city, cheer at the announcement of the missile launch on Saturday (AP)

The ballistic missile that North Korea launched early on Saturday
morning was sent from a truck-mounted mobile launcher. The missile
flew for about 45 minutes, and reached an altitude of 3,700 km. The
missile landed in Japanese waters in the Sea of Japan.

The missile was launched almost vertically, so that it would reach a
high altitude, but would not travel beyond the Sea of Japan. If used
in an actual attack, it would be launched closer to a 45 degree angle
which could carry it possibly as far as the United States mainland,
which would make it an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).
Some analysts are saying that missile could reach Los Angeles, Denver
and Chicago. North Korean media claimed it could reach any target in
the United States. Analysts doubt that this is true, but North
Korea's missile capabilities are growing more rapidly than previously
predicted, so the next missile development may be able to reach more
targets.

The next challenge for North Korea will be to develop a nuclear weapon
small enough to fit in the nose of the ICBM. Many analysts believe
that the North Koreans will have that capability within a year or two.
Guardian (London) and Asahi Shimbun (Tokyo) and NY Daily News

****
**** South Korea's president Moon approves new THAAD development
****

In a sharp reversal of policy, South Korea's president Moon Jae-in
ordered talks on Saturday morning to consider permitting more units in
the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense
system, deployed by the United States military.

Later reports indicate that additional THAAD units have been approved.
Four additional launchers will be deployed, in addition to the two
launchers that have already been deployed.

South Korea's previous conservative president, Park Geun-hye, approved
the initial deployment, scheduled for the end of 2017. However, the
schedule was speeded up for two reasons -- because of North Korea's
aggressive development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, and
because polls indicated that Park would lose the presidential
election. For that reason, the first THAAD units began deployment in
March.

China reacted furiously to the deployment, even though THAAD is a
purely defensive weapon, whose purpose is to knock incoming missiles
out of the sky. However, THAAD comes with an extremely powerful radar
system that would give the US early warning of a surprise Chinese
missile attack on the US, which would reduce China's ability to launch
a surprise missile attack. So China retaliated harshly against South
Korea, banning South Korean goods for sale in China, banning South
Korean pop stars and entertainers, and banning travel agencies from
selling packaged tours to South Korea.

At times like this I always like to respond to the commonly held
belief that there won't be a war because war is bad for business. If
that were true, there would never be any wars. Actually, the opposite
is true: If two countries have a trading and business relationship,
then trade becomes just another weapon of war, as we're seeing in this
case.

President Moon Jae-in is far more liberal than his predecessor, and
when he took office in May, he put a hold on further THAAD deployment,
and also announced that he would seek peace negotiations with North
Korea. North Korea has completely rejected the peace negotiations,
and repudiated them with even more aggressive ballistic missile
development.

So Moon has now reportedly approved another set of THAAD launchers.

The THAAD system is deployed in southern Korea. According to
analysts, it won't prevent a North Korean missile strike on South
Korea's capital city, Seoul, which is only a few miles from the North
Korean border, but THAAD will provide protection for southern Korea.
This is important because in the case of a new Korean war, American
troops would enter from the south, and so THAAD would provide
protection for them. Yonhap News (Seoul) and Reuters

Related Articles

• China promises retaliation over surprise deployment of THAAD in South Korea (08-Mar-2017)
  
  
• China's fury grows over South Korea's plan to deploy THAAD anti-missile system (10-Aug-2016)
  

****
**** What could trigger another world war?
****

One does not need Generational Dynamics to see that the world is
becoming increasingly unstable, and is far less stable than it was 15
years ago. Still, some people think that world wars have been
abolished, and one person recently wrote to me saying that a world war
can't happen because country leaders are "rational actors"!!

There's no way to predict the scenario that will start World War III,
since there are so many possibilities, but we can look at the
scenarios that started previous wars and try to learn lessons from
them.

• WW II did not begin with the Anschluss of Nazi Germany and
  Austria, nor did it begin with the Nazi invasion Czechoslovakia.
  Hitler was using the "salami slicing technique" of one conquest after
  another, each one thought to be too small to trigger an all-out war.
  Nonetheless, when the Nazis invaded Poland, Britain felt it had to
  intervene.
  
  Today, China is using the same "salami slicing technique" in the South
  China Sea and elsewhere, as it plans to take control of their entire
  region and control all access to it. At some point, China will take a
  step too far, and Vietnam or the Philippines or India or Australia or
  the United States will feel obligated to oppose the Chinese.
  
  Another example is that North Korea is using a kind of "salami slicing
  technique" to develop a nuclear-tipped ICBM that could reach American
  soil. At some point, North Korea may conduct one more nuclear weapon
  test or one more ballistic missile test that will cause the US or
  China to decide to do something to stop further nuclear development,
  and that could trigger a war.
  
  However, a "small action" doesn't always trigger a world war. There
  are numerous examples -- US invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11, US
  invasion of Iraq over fear of WMDs (58 year hypothesis), Israel's
  invasion of Lebanon because of Hezbollah's actions (58 year
  hypothesis), Saudi Arabia's invasion of Yemen, the proxy war in Syria,
  Russia's invasion and annexation of Crimea, Russia's invasion of South
  Ossetia and Abkhazia, and so forth.
  
  
• The Pacific theatre of WW II began when Imperial Japan attacked
  Pearl Harbor and other American targets. Today, China may decide to
  launch a direct attack on the US and/or India.
  
  
• WW I began when a high school student decided to shoot and kill
  the archduke of another country. We can imagine many variations of
  this today.
  
  In 2011, Salman Taseer, the governor of Pakistan's Punjab province,
  tried to reform the blasphemy laws, and was shot dead by his own
  bodyguard. So, if an official from India had been visiting Taseer
  that day, that same bodyguard might have decided to shoot and kill the
  Indian official, and that might have triggered retaliation or a war.
  
  As another example, in December of last year in Ankara, a member of
  Turkey's security forces shot and killed Russia's ambassador to
  Turkey. Russia decided not to retaliate, but they might have.
  
  As a final example, one country's "special forces" might infiltrate
  another country and kill the country's leader, and that could trigger
  retaliation and a war.
  
  
• The War of the Spanish Succession was a kind of "world war" that
  ran from 1701-14 and devastated Europe. It began with a legal issue:
  The death of the King of Spain, and a will that bequeathed Spain to
  the grandson of the King of France, triggering the war.
  
  Today, some sort of legal issue in Taiwan might appear to Beijing to
  be moving Taiwan in the direction of independence, which would trigger
  a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
  
  Or we're seeing this crazy blockade of Qatar by four Arab countries,
  based on little more than legalisms. That could trigger some sort of
  war.
  
  
• Many wars have begun with popular national rebellions. There's
  America's Revolutionary War, Russia's Bolshevik Revolution, China's
  Taiping Rebellion, China's Communist Revolution, Iran's Great Islamic
  Revolution, the French Revolution, and so forth. This could happen
  today in countries like China, Russia, Egypt, and so forth.
  
  
• Some country (China) could trigger one of America's mutual defense
  treaties. The United States has some sort of mutual defense treaty
  with many countries: Japan, South Korea, Israel, Taiwan, the
  Philippines, the Marshall Islands, the ANZUS agreement with Australia
  and New Zealand, a special treaty with Iceland, and the NATO agreement
  with all of Europe.

These kinds of situations would not have triggered a war during the
1990s because that was a generational Unraveling period, when the
world was still being run by the Silent generation, survivors of World
War II who had the sense to make sure it wouldn't happen again.
Today, in a generational Crisis era, those generations of sensible
survivors are all gone, and nationalism and xenophobia are increasing
rapidly in countries around the world, so that situations like those
described above could easily trigger a world war.

Related Articles

• What could trigger another world war? (29-Jun-2014)
  

****
**** War between Russia and China
****

There's one more possibility that's rarely mentioned because most
people have the mistaken belief that Russia and China are allies. But
they're only allies in the sense of "honor among thieves," where they
support each other in the invasion and annexation of other countries'
territories, following Hitler's example in 1939.

The Russians and the Chinese have hated each other at least since the
1200s. The 1206 victory of the Mongols over the Han Chinese still has
enormous impact on Chinese thinking today. Han Chinese adopted much
from Mongol culture, and many aspects of the two cultures merged --
culturally, not ethnically.

After the Mongols conquered the Han Chinese, they went on to attack
the Russians. The Russian culture definitely did NOT merge with the
Mongol/Chinese culture, and those hatreds exist today. In fact,
Russia and China did have a border war in 1969, though it didn't last
long. But today, in a generational Crisis era, it could spiral into
full-scale war.

In 2014, Russia held the massive Vostok military exercises in the Far
East, explaining that the military drills were necessary to prepare
for war with the United States. And yet, the assets deployed during
this exercise were more consistent with preparing for a defense of the
Far East, a region that America would be unlikely to invade if it
wanted to invade Russia at all. The only state actor that against
which such a defense is needed is China. And so it appears that
Russia and China claim that they're each preparing for war with the
United States, but they're also preparing for war with each other.

In early June 2017, Russian media reported that the powerful
road-mobile 9K720 Iskander-M missile system was installed in Russia's
Eastern Military District. This joins three other major missile
installations that took place in 2013, 2015 and 2016, respectively.
These installations have very limited ability to strike American or
Japanese targets. Their only logical purpose is to strike China.

So it seems evident that Russia is preparing for war with China, and
that could be the trigger for World War III.

As I've been saying for years, Generational Dynamics predicts that the
world is headed for a Clash of Civilizations world war pitting the
United States, the West, India, Russia and Iran versus China, Pakistan
and the Sunni Muslim countries. National Interest

Related Articles

• China and Russia in military competition in Tajikistan (06-Dec-2016)
  
  
• Russia, India, Japan prepare for war with China (13-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Mongol invasion of China in 1206 has impact today (06-Dec-2010)
  
  
• Russia's concerns about China's 'invasion' of the Far East continue (21-Jun-2015)
  
  
• Russia holds massive Vostok 2014 military exercises amid anti-US hysteria (26-Sep-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, China,
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, THAAD,
Moon Jae-in, Park Geun-hye, Russia, India, Turkey, Taiwan,
Mongol Invasion, War of the Spanish Succession,
Pakistan, Salman Taseer, Revolutionary War

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

*** 31-Jul-17 World View -- Indian Kashmir separatists split over announcement of Zakir Musa as al-Qaeda leader

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Indian Kashmir separatists split over announcement of Zakir Musa as al-Qaeda leader
  
• India says that Kashmir's law and order situation is improving
  

****
**** Indian Kashmir separatists split over announcement of Zakir Musa as al-Qaeda leader
****


Zakir Musa ® became leader of Hizbul Mujahideen in July of last year, after the previous leader Burhan Muzaffar Wani (L) was killed in a gunfight with Indian police. Musa was named al-Qaeda commander last week.

Al-Qaeda's public relations department has announced that one of
Kashmir's most popular militant leaders Zakir Musa, 23, has been
appointed the head of Ansar Ghawzat-Ul-Hind, the al-Qaeda linked
terrorist organization in India-controlled Kashmir.

Musa, an engineering college dropout, is the son of an engineer in the
Jammu and Kashmir government and his brother is a doctor in Tral,
about 30 km from Srinagar, the provincial capital of Kashmir. He took
over as leader of the Kashmir separatist group Hizbul Mujahideen (HM)
after its previous leader, Burhan Muzaffar Wani, was killed by Indian
security forces last year.

Hizbul Mujahideen was formed in 1989, funded by Pakistan's
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency. It's been very popular in
Kashmir, with thousands of anti-India protesters, and is demanding
that Kashmir be separated from India and made part of Pakistan.

However in May of this year, Musa split with HM because didn't have
sufficiently grandiose plans for Musa. Musa said:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"I see that many people in Kashmir are engaged in a
> war of nationalism, which is forbidden in Islam. [The fight
> should] not be for the sake of Kashmir. It should be exclusively
> for Islam so that sharia is established here."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The Indian media is treating this as an extremely serious development,
but it strikes me as rather comical. The thousands of young
stone-throwing separatists in Kashmir believe that their lives would
be better if Kashmir were separated from India and attached to
Pakistan, but they have absolutely no desire to have a terror attack
in Paris or to see Israel pushed into the sea.

Even more comical is another statement by Musa, declaring war on
Pakistan:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"There is no Islam [in Pakistan] at present, so we are
> unhappy with it. We have to do jihad with Pakistan as
> well."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

No wonder he flunked out of college.

The leaders of several separatist factions in Kashmir issued a joint
statement blaming Musa's alignment with al-Qaeda on "Indian secret
agencies," in order to bring a bad name to HM. According to the
statement:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda are non-existent in
> Jammu and Kashmir and there is no role for these groups within our
> movement which is local in nature and indigenous in character.
>
> By linking Kashmir movement with some global organizations, they
> (Indian agencies) are planning their roguish activities to
> influence the international community.
>
> The peace-loving nations of the world have also acknowledged the
> disputed status of Jammu and Kashmir and we are pursuing a
> peaceful movement for its resolution."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

One wonders why Musa chose to link to al-Qaeda rather than ISIS. The
reason may be that ISIS is being defeated in Syria and Iraq, and ISIS
is no longer the glittering, highly fashionable terror organization it
once was.

The situation is typical of the confusion that arises all to often
today, when a local jihadist militant group decides to declare
allegiance to al-Qaeda or to the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS
or ISIL or Daesh). This declaration allows the group to claim that
al-Qaeda or ISIS is now conducting terror attacks in the region, but
in fact the pledge of allegiance is almost meaningless, except as a
publicity stunt to impress the mainstream media, who always fall for
it, hook, line and sinker. Guardian (London) and Hindustan Times and India Times and Pak Observer and India Times



****
**** India says that Kashmir's law and order situation is improving
****

Zakir Musa became leader of Hizbul Mujahedeen (HM) following the July 8 2016 death of HM leader Burhan Muzaffar Wani in a gunfight with the Indian army.
Wani's death
triggered large anti-Indian stone-throwing riots of the past year
throughout the rest of the summer and fall, and resumed in Spring of
this year. In the last year, almost ten thousand people were injured,
and thousands of Kashmiris have been blinded in one or both eyes by
pellet guns used by Indian security forces, and thousands of youths
have been arrested.

India's Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is now saying that the law and
order situation is improving, with fewer stone-pelting incidents than
in the past. According to the MHA, 95 terrorists have been
eliminated, although 38 security personnel had lost their lives as
well, while 89 were killed in 2016. Indian Express and Indian Express

Related Articles

• India's 'Operation All-Out' brings Kashmir closer to all-out war (24-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Kashmir violence surges as India launches massive house-to-house sweep (06-May-2017)
  
  
• Police clashes in India-governed Kashmir kill 36 and leave thousands injured (14-Jul-2016)
  
  
• India threatens retaliation on Pakistan terrorists for Pathankot air base attack (12-Jan-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, India, Pakistan, Kashmir, Jammu,
Zakir Musa, Burhan Muzaffar Wani, Hizbul Mujahideen, HM,
Pakistan, Inter-Services Intelligence, ISI,
al-Qaeda, Ansar Ghawzat-Ul-Hind,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh

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-Aug-17 World View -- Torture and murder of election official raise fears of violence in Kenya

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Torture and murder of election official raise fears of violence in Kenya
  
• Widespread fears in Kenya of a repeat of the 2008 tribal violence
  

****
**** Torture and murder of election official raise fears of violence in Kenya
****


Election poster in Kenya (Reuters)

With the minds of the people of Kenya still filled with sharp memories
of the massive bloody violence that occurred after the 2007
presidential elections, most people were shocked and disgusted to
learn on Monday that the person most responsible for guaranteeing free
and fair presidential elections next week on August 8 was tortured and
killed on Friday.

Chris Msando, who was in charge of IT systems for Kenya's electoral
commission, went missing on Friday. On Monday, his naked body was
found dumped in a forest, with his left hand and fingers broken, a
swollen injury on his head, and evidence of strangulation. The body
of a woman identified only as Shiru was also found, leading to some
social media speculation that the murder was a personal matter
triggered by an illicit affair.

However, most Kenyans believe that Msando was murdered to affect
the presidential elections next week. Those who support the
incumbent, Uhuru Kenyatta, say that polls show that their candidate
is likely to win, and therefore the opposition are the likely
murderers, with the objective of making it possible to rig
the election against the incumbent.

Those who support the main opposition candidate, Raila Odinga, say
that the polls show that the election will be close, and the
government had Msando murdered in order to make it possible to rig the
election to make sure that the incumbent wins.

On Monday, Msando was to oversee the public testing of a new national
computerized voting system, the Kenya Integrated Electoral Management
System (KIEMS). A similar electronic system that was used in the 2013
election failed spectacularly, leading to manual counting of votes
which some have argued allowed for voter manipulation. The test was
put on hold following the announcement that Msando's dead body was
found, and it's unclear what the status of next Tuesday's presidential
elections is now. BBC and Standard Media (Kenya) and The Nation (Kenya) and Standard Media (Kenya) and Deutsche Welle (9-July)


****
**** Widespread fears in Kenya of a repeat of the 2008 tribal violence
****

After the December 2007 president elections, there was a period of
extremely bloody inter-tribal violence in Rift Valley in Kenya, that
began early in 2008. The worst atrocity occurred when 30 people were
lured into a church to escape violence, and a young gang locked the
doors and set the church on fire, burning everyone alive. All in all,
more than 1,200 people were killed in the tribal violence between the
Kalenjins, whose nomadic lifestyle was typical of herders, and the
Kikuyus, who were mostly farmers.

President Uhuru Kenyatta is from the market-dominant Kikuyu tribe,
while his opponent, Raila Odinga, is from the marginalized Luo tribe,
which is an offshoot of the Kalenjins. Observers in Kenya are
pointing out that the Kikuyus and the Kalenjins have reached some sort
of agreement to prevent violence this time. However, as I described in detail in April,
the
violence between herders and farmers is a classic battle and standard
fare in country after country, including America in the 1800s.

In fact, the pre-election violence in Kenya has already begun. As I
described in my April article, well-known Italian conservationist Kuki
Gallmann, 73, was shot in the stomach by herders who invaded her
Gallmann Laikipia Nature Conservancy in Laikipia county in Kenya's
Rift Valley.

Kenya's last generational crisis war was the Mau-Mau rebellion
that began in 1952 and climaxed in 1956. In 2008, Kenya was
still in a generational Unraveling era, which made a full-scale
war very unlikely, and explains why the violence at that time
fizzled fairly quickly. Today, Kenya is in a generational
Crisis era, and so the possibility of full-scale war is much
greater.

As I described in April, there is a significant generational
difference between 2008 and 2017. During the last year, Kalenjin
politicians have been inciting violence by herders against farmers.
In 2008, the senior politicians were all survivors of the Mau-Mau
rebellion, and they would not have incited violence and risked
full-scale war. But today, those survivors are almost all gone, and
politicians are really playing with fire by inciting violence. That's
the difference between a generational Unraveling era and a Crisis era.

Kenya is headed for an all-out war, repeating the extremely bloody
violence of the Mau-Mau rebellion, either now or in the months to
come. The torture and murder of Chris Msando sets the stage for
accusations of vote-rigging by whoever loses the election, and if one
side or the other becomes convinced that the election was stolen, that
could trigger new violence. The Star (Kenya) and Deutsche Welle and Human Rights Watch and Standard Media (Kenya)

Related Articles

• Post-election massacre in Kenya raises concerns of tribal war (02-Jan-2008)
  
  
• Ethnic revenge massacre in Kenya kills 41 (22-Dec-2012)
  
  
• Kenya's herders attack well-known conservationist, stoking tribal tensions (24-Apr-2017)
  
  
• Herders invade ranches in Kenya, ambush and kill British ranch owner (07-Mar-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Kenya, Rift Valley, Chris Msando,
Uhuru Kenyatta, Kikuyus, Raila Odinga, Luos, Kalenjins,
Kenya Integrated Electoral Management System, KIEMS,
Kuki Gallman, Mau-Mau rebellion

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-Aug-17 World View -- Court orders France to provide water and sanitation to Calais migrants

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Court orders France to provide water and sanitation to Calais migrants
  
• French police accused of abusive treatment towards Calais migrants
  

****
**** Court orders France to provide water and sanitation to Calais migrants
****


Migrants are continuing to arrive in Calais, despite the closure of the Jungle camp nine months ago. (CNN)

Under court order, France's government said that it would provide
hundreds of refugees "sleeping rough" in the Calais region with
drinking water, showers, and toilets.

In October of last year, France finally closed "The Jungle," the
refugee camp housing about 7,000 refugees in the French port city of
Calais, hoping to sneak onto ferries and trucks crossing the English
Channel, in order to apply for asylum in Britain.

France had hoped to be done with "The Jungle," but now hundreds
of new refugees have come to Calais with the same goals. One
Afghan refugee said that this year it's different:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The difference is huge compared to the former
> ‘Jungle,’ police were not harassing people every day. There were
> houses, tents set up, there was food. We had everything there.
>
> There were showers, toilets, a mosque and even a place for
> eating. We had everything. Here, there is nothing, no toilet, no
> shower, nowhere to sleep. Not even a plate to eat
> from."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

In June, a regional court ordered Calais officials, within ten days,
to provide drinking fountains, toilets and showers to migrants who are
"exposed to inhuman and degrading conditions" in the area. The court
said that Calais didn't have to provide shelter to migrants on a
permanent basis, but said it was "unlawful to deny all aid to people
who are in a state of complete deprivation." The court said that if
Calais failed to comply, then the city would be fined &euro;100 per
day.

The ruling was hailed as a victory by migrants' rights activists, but
Calais chose not to comply, with the mayor reportedly saying that he's
rather pay a &euro;100 per day fine than risk having thousands of
migrants come back to Calais.

Interior minister Gérard Collomb warned that complying with the order
risked developing a migrant "abscess."

> [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]

So on Monday, France's highest administrative court, the e Council of
State or Conseil d'État, upheld the lower court order, and ordered the
state to provide running water and sanitation for the migrants, saying
that its refusal so far to do so "exposed them to inhuman and
degrading treatment."

Calais Mayor Natacha Bouchart said that she would ignore the order:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The decision by the Council of State is unfair to the
> people of Calais because it threatens them with the emergence of
> yet another Jungle.
>
> In the absence of a national and European policy offering a global
> solution on controlling immigration, Calais will not implement the
> injunctions."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Instead, Interior minister Gérard Collomb announced on Monday that two
shelters for Calais migrants, each with a capacity of 300, would be
opened within ten days. The centers will be located in the towns of
Troisvaux and Bailleul, situated about 80 kilometers from Calais.
Furthermore, refugees will only be permitted to remain there for a few
days, to allow their asylum applications to be processed, and then
they would be required to leave and go somewhere else. Whether that
will satisfy the court remains to be seen.

But Calais's mayor, Natacha Bouchart, called Collomb's plans "an
injustice to the people of Calais," and said the plans would lead to a
new Jungle. Euro News and RFI and France 24 (26-June) and Express (London)

****
**** French police accused of abusive treatment towards Calais migrants
****

For months, NGOs and activists have been accusing French police of use
of abusive treatment and excessive force towards migrants in Calais.
Police were accused of preventing aid groups from distributing meals
in Calais.

According to regional police chief Fabien Sudry in June, the charges
were unfounded:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"In a country with the rule of law, all people can
> file a legal complaint and ask for an investigation from the
> police inspector general. No legal complaints have been filed at
> this stage regarding police violence on migrants."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Now Human Rights Watch has produced a report based on interviews of 60
asylum seekers and migrants, confirming the reports of police
abuse. According to the report:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Human Rights Watch finds that police in Calais,
> particularly the riot police (Compagnies républicaines de
> sécurité, CRS), routinely use pepper spray on child and adult
> migrants while they are sleeping or in other circumstances in
> which they pose no threat; regularly spray or confiscate sleeping
> bags, blankets, and clothing; and sometimes use pepper spray on
> migrants’ food and water. Police also disrupt the delivery of
> humanitarian assistance."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

According to HRW, authorities have turned a blind eye to these
widespread reports of police abuse against asylum seekers and other
migrants. According to HRW's director in France: "It is reprehensible
for police to use pepper spray on children and adults who are asleep
or peacefully going about their day. When police destroy or take
migrants’ blankets, shoes, or food, they demean their profession as
well as harm people whose rights they’ve sworn to uphold." Human Rights Watch and European Observatory of Crimes and Security and Reuters (1-June) and Daily Sabah (Ankara)

Related Articles

• France struggles with hundreds of migrants returning to Calais campground (30-Jun-2017)
  
  
• 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)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, France, Calais, The Jungle,
Natacha Bouchart, Gérard Collomb, Fabien Sudry

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-Aug-17 World View -- Rex Tillerson warns China is risking 'open conflict' with the United States

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Rex Tillerson promises a US 'response' to North Korea's 'unacceptable threat'
  
• Rex Tillerson warns China is risking 'open conflict' with the United States
  

****
**** Rex Tillerson promises a US 'response' to North Korea's 'unacceptable threat'
****


Secretary of State Rex Tillerson

Speaking to the State Dept. press corps on Tuesday, Secretary of State
Rex Tillerson made it clear that the United States would not be
appeasing either North Korea or China. Tillerson began by explaining
the policy toward North Korea:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We have reaffirmed our position towards North Korea,
> that what we are doing, we do not seek a regime change; we do not
> seek the collapse of the regime; we do not seek an accelerated
> reunification of the peninsula; we do not seek an excuse to send
> our military north of the 38th parallel. And we’re trying to
> convey to the North Koreans we are not your enemy, we are not your
> threat, but you are presenting an unacceptable threat to us, and
> we have to respond."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Tillerson's statement was consistent with a remark made the
previous day by President Donald Trump:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"We will handle North Korea. We are gonna be able to
> handle them. It will be handled."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

UN Ambassador Nikki Haley said that the "time for talk is over,"
referring to the endless series of UN Security Council resolutions,
each one expressing outrage that North Korea has ignored previous
resolutions, and threatening North Korea with a new resolution in the
future if the current one is violated.

Some people in the mainstream media are having reading comprehension
difficulties with these statements, considering them contradictory to
one another. One journalist, for example, said that Trump and
Tillerson "offered distinctly mixed messages on North Korea," and that
Trump "preached a different message."

And yet, the messages are perfectly clear and consistent. We do not
seek regime change, but North Korea is presenting a major unacceptable
threat to the US, and we have to "respond" or to "handle it."

The reason that so many journalists, politicians, pundits and analysts
are having difficulty is because they don't have the vaguest clue
what's going on in the world, or how the world works, or they think
that the world works the same way it did when they were children
in the 1980s-90s. In those days, the world was still being run by
the Silent generation, survivors of World War II, who were well
aware of what can go wrong. But the world today is being run
by younger generations who have no clue what can go wrong.

The exception is Donald Trump's close adviser, Steve Bannon, who knows
very well what is going on in the world. As I've described in the past,
I've worked with Steve Bannon
off and on for several years in the past, both on his movie
"Generation Zero" and when I was cross-posting articles on the
Breitbart National Security site. So I know that Steve Bannon is an
expert on military history and world history, and he also has an
expert understanding of Generational Dynamics and generational theory.

So Bannon knows very well, and presumably has communicated to Trump,
that a nuclear military confrontation with North Korea is coming with
absolute certainty. Following the path of previous administrations
would have meant showing weakness and appeasing North Korea, and then
being overwhelmed by North Korea's unexpected surprise nuclear attack
on South Korea and American bases, just as the US was overwhelmed by
Imperial Japan's unexpected surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

Instead of appeasing North Korea, the Trump administration is
threatening to "respond." Presumably, there is hope that some
response could somehow cripple North Korea's nuclear missile
development program. To my knowledge, nobody believes that any such
response is possible, and most analysts believe that any such attempt
would trigger a North Korean attack on Seoul and South Korea.
US State Dept. and Washington Examiner and Global Times (Beijing)

Related Articles

• What could trigger another world war? (30-Jul-2017)
  
  
• North Korea launches another ballistic missile test, as talk of war increases (29-May-2017)
  
  
• US aircraft carrier strike force heads for Korean peninsula (10-Apr-2017)
  
  
• Ancient tensions flare between China and North Korea (08-May-2017)
  

****
**** Rex Tillerson warns China is risking 'open conflict' with the United States
****

In his speech to the State Dept. press corps, Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson said that the US has asked China to pressure North Korea to
end their nuclear missile program:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The Chinese have been very clear with us that we
> share the same objective, a denuclearized Korean Peninsula. They
> do not see it in their interest for North Korea to have nuclear
> weapons, just as we do not see it in anyone’s interest. ...
>
> We’ve been very clear with the Chinese we certainly don’t blame
> the Chinese for the situation in North Korea. Only the North
> Koreans are to blame for this situation. But we do believe China
> has a special and unique relationship because of this significant
> economic activity to influence the North Korean regime in ways
> that no one else can.
>
> And that’s why we continue to call upon them to use that influence
> with North Korea to create the conditions where we can have a
> productive dialogue. We don’t think having a dialogue where the
> North Koreans come to the table assuming they’re going to maintain
> their nuclear weapons is productive. So that’s really what the
> objective that we are about is."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The logic of this statement is a little convoluted. He wants China to
influence North Korea so that they can all have a constructive dialog.
But a productive dialog is not possible if North Korea assumes that
they're going to maintain their nuclear weapons. Therefore, he's
implying that he wants China to influence North Korea to abandon its
nuclear weapons development.

After North Korea's ballistic missile statement last weekend,
President Trump lashed out at China on Twitter:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"I am very disappointed in China. Our foolish past
> leaders have allowed them to make hundreds of billions of dollars
> a year in trade, yet they do NOTHING for us with North Korea, just
> talk. We will no longer allow this to continue. China could
> easily solve this problem!"<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Trump's tweet contained an implicit threat towards China. Tillerson
went farther in his speech to the press corps and warned China that
China is risking open conflict with the United States, because of
disagreements over trade and over China's actions in the South China
Sea:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The question now is that we – we believe we’re at a
> bit of a pivot point in that relationship because of how China has
> progressed now to become the second largest economy in the world,
> and they will continue to grow in their importance to the global
> economy. What should define this relationship for the next 50
> years? And those are the discussions that we have with the Chinese
> in the broadest contours: How should we define this relationship
> and how do we ensure that economic prosperity to the benefit of
> both countries and the world can continue, and that where we have
> differences – because we will have differences, we do have
> differences – that we will deal with those differences in a way
> that does not lead to open conflict. And that has been the
> success of the past policy. It’s one that we must continue, but we
> recognize conditions have changed and to simply rely upon the past
> may not serve either one of us well.
>
> So these are very in-depth conversations and discussions we have
> with the Chinese, and we test this relationship through things
> like the situation in North Korea. Can we work together to address
> this global threat where we have a common objective? And where we
> have differences – in the South China Sea, and we have some
> trading differences that need to be addressed – can we work
> through those differences in a way without it leading to open
> conflict and find the solutions that are necessary to serve us
> both?"<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Tillerson's statement contains a direct warning to China by twice
using the phrase "lead[ing] to open conflict."

Previous administrations have avoided any sorts of direct threats to
China, for fear of angering them. But avoiding threats has the effect
of showing weakness and appeasing China, and then later being
overwhelmed by an unexpected surprise attack.

But, once again, this administration is different because Trump
advisor Steve Bannon is an expert on Generational Dynamics, and is
well aware of the Generational Dynamics prediction that the US and
China are headed for all-out war with 100% certainty.

Instead of appeasing North Korea and China, the Trump administration
is making unspecified threats, in the hope of finding either
a way to stop the war or a way to make sure that the United
States survives a war.

The Trump statement quoted above suggests that Trump plans trade
sanctions against China, and the statements by Tillerson suggest that
the administration plans some sort of action to neutralize North
Korea's nuclear missile threat.

I wish I could say that there's hope that these measures will have the
desired effect of stopping North Korea and China, but as I've been
saying for years, major decisions and trends like those developing now
do not come from the countries' leaders. They come from the
countries' populations, entire generations of people, and attempting
to halt these trends is like trying to stop a tsunami with a teacup.

On Tuesday morning, South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, who has
a close relationship with Trump, made a statement about the
inevitability of war in Korea that is believed to have come from Trump
himself. Graham said that unless North Korea's president Kim Jong-un
changes, war is coming:

> [indent]<QUOTE>I’m saying it’s inevitable unless North Korea changes
> because you’re making our president pick between regional
> stability and homeland security.
>
> If there’s going to be a war to stop him [Kim], it will be over
> there. If thousands die, they’re going to die over there.
> They’re not going to die here. And he [Trump] has told me that to
> my face."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

These statements by Tillerson, Trump and Graham, taken together,
define a policy that is completely consistent with the Generational
Dynamics analysis of the situation in China and North Korea.
Mainstream journalists and analysts are completely baffled by it,
because they have no idea what's going on in the world, and they know
nothing about Generational Dynamics or generational theory. That's
why mainstream journalists talk about chaos, or a White House with no
foreign policy or an incoherent foreign policy. They simply have no
clue.

But the fact is that this is the most coherent and sophisticated White
House foreign policy that I've seen in the 15 years that I've been
writing about Generational Dynamics. Unfortunately, it won't prevent
the catastrophic Clash of Civilizations war that's approaching, any
more than a policy of appeasement would do, but we can hope that it
may help guarantee that the United States will survive. Guardian (London) and Daily Star (London) and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) and Global Times (Beijing) and Daily Beast

Related Articles

• China builds illegal surface-to-air missile sites in South China Sea (03-Jul-2017)
  
  
• 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's military strength and poor civilian control alarm neighbors (24-Nov-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Rex Tillerson, North Korea, China,
Nikki Haley, Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, Lindsey Graham

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

*** 4-Aug-17 World View -- Thousands of migrants flee to Canada, fearing deportation in the US

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Thousands of migrants flee to Canada, fearing deportation in the US
  
• Seven years after earthquake, Haiti is still devastated
  

****
**** Thousands of migrants flee to Canada, fearing deportation in the US
****


Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre greets a busload of Haitian asylum seekers from the United States as it arrives on Thursday (AFP)

Officials in Canada are scrambling to accommodate hundreds of migrants
fleeing from the United States in fear of being deported back to their
home countries by the Trump administration. 500 migrants arrived on
Tuesday, and another 300 people arrived on Wednesday. The average has
grown to 150 people per day requesting asylum in Canada.

Some 4,345 migrants arrived in the first six months of 2017, and
another 1,000 arrived in July alone. Migrants that cross at official
land border crossing are denied asylum on the spot, and are sent back
to the United States, under an agreement between the two countries.
The "Safe Third Country Agreement" was signed on December 5, 2002, as
part of a plan to improve security between the two countries in the
wake of the 9/11 attacks.

However, the agreement applies only to official land border crossings.
For that reason, most migrants simply cross the border at an unmanned
location. By entering Canada illegally, they bypass this agreement.
They can then claim refugee status, seek asylum, and then stay while
their refugee applications are being processes. Hundreds of migrants
have crossed into Canada by walking along a dirt crossing into the
Quebec town of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle.

Canadian authorities were unprepared for the sudden surge in migrants.
To accommodate them, Montreal's Olympic Stadium, built for the 1976
summer Olympics, has been transformed into a makeshift refugee center.
Others are being sent to schools, which are not in session during the
summer. Other accommodations will have to be found when schools open
in September.

Some 70% of the migrants are from Haiti, but others are from Sudan,
Turkey and Eritrea. There are also some who are US citizens fleeing
to Canada.

Most of the asylum seekers are from Haiti, who arrived in the United
States following the January 2010 earthquake. The Department of
Homeland Security under President Obama granted Haiti the Temporary
Protected Status (TPS) benefit following the earthquake, which permits
them to stay in the country and work, and send remittances back to
their families in Haiti.

Besides Haiti, several Latin American countries have TPS status. El
Salvador has had TPS status since 2001 because of a devastating
earthquake. Nicaragua and Honduras have had TPS status since a
hurricane that happened 18 years ago.

The TPS for Haiti was meant to last only 18 months, but it kept
getting 18-month extensions under the Obama administration. When the
last TPS extension expired in May, the DHS announced a final six-month
extension. In a statement from DHS:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The Department of Homeland Security urges Haitian TPS
> recipients who do not have another immigration status to use the
> time before Jan. 22, 2018, to prepare for and arrange their
> departure from the United States."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

So many Haitian refugees have been taking the DHS advice and arranging
their departure from the United States by traveling to Canada. They
were encouraged by a welcoming tweet from Canada's prime minister
Justin Trudeau on January 28, shortly after Trump announced his travel
ban:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians
> will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our
> strength #WelcomeToCanada"<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Trudeau's tweet was followed by a picture of him greeting a refugee
family. The two tweets received over a million likes and
half-a-million retweets. Canadian Broadcasting and Canadian TV News and AFP

Related Articles

• US will deport tens of thousands of Haitian immigrants surging toward California (25-Sep-2016)
  
  
• Canada receives record numbers of Mexican asylum seekers after Trudeau's welcome tweet (13-May-2017)
  
  
• Central Americans reach agreement on letting Cuban migrants reach the US (30-Dec-2015)
  

****
**** Seven years after earthquake, Haiti is still devastated
****


People dump trash and raw sewage into canals that run through Port-au-Prince, Haiti. When it rains, the canals overflow and flood poor neighborhoods. (NPR)

Haiti appears to be a cursed country. Before 2010 it was already
almost the poorest country in the world, with many neighborhoods
strewn knee high in garbage. Then, on January 12, 2010, the
earthquake struck, killing 316,000 people and leaving more than 1.5
million people homeless, and 3.3 million facing food shortages.

Then the United Nations sent in peacekeepers to aid in the cleanup.
The peacekeepers didn't accomplish too much cleanup, but they did
infect the water in Haiti with cholera, in a country which had
previously been free of cholera. This caused hundreds of thousands of
cases of cholera. It was later attributed to the peacekeepers from
Nepal.

Billions of dollars in aid have been spent in Haiti since then,
apparently accomplishing little because of pervasive corruption. The
Red Cross, for example, is accused of building only six homes in Haiti
with nearly half a billion dollars in donated funds, and spending
millions on internal expenses.

Haitian migrants have been flooding into other countries, usually in
order to work and send remittances back to their families. The
Dominican Republic recently granted a one-year extension to some
230,000 Haitian migrants trying to renew or obtain residency permits.
Other countries, including the Bahamas and Turks-and-Caicos have also
had to cope with Haitian migrants. Huffington Post (12-Jan-2017) and Reuters and NPR and Magnetic Media TV and Bahama Journal

Related Articles

• Haiti, seething with ethnic violence, may require US forces for a long time (17-Jan-2010)
  
  
• 11-Mar-10 News - Haiti's president asks for earthquake food aid to end (11-Mar-2010)
  
  
• Violence and cholera spread in Haiti (09-Dec-2010)
  
  
• Hurricane Sandy a new disaster for Haiti (31-Oct-2012)
  
  
• History of Haiti (04-Mar-2004)

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Canada, Montreal, Denis Coderre,
Justin Grudeau, Montreal, Quebec, Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle,
Haiti, Sudan, Turkey, Eritrea, Dominican Republic,
Bahamas, Turks-and-Caicos

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

*** 5-Aug-17 World View -- China further escalates the rhetoric threatening India over Doklam Plateau

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• China further escalates the rhetoric threatening India over Doklam Plateau
  
• China attempts to justify its claim to the Doklam Plateau
  

****
**** China further escalates the rhetoric threatening India over Doklam Plateau
****


India's prime minister Narendra Modi and China's president Xi Jinping at a meeting last year (AP)

The border dispute involving China, India and Bhutan over the Doklam
Plateau seems far from resolution. As we've been reporting
a standoff between India's army and China's
army on Doklam plateau in the tiny country of Bhutan. China is
attempting to annex the region, and on June 16 sent Chinese troops and
construction workers to begin road construction. Bhutan troops tried
to prevent the Chinese troop incursion, but they were overrun. India
sent in its own troops, saying that it did so when Bhutan invoked a
treaty with India and asked for help. The result is a standoff,
though no bullets have been fired yet.

China's Foreign Ministry tells the story a little differently:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"On June 16, the Chinese side was building a road in
> the Dong Lang area which is located on the Chinese side of the
> Sikkim Sector of the China-India boundary. This was aimed at
> improving the local transportation and facilitating local
> herdsmen's grazing of livestock and border troops' patrolling. It
> is normal activity of China in its own territory which is
> completely lawful and legitimate."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Unfortunately, it isn't "normal activity," and it isn't China's
territory. It's Bhutan's territory.

To make its point, China's military has carried out live fire
exercises in Tibet, presumably near the Doklam region. A video on
China Central Television (CCTV) showed a commander sitting in a
vehicle shouting “3, 2, 1, fire!” into two telephones and a missile
was launched into the sky. Troops were shown loading and firing other
missiles, some of which landed in fiery explosions.

Probably more significant is that a commentary in China's official
Xinhua news agency said, "China has made it clear that there is no
room for negotiation and the only solution is the unconditional and
immediate withdrawal of Indian troops from the region."

China's state-run Global Times says that China would "annihilate"
Indian forces:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"India is publicly challenging a country that is far
> superior in strength. India's recklessness has shocked
> Chinese. Maybe its regional hegemonism in South Asia and the
> Western media comments have blinded New Delhi into believing that
> it can treat a giant to its north in the way it bullies other
> South Asian countries.
>
> Over the past month, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been
> on the move. We believe that the PLA has made sufficient
> preparation for military confrontation.
>
> It is a war with an obvious result. The government of Prime
> Minister Narendra Modi should be aware of the PLA's overwhelming
> firepower and logistics. Indian border troops are no rival to PLA
> field forces. If a war spreads, the PLA is perfectly capable of
> annihilating all Indian troops in the border region."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Indian authorities have said in the past that they are prepared
for a military clash with China in Doklam, and that they expect
to win.

India's Ministry of External Affairs is using far more diplomatic
rhetoric than China, but has not shown and inclination to back down.
A spokesman said that India is continuously coordinating with Bhutan
to arrive at a "mutually-acceptable solution" to resolve the Doklam
dispute. He added, "Our objective is to achieve peace and tranquility
through diplomacy." However, it's hard to see how war can be avoided
unless India backs down.

China's president Xi Jinping may be under pressure to resolve the
situation as quickly as possible.

The Communist Party congress is set for November. If the Doklam
standoff continues until them, or if China's military withdraws, then
it would make Xi look weak, and would bolster his rivals.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics,
xenophobia and nationalism are increasing in countries around the
world, as countries go deeper into a generational Crisis era.
The result is that many countries are becoming more belligerent,
at least in rhetoric.

On the Arabian Gulf, the four Arab countries Saudi Arabia, Bahrain,
United Arab Emirates, and Egypt have implemented a land, sea
and air blockade against Qatar. This has gone on for weeks.

As we reported two days ago,
US
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that China was risking "open
conflict" with the US over its policies in the South China Sea and in
Korea. His remarks were consistent with other statements by President
Donald Trump and Senator Lindsey Graham. They represent a significant
escalation in rhetoric by the US, and a change in policy that's
consistent with a Generational Dynamics analysis.

Another example is North Korea itself, which is exhibiting increased
belligerence through development of ballistic missiles and
nuclear weapons.

China's escalating rhetoric over the Doklam Plateau is consistent with
these other examples, which illustrate how the worldwide increase in
xenophobia and nationalism is pointing in the direction of a new war.
India.com and AP and China's Foreign Ministry and Global Times (Beijing)

****
**** China attempts to justify its claim to the Doklam Plateau
****

On Wednesday, China's Foreign Ministry issued a 15-page document
entitled: "The Facts and China’s Position Concerning the Indian Border
Troops’ Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into
the Chinese Territory."

It goes into detail about an agreement called the "1890 Convention
Between Great Britain and China Relating to Sikkim and Tibet" to
provide proof that the Doklam Plateau really belongs to China, rather
than Bhutan. However, that was a colonial-era agreement between Great
Britain and China. Bhutan was not a party to that agreement.

We always run into the same problem with China. In the South China
Sea, they're building artificial islands and military bases that are
in violation of international law, and they've repeatedly lied to make
their claim to annexing the entire South China Sea. If they've lied
repeatedly about the South China Sea, why would anyone believe
anything they say about the Doklam Plateau or anything else?

Of course it doesn't make any difference whether China is lying or
not. China is a highly militarized state with a "China dream" that is
preparing for many wars. China's Foreign Ministry (PDF) and India Times and International Business Times (India)

Related Articles

• China escalates its military threats over its border dispute with India at Doklam Plateau (26-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Rex Tillerson warns China is risking 'open conflict' with the United States (03-Aug-2017)
  
  
• Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations cut ties with Qatar in new Mideast crisis (06-Jun-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, India, Bhutan, Doklam Plateau,
Narendra Modi, Xi Jinping, Rex Tillerson,
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Qatar

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

(08-04-2017, 10:45 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]On Wednesday, China's Foreign Ministry issued a 15-page document
entitled: "The Facts and China’s Position Concerning the Indian Border
Troops’ Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into
the Chinese Territory."

It goes into detail about an agreement called the "1890 Convention
Between Great Britain and China Relating to Sikkim and Tibet" to
provide proof that the Doklam Plateau really belongs to China, rather
than Bhutan.  However, that was a colonial-era agreement between Great
Britain and China.  Bhutan was not a party to that agreement.

So a treaty signed by two great powers should be disregarded just to make a weak buffer state happy. Countries like old imperial Britain, China and India make history. Countries like Bhutan and Czechoslovakia do not and never have driven historical forces. The fight Between China and India would be for supremacy in south and southeast Asia, not about the integrity of Bhutan whom neither country seriously cares about. Boomer globalists in the west blooming with Utopian fantasies seek the nonsensical idea of small countries having the same rights as great powers. When are boomers going to accept reality and reorient western foreign policy around relations with and between great powers and rival great powers instead of the nonsense of trying to have the west be a global guarantor for small countries. Regarding India's defense the Indians have been building up their defenses since 1962, also India's treaties are with Russia not with the west. So this is not a significant issue for either the US or Europe.

(08-04-2017, 11:06 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> So a treaty signed by two great powers should be disregarded just
> to make a weak buffer state happy. Countries like old imperial
> Britain, China and India make history. Countries like Bhutan and
> Czechoslovakia do not and never have driven historical forces. The
> fight Between China and India would be for supremacy in south and
> southeast Asia, not about the integrity of Bhutan whom neither
> country seriously cares about. Boomer globalists in the west
> blooming with Utopian fantasies seek the nonsensical idea of small
> countries having the same rights as great powers. When are boomers
> going to accept reality and reorient western foreign policy around
> relations with and between great powers and rival great powers
> instead of the nonsense of trying to have the west be a global
> guarantor for small countries. Regarding India's defense the
> Indians have been building up their defenses since 1962, also
> India's treaties are with Russia not with the west. So this is not
> a significant issue for either the US or Europe.

I think you have it backwards. Whereas India and China have been
conquered and ruled by everyone from the Greeks to the Mongols, often
changing religions, and until recently have been nothing but
collections of regions controlled by various kinds of warlords, Bhutan
has been fairly coherent Buddhist entity since the 700s, unconquered
and unconquerable. Bhutan has driven historical forces in southern
Asia many times before, and is doing so again today.

*** 6-Aug-17 World View -- China takes control of Sri Lanka's strategically valuable Hambantota seaport

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• China takes control of Sri Lanka's strategically valuable Hambantota seaport
  
• India reacts to China's One-Belt One-Road and threat of war over Doklam
  
• Threat of India-China border war at Doklam Plateau grows
  

****
**** China takes control of Sri Lanka's strategically valuable Hambantota seaport
****


Sri Lankan citizens watch Chinese dredging ships in Hambantota port (Reuters)

Last week, Sri Lanka's government signed an agreement giving China a
99-year lease to use Sri Lanka's strategically valuable southern
Hambantota seaport. The seaport is on the main shipping route from
Asia to Europe, and oversees the Indian ocean all the way to
Antarctica. In addition, China will hold a 70% stake in a joint
venture to handle the commercial operations of the port.

The deal has been extremely controversial for several reasons:

• Sri Lanka is giving China a substantial peace of Sri Lanka's
  soil, undermining the country's sovereignty.
  
  
• China also receives a 99-year lease on 15,000 acres (6,070
  hectares) of Sri Lankan land adjacent to the port to develop an
  industrial zone.
  
  
• Thousands of Sri Lankan families will be displaced from their
  homes.
  
  
• Thousands of Chinese families will migrate and settle in the
  adjacent land, forming a permanent Chinese enclave in Sri Lanka.
  
  
• There are widespread concerns that China will use the port as a
  military base. However, under local and international pressure, the
  agreement was modified so that China promised to use the port only for
  commercial purposes.

The deal triggered violent protests earlier this year by Buddhist
monks and anti-government protesters, but there were few protests when
the deal was finally signed on July 29.

The agreement is considered a very bad deal for Sri Lanka, even by
those politicians who felt that Sri Lanka had no choice but to go
ahead with it as part of a debt repayment scheme. In 2009, China
invested $1.2 billion in the Hambantota seaport. Sri Lanka had
expected to repay the debt through profits earned by the port, but the
slowdown in trade throughout the entire region in the last few years
has meant that Sri Lanka has been unable to repay the debt, and now
China has essentially taken over the port in lieu of repayment of the
debt.

The deal has generated a great deal of anger by people who are
accusing China of having purposely set a "debt trap" in 2009, knowing
that Sri Lanka would be unable to repay the debt, and would be forced
to give away Sri Lankan assets to China. Container Management Magazine and Asian Tribune and Colombo Gazette and LankaWeb

Related Articles

• Violent protests in Sri Lanka over China's takeover of Hambantota seaport (08-Jan-2017)
  

****
**** India reacts to China's One-Belt One-Road and threat of war over Doklam
****

Recently, China launched a naval military base in Djibouti in eastern
Africa as the endpoint to its "string of pearls," commercial
deep-water ports in the Indian Ocean that China could use in time of
wars. Many of these ports were built and often are operated by
Chinese companies. These include deep-water ports in Sri Lanka, in
Colombo and Hambantota; Pakistan, in Gwadar and Karachi; Myanmar, in
Sittwe; and the Seychelles, in Port Victoria. The Gwadar port in
Pakistan is expected to be upgraded to a full Chinese military base
soon.

These are all part of China's $1 trillion "One Belt One Road" (OBOR)
initiative consisting of an overland Economic Belt and a Maritime Silk
Road. Although these infrastructure projects are supposed to be for
commercial use, Indian officials believe that China is preparing for
war by surrounding India with the Hambantota port and other ports, as
well as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that appears to be
impinging on the India-government portion of Kashmir. And this is
occurring at a time when China and India are close to a border war
over the Doklam Plateau in Bhutan.

India is attempting to match China's influence in the region by
executing its own major infrastructure projects. India is involved in
joint economic and technical projects with Bangladesh, Bhutan and
Nepal. India is also investing heavily in Africa to compete with
China there.

India is part of the North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) which links
India with Iran, the Central Asian countries, and Russia. Part of
NSTC is the port in Chabahar, which is on the coast of Iran near
Pakistan. It's a direct competitor to China's Gwadar port in
Pakistan. Using it, India will be able to bypass Pakistan in shipping
goods to Iran, and from there to Afghanistan, Central Asia or Europe.

However, India's projects are generally much smaller than China's, and
are often only in the planning stages. For example, India invested
$54 billion in Africa and Indo-African trade in 2016, while China
invested $194 billion. Menafn (Middle East North Africa Financial Network)

Related Articles

• China establishes its first foreign military base, in Djibouti (13-Jul-2017)
  
  
• China launches 'One Belt One Road', raising objections and violent protests (14-May-2017)
  
  
• Iran-India sign 'historic' Chabahar port deal to counter Pakistan-China (25-May-2016)
  

****
**** Threat of India-China border war at Doklam Plateau grows
****

We've reported several times on the growing tensions in Bhutan's
Doklam Plateau, which China would like to invade and annex, but is
being blocked by India forces, although no shots have yet been fired.

As we reported yesterday,
China is
threatening war over Doklam, and believes they will "annihilate"
India's army.

Many analysts, including some officials in India, believe that sooner
or later India will back down. However, a web site reader pointed out
that it's a lot more serious than a simple border dispute over a small
piece of land:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The Indians will definitely fight, because if they
> don't push back now, they will wake up and find Eastern India cut
> off from New Delhi. This is a red line the Indians will never
> allow to be crossed. And this is where it gets really
> dangerous. China doesn't need to steal land from Bhutan to
> survive, but India needs to preserve the Siliguri Corridor because
> India has no choice but to defend it if it wants to preserve the
> country. India will fight. It's the Chinese who are
> miscalculating."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

The Siliguri Corridor, also known as the "Chicken's Neck," is a land
corridor that connects western and eastern India. If China takes
control of the Doklam Plateau, they will also take control of the
Chicken's Neck corridor, and India will be effectively split into two
pieces.

The Doklam Plateau conflict has turned into an existential threat for
both countries, and it seems that neither China nor India will back
down. There's also a hard deadline in getting the issue resolved, as
there's a Chinese "People's Congress" in November, and China's
president Xi Jinping will look extremely weak if there's still a
standoff.

And according to the somewhat hysterical Global Times article tht I
quoted yesterday, the Chinese say that they will "annihilate" the
Indian army, and it wouldn't surprise me if they actually believe
that. Needless to day, the Indians don't agree. And it's worth
remembering that the Saudis expected to annihilate the Houthis when
they invaded Yemen in 2014.

Finally, for those readers who enjoy a little black humor, we have a
remarkable analysis appearing Sri Lanka's Daily Mirror, who has this
response to people who fear war between China and India:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Have no such fears. With certainty, it can be said
> that nuclear powers will not go to war. Take heart from
> Wednesday’s US statement offering peace talks with North Korea. It
> came days after the maverick regime carried out a successful test
> of an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile capable of hitting the US
> mainland.
>
> The deterrent value of nuclear weapons is one of the key factors
> why the Third World War has still not happened. For nearly two
> months, China and India have been bogged down in a face-off in the
> Himalayas. But neither wants to start a major war. Nuclear powers
> may find themselves in warlike situations, but will not go to war,
> unless insane leaders take control of affairs. This is why China
> and the US have not gone to war over the South China Sea
> disputes."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

I know that regular readers of my Generational Dynamics articles will
have a good laugh over this.

However, with both India and China facing an existential crisis over
the Doklam Plateau, the situation is a disaster in the making, unless
someone can figure out a face-saving formula that both sides can agree
to in the next month or so. India Times (3-July) and Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka)

Related Articles

• China further escalates the rhetoric threatening India over Doklam Plateau (05-Aug-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, India, Sri Lanka, Hambantota port,
Gwadar port, Pakistan, Djibouti, One Belt One Road, OBOR,
North-South Transport Corridor, NSTC, Chabahar port, Iran,
Bhutan, Doklam Plateau, Siliguri Corridor, Chicken's Neck,
Xi Jinping

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

*** 7-Aug-17 World View -- Israel announces that it will ban al-Jazeera in Israel

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Israel announces that it will ban al-Jazeera in Israel
  
• Al-Jazeera gives bitter, angry response to Israel's move
  
• BBC vs Al-Jazeera: Which is more biased?
  

****
**** Israel announces that it will ban al-Jazeera in Israel
****


Al-Jazeera's Marwan Bishara (L) comments during the news conference of Israel's communications minister Ayoub Kara

Israel’s Communications Ministry announced Sunday that it will take
action to ban Qatar-owned al-Jazeera from both operating and
broadcasting in Israel.

In doing so, Israel has clearly and unequivocally taken sides against
Qatar and in favor of the countries that are currently enforcing a
land, sea and air blockade against Qatar -- Saudi Arabia, United Arab
Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, and Egypt.

Israel's Communications Minister Ayoub Kara made the announcement in a
televised news conference:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Freedom of expression is a basic value, and I will do
> everything I can to protect objective journalism and freedom of
> expression, which is very important to me. But the events on the
> Temple Mount have put me in a position where I need to think about
> how I can secure the safety of Israel’s citizens, and that is the
> most important.
>
> “Recently, we’ve noticed that some outlets are not being used for
> free expression, but for incitement against Israeli citizens. One
> of these outlets, the Al Jazeera network, is responsible for the
> loss of some of our finest sons. ...
>
> A media, which has been deemed to be a supporter of terror by
> almost all Arab countries, and we know this for certain, we will
> take a few steps against it, to express our fight against
> terrorism and radical Islam, and our empathy with the sane Arab
> world.
>
> The freedom of speech is not the freedom of incitement. Democracy
> has boundaries as well. When it comes down to the question what
> precedes what, I have no doubt, I prefer citizens and soldiers
> alive in Israel. ...
>
> Lately, almost all countries in our region determined that Al
> Jazeera supports terrorism, supports religious radicalization.
>
> And when we see that all these countries have determined as fact
> that Al Jazeera is a tool of the Islamic State, Hamas, Hezbollah
> and Iran, and we are the only one who have not determined that
> then something delusional is happening here."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

Although Israeli officials have discussed banning al-Jazeera for
years, the move gained impetus after the massive sometimes violent
anti-Israeli protests at the Al-Aqsa Mosque / Temple Mount in
Jerusalem last month. At that time, Israel's president Benjamin
Netanyahu accused al-Jazeera of inciting violence by encouraging the
protests, and wrote in a Facebook post:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The Al-Jazeera channel continues to incite violence
> around the Temple Mount. ...
>
> I have appealed to law enforcement agencies several times to close
> the Al-Jazeera office in Jerusalem. If this is not possible
> because of legal interpretation, I am going to seek to have the
> necessary legislation adopted to expel Al-Jazeera from
> Israel."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

There are two al-Jazeera channels, al-Jazeera English (AJE) and
al-Jazeera Arabic (AJA). Israelis say that the media source tries to
appear reasonable on AJE, but really incites violence on the AJA,
since few Jews understand Arabic.

Kara announced that he first would work to revoke the journalist
credentials for all reporters affiliated with al-Jazeera. In
addition, he would push to have al-Jazeera dropped from cable and
satellite services in Israel, and to close its Jerusalem offices.

The decision will not have immediate effect, since it would require a
vote by Israel's cabinet, and possibly the parliament (Knesset). Some
analysts are saying that Kara will have difficulty getting approval
for those measures, since many ministers and MKs strongly support
freedom of speech. Israel prides itself in claiming to be the only
democracy in the Mideast.

During this generational Crisis era, censorship has been increasing
around the world. Online blogs and discussion sites are being closely
monitored or shut down in countries like China, Iran and Russia.
Egypt jailed four al-Jazeera reporters for years, and one is still in
jail. Russia Today, which used to be a reasonably independent media
site, now publishes only state-approved propaganda. In Turkey, the
country's largest opposition media operation, Zaman Media, was shut
down and some of the reports arrested -- and this was several months
before the aborted coup occurred.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, nationalism and
xenophobia are rapidly increasing in countries around the world, as
these countries go deeper into a generational Crisis era. This trend
will continue, and will only be ended by war. Israel National News and Jerusalem Post

****
**** Al-Jazeera gives bitter, angry response to Israel's move
****

In an official statement, al-Jazeera said that it had reported
violence at the al-Aqsa Mosque / Temple Mount, but had not incited it,
and they denounced Israel's announcement:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Al Jazeera stresses that it will closely watch the
> developments that may result from the Israeli decision, and will
> take the necessary legal measures towards it. ...
>
> Al Jazeera will continue to cover the events of the occupied
> Palestinian territories professionally and accurately, according
> to the standards set by international agencies, such as the UK
> Office of Communications (Ofcom)."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

However, what was more interesting were the 30-minute rants by chief
analyst Marwan Bishara that I watched on al-Jazeera English.

Bishara's biases are well-known: He hates Israel, he hates the
Palestinian Authority even more, he hates Egypt, and he loves Hamas.
So anything he says must be understood in that context. But I've
listened to him many times over the years, and he provides a window
into the thinking of Arab governments in general, though more recently
just the Qatari government.

So it's not surprising that Bishara said that Israel performed this
move on behalf of "Arab dictators," referring the four countries that
have implemented the blockade against Qatar, and that he praised the
2011 "Arab Spring" that brought down Egypt' long-time dictator Hosni
Mubarak, and led to the election of Mohammed Morsi and a Muslim
Brotherhood government allied with Hamas.

Bishara did not mention that Qatar, which is the wealthiest country in
the world in terms of per-capita income for its citizens, treats its
foreign workers brutally.

Bishara said that the move by Israel shows a "synergy" of
"dictatorships" in the Arab world and "dictatorship of military
occupation in Palestine":

> [indent]<QUOTE>"It is as if closing down a network will diminish
> violence, when everyone knows that repression and military
> occupation, and aggression is the reason for violence in the
> region. Not reporting it."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

But by far, the most interesting of Bishara's remarks was his
ten-minute vitriolic rant attacking on Israel's Communications
Minister Ayoub Kara, the man who gave the televised news conference
that made the announcement.

Bishara began by pointing out that Kara is not a Jew. "He is an Arab
-- an Arab Druze," said Bishara angrily and bitterly. He attacked
Kara's intelligence by calling his performance at the news conference
"incoherent" and "irrational."

He said that Kara had risen in Israel's government go become a
minister by betraying Arabs and the Palestinians. He repeatedly
called Kara a "traitor" to Palestinians.

It was very peculiar rant, and it makes one wonder whether Bishara
would have been happier if the announcement had been made by a Jew.

However, there's more angle to this. During his news conference, Kara
said the following:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"I am the only one [in Israel's government] who is an
> Arabic speaker, who understands Arabic and my native language is
> Arabic. You cannot fool me with Al Jazeera English and Al Jazeera
> Arabic. I know how to identify how disturbing reporting becomes
> incitement instead of being free speech."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

This is perhaps the part of Kara's statement that infuriated Bishara
most of all. Other Israeli officials have been "fooled" by
al-Jazeera's trick of broadcasting its worst incitement on al-Jazeera
Arabic (AJA), but Kara used his knowledge of Arabic to avoid being
"fooled," and see through the ploy. Al-Jazeera and Middle East Eye

Related Articles

• Al-Jazeera may be at the center of the Gulf crisis with Qatar (25-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Egypt's Kangaroo Court finds Al-Jazeera journalists guilty with no evidence (24-Jun-2014)
  
  
• Egypt inflames tensions with Qatar with al-Jazeera reporter verdicts (30-Aug-2015)
  

****
**** BBC vs Al-Jazeera: Which is more biased?
****

I've watched both the BBC and al-Jazeera for years. The BBC is an
invaluable source of information because it has correspondents in
countries around the world. Al-Jazeera is an invaluable source of
information because it has the best coverage of the Mideast. However,
it's very hard to be worse than the BBC in terms of bias.

During the George W. Bush administration, I was on a mailing list of
the BBC reporter Gavin Esler. Esler's mailings included the news of
the day, and also the "BBC News Joke of the Day." The jokes were
almost always designed to make Bush look like an idiot or a fascist.
Actually much of the news had the same objective.

The worst occurred in 2007, during President Bush's "surge" in Iraq.
The BBC, the NY Times and NBC News essentially became the public
relations agency for al-Qaeda in Iraq by coordinating their news
reports with the bombings that occurred in Baghdad. They did
everything they could to support al-Qaeda and get American soldiers
killed in the most appalling example of nearly traitorous behavior by
the press that I've ever seen, though it's hard to call them traitors
because they were the stupidest bunch of idiots imaginable. Later,
these media sources were completely humiliated when the "surge"
worked.

By contrast, the BBC were lapdogs for President Barack Obama. He
could start a war, get Americans killed, commit any crime, and the BBC
would excuse him and blame it on the Republicans. I've always
believed that if Obama had picked up a gun and shot and killed
Michele, then the BBC, NY Times and NBC News would blame it on the
Republicans.

Now, with President Trump in office, it's the same as during the Bush
administration or even worse. As I've reported in the past,
the BBC makes up whatever facts they
want. They have no morals or ethics, and they obviously believe that
they have the right to make up anything they want with impunity.

Now, as I've said before, al-Jazeera hates Israel. Al-Jazeera loves
the Muslim Brotherhood, and loved Mohammed Morsi in Egypt, but now
hates Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi. Al-Jazeera loves Hamas.

Al-Jazeera hates Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, and
after today's rant against Ayoub Kara, I can finally see why.

Marwan Bishara was vitriolicly critical of Kara, even more so than
of the new Israeli policy. To Bishara, the great crime was not
shutting down al-Jazeera. The great crime was being a traitor to the
Palestinians.

And that explains why Bishara and al-Jazeera hate the Palestinian
Authority so much. Mahmoud Abbas has followed a policy of cooperating
with the Israelis to maintain peace on the West Bank, saving the lives
of both Palestinians and Israelis. To Bishara, that's a betrayal at
the level of the biblical Judas.

Hamas, on the other hand, wages war against Israel, and gets both
Israelis and Palestinians killed, although in the 2014 Gaza war, far
more Palestinians were killed than Israelis. To Bishara, that's GOOD
thing, because Hamas isn't a traitor the Palestinians.

Egypt is just as bad to Bishara because Egypt and Israel are
coordinating efforts to control ISIS-linked terrorist killings in
Egypt's northern Sinai, along the border with Israel. Once again,
that level of cooperation is, to Bishara, a traitorous betrayal of the
Palestinians.

When looked at in this light, we can see why Saudi Arabia is demanding
that Qatar end its support of terrorists. If Bishara's thinking
represents the policies of Qatar's government, then the Saudis might
well believe that Qatar supports terrorism.

So is the BBC better or worse than al-Jazeera? I report, you decide.

However, if things have gotten to the point where the Qataris believe
that it's better to let Palestinians be killed than to betray them by
cooperating with Israel, then things have really gotten very bad.

Related Articles

• BBC reporter Mike Embley is completely full of crap (24-Feb-2017)
  
  
• Rift grows between Palestinian Authority and Al-Jazeera (31-Jan-2011)
  
  
• Breitbart says that Fox News is taking 50% hit because of Trump (28-Feb-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Israel, al-Jazeera, Marwan Bishara,
Ayoub Kara, Benjamin Netanyahu, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt,
al-Aqsa Mosque, Temple Mount, Jerusalem, Hamas, Gaza,
Turkey, Zaman Media, Russia, Iran, China,
Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, West Bank,
Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, Mohammed Morsi, Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi,
BBC, Gavin Esler

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

*** 8-Aug-17 World View -- Dozens of Shia Muslims in Afghanistan killed in fourth Taliban victory in 3 weeks

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Dozens of Shia Muslims in Afghanistan killed in fourth Taliban victory in 3 weeks
  
• Did ISIS team up with the Taliban in Sar-e-Pul massacre?
  
• Trump's review of the Afghanistan war seeks solution where none exists
  

****
**** Dozens of Shia Muslims in Afghanistan killed in fourth Taliban victory in 3 weeks
****


Afghan security forces retake control of Jani Khel in Paktia province after ten days of heavy fighting with the Taliban (Khaama)

Dozens of men, women and children, mostly ethnic Hazara Shia Muslims,
were massacred in a two-day battle that ended on Saturday in northern
Afghanistan in Sar-e-Pul. About 50 people were shot and killed, 30
houses were torched and burned to the ground, several mosques were set
ablaze, and an unknown number of villagers were taken hostages. Seven
Afghan troops and 12 Taliban militants were killed in the fighting.

The extremely bloody Afghan crisis civil war, 1991-96, mostly pitted
the ethnic Pashtuns, who are Sunni Muslims and later formed the
Taliban, versus the Northern Alliance of Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks in
northern Afghanistan. Now, twenty years later, Afghanistan is
in a generational Awakening era, and a new young generation
of Pashtuns is coming of age, raised on stories their parents told
them about the atrocities committed by the Northern Alliance.

These kinds of attacks are going to continue and may even become
more frequent. Furthermore, this is only one of four Taliban
attacks across the country in four different provinces.

The district of Jani Khel in Paktia a known stronghold of the Haqqani
Network fell to the Taliban in late July after several days of heavy
fighting. It was recaptured on August 4. The districts of Taywara in
Ghor in central Afghanistan, and Kohistan (or Lolash) in Faryab in the
northwest fell to the Taliban on July 23 after several days of
fighting.

Afghan security forces were unable to prevent any of these losses.
None of these losses is an existential threat to the government in
Kabul, and in each case Afghan forces will recapture the district in
time. But they provide the Taliban with an opportunity to loot the
district of its equipment, vehicles, weapons and ammunition -- much of
which was supplied by the US, meaning that the US is arming both sides
in Afghanistan. These losses also show that the Taliban is capable of
conducting operations in all regions of the country. BBC and Khaama Press (Afghanistan) and Long War Journal (25-Jul) and Tolo News (Afghanistan, 25-Jul) and Deutsche Welle

****
**** Did ISIS team up with the Taliban in Sar-e-Pul massacre?
****

According to most western media reports, the massacre of dozens of
Shia Muslim Hazaras in Sar-e-Pul on Saturday is the result of a joint
coordinated attack by the Taliban and the so-called Islamic State (IS
or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh).

As usual, this is mainly a publicity stunt. It definitely does not
mean that ISIS leader Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, who is probably cowering
in a basement somewhere in Syria or Iraq, has ordered a few of his
thugs to pack up their things and travel to Sar-e-Pul to massacre some
women and children.

What it really means is that two Taliban factions were involved in the
slaughter, and one of the factions has pledged allegiance to ISIS,
hoping to get some publicity and perhaps some volunteers out of it.

As a matter of fact, in this case what it means is that Sher Mohammad
Ghazanfar, a local Taliban command, has pledged allegiance to ISIS,
according to a local government spokesman.

Furthermore, a Taliban spokesman denied the allegations:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"It was an independent operation by our mujahideen
> forces. There is no cooperation with [ISIS] on the
> operation."<END QUOTE>[/indent]

He also denied that civilians were killed. This is also a public
relations fabrication. The Taliban have faced criticism even from
Pashtuns in Afghanistan for their willingness to kill innocent women
and children. So now they just kill the women and children anyway,
but claim they didn't. International Business Times and Al Jazeera and CNN and PBS (17-Nov-2015)

Related Articles

• ISIS claims responsibility for attack on Shia Hazaras in Kabul Afghanistan (24-Jul-2016)
  
  
• Kabul bombing brings back memories of bloody 1990s Afghan civil war (03-Jun-2017)
  

****
**** Trump's review of the Afghanistan war seeks solution where none exists
****

In the last couple of weeks, the media have been filled with stories
about a new White House review of the war and Afghanistan, including a
demand by President Donald Trump to achieve victory. The media have
described this as an angry disagreement between National Security
Adviser H.R. McMaster and President Donald Trump's chief strategist
Steve Bannon.

According to the reports that I've seen, McMaster wants to send a new
"surge" of troops into Afghanistan, presumably to win, while Bannon
wants either to withdraw completely, or else to outsource the war to
military contractors, such as Blackwater Worldwide or DynCorp.

As long-time readers are aware, I've been predicting for years, based
on a Generational Dynamics analysis of, among other things, the tribal
relationships of the Pashtuns in Afghanistan and Pakistan, that a
victory is impossible. I summarized the reasoning briefly earlier in
this article with the discussion above of the Pashtuns and the
Northern Alliance.

As I've described in the past,

I've worked with Steve Bannon off and on for several years in the
past, both on his movie "Generation Zero" and when I was cross-posting
articles on the Breitbart National Security site. So I know that
Steve Bannon is an expert on military history and world history, and
he also has an expert understanding of Generational Dynamics and
generational theory, and he also understands the Generational Dynamics
predictions in Afghanistan.

So the strategy of withdrawing all American forces would seem to make
the most sense, given that a victory is impossible. The problem with
that strategy is that it will leave the way open for total victory by
the Taliban, collapsing the government completely, and would also deal
a huge blow to India, which has major interests in Afghanistan. Other
possible consequences would be the rise of ISIS militias in
Afghanistan, and a return of the Russian military to Afghanistan to
fill the vacuum created by an American withdrawal. The use of
military contractors might mitigate some of these consequences. This
is presumably the subject of in-depth analyses being performed in the
White House.

Sending in additional troops would be a "kick the can down the road"
strategy. Victory is impossible, but additional troops would not have
the potentially disastrous consequences of a complete withdrawal.
Instead, it would be a kind of holding action.

At times like this, I like to point out that there is no solution to
this problem. By this, I don't mean that nobody has been clever
enough to figure out the solution. What I mean is that no solution
exists, because no strategy can lead to victory. NewsMax and Washington Post

Related Articles

• Massive Kabul bombing on Monday leaves US Afghan policy in tatters (25-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Taliban victories in Helmand put Obama's Afghan withdrawal policy in doubt (21-Dec-2015)
  
  
• Donald Trump's speech in Warsaw Poland evokes the Clash of Civilizations (07-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Trump considers new troop surge and strategy change in Afghanistan war (10-May-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Afghanistan, Sar-e-Pul, Jani Khel, Paktia,
Pashtuns, Taliban, Hazaras, Sher Mohammad Ghazanfar,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh

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